I received an allegation of academic misconduct from my university. What should I do? I wrote an exam a couple of months ago and I recently received an email accusing me of academic misconduct. I had just finished my first year of university and this is the first time that I am receiving a letter of this kind.
One of the long answers that I had written matched an answer that was posted online on a homework solutions website.
Now due to Covid-19, this exam was an online open-book exam, I had interpreted the open book exam to mean that we could have our notes and our lecture slides with us. The weeks leading to the exam, I had searched up practice questions online and had written and solved them out on paper to have with me during the exam just in case a similar question came up.
Sure enough one of the practice questions that I had was very similar to the one on the exam. Thus, I had an easy time answering it and pretty much reused what I had written on my notes. I don't think that's cheating if I only looked at my notes on an open book exam. Also, the exam had a lot of math calculations and conclusion statements to go with it. Most questions like this have similar steps/conclusions.
I had contacted a student advocate to help me with my case and I'm supposed to write an opening statement to present to a meeting with the dean of the department.
The evidence against me seems very strong. If I am found guilty, I would get an F on the class and be suspended from taking courses for the months of May-August. But, I am already in the process of finishing 4-5 classes this summer. I am distressed that all of my money and hard work would all be wasted.
Is my evidence sufficient? What other evidence could I use to prove that I didn't commit academic misconduct? What should I write on my opening statement?
Clarifications:

I sifted through his emails regarding the final, and this was what he had written: "Open-Book final exam. Despite the final exam being open-book you still need to be well prepared otherwise- you will not have enough time to finish the exam if you spend a lot of time looking through your notes." No other explanations were provided. Perhaps it was my fault that I didn't ask for clarifications and just assumed.
My notes and the solutions were very similar, but the conclusion was different. I had tried to solve the problem on my own, but referenced the solution when I got stuck.

In a comment, you write that the professor had written in an email regarding the exam:

you will not have enough time to finish the exam if you spend a lot of time looking through your notes

This email is absolutely key. Quote the full email in your statement (including the date and timestamp), and highlight this sentence. It immediately implies that you were assumed and allowed to use notes.
The next point is that the professor apparently did not place any restrictions on what could be in your notes. (Did they?) Point this out.
The next exhibit should be that is was apparently easy to find practice questions that turned out to be similar to questions on the exam.
Nobody can hold it against you if you used the internet in researching what might come up in the exam, and in preparing your notes. (Yes, it would be better to reformulate your notes in your own words. Do this next time. You learn more that way.)
That should already be enough of an argument to rebut the accusation. Here is the structure of the argument I would propose:

You were allowed to use notes. Quote the email.
No restrictions on the notes were given.
You worked practice questions from various sources, e.g., from the internet. Quote the practice question, include if possible the link and a screenshot.
For one practice question, you used an answer you found online and put this in your notes. Again, include the link to the answer and a screenshot. Possibly include a copy of your notes.
One question on the exam was very similar to this practice question. Quote the question on the exam, perhaps highlight the similarities.
Therefore, it is not surprising that your answer matches something found in the internet.

Write this up in a short succinct way. Use paragraph breaks between the arguments. Don't ramble. Make this a short document of two pages at most.
If there is any sanity at your school, this accusation will be dropped immediately, and the professor will get some friendly advice about what to expect if they use questions on the exam that match questions that diligent students might find online while preparing.

I believe the school has a Student Affairs Unit or Guidance and Counselling Section. Every student deserves a fair hearing. Writing a letter directly to the Head of the Institution (Vice Chancellor or Provost) can also accelerate your being heard.


Instructor's manual -- model answers from it by instructor For a textbook, there is an instructor's manual provided by the publisher to the instructor that has prescribed the textbook in a course. The instructor sets some questions from the textbook as assignment. After the assignment is due, the instructor takes the solutions from the instructor's manual verbatim for the questions on the assignment and shares with the students as model solutions without stating that they are from the instructor's manual that he has access to. In this particular case, it seems clear that if students also have access to the instructor's manual (via free document repositories) and turn in answers verbatim from the instructor's manual, that would count as academic indiscipline. But what of the instructor's actions?
Another variation of this is the following. The students at the beginning of the course, ask for some model questions with answers to help them prepare. The instructor chooses questions and answers from a different textbook (for which he has the instructor's manual) than the one prescribed for the course. He shares with them at the beginning of the course these questions with solutions without citing the source.
If the source is cited by the instructor, and the students ask for access to the instructor's manual, on what basis can access to it be denied? At present, it seems that the only basis for such denial is an agreement with the publisher that the instructor will not share the complete instructor's manual.
What is the consensus view on these issues?

Assuming that you want to teach your students good academic practice in general as well as your specific subject, then you should let them know the source of the answers you provide, at least in general. "This comes from the book's authors" is probably enough. Otherwise they might get the idea that copying and plagiarism is fine. And if you represent the answers as your own work, then, yes, it is a form of plagiarism..
However, providing the answers verbatim, raises also the issue of over-copying from published material. It may be, however, that the instructor's guide provides specific guidance for use, possibly granting (or forbidding) such release. For some books, the questions/exercises are the most valuable part, and releasing this information can definitely lessen the value of the book, especially if students are likely to put such things online or otherwise cache them for others. That would be a copyright problem, but not a plagiarism issue if you give the source.
Third, while not an ethical issue, courtesy and respect for the authors might imply that you not give out answers verbatim, to protect the investment they made in producing it. And also courtesy and respect for future instructors (and students) who want to use the book in a way that maximizes learning and lessens the likelihood of student cheating.
Finally, there is the issue of serving your students. This can raise many issues, but, in general, hints for producing solutions are more valuable to their learning than just providing answers. In fact, minimal hints, that help them develop insight, are more valuable than extensive hints. There is a vast difference between developing an answer on your own and reading a solution. Developing a solution with minimal hints is very much closer to the former than the latter. This will aid their education rather than giving them the false impression that they have developed some skill or insight when they have not. Hints are also sometimes necessary to dispel misconceptions. Unfortunately, tailored hints don't scale very well.
To answer one of your concerns directly, you can deny them access on the basis that having those answers would inhibit their learning and that they should try a bit harder to work out the answers themselves.
So, my suggestion, as an experienced educator, is that you don't give these out for a variety of reasons, the most important one is the value that actually doing the exercises has for your students. Even if they struggle. Perhaps especially if they struggle. The purpose of education isn't "answers", but learning.


What physical contact, if any, is acceptable between a supervisor and a student? I was rather surprised that in this answer which suggests that a supervisor giving a side-hug to a research assistant is acceptable behaviour. I try and limit the physical contact with my students/postdocs/assistants to hand shakes and high fives, however if they initiate a hug I tend not to block it. What physical contact, if any, is acceptable between a supervisor and a student? I guess a follow up question would be do the genders of the supervisor or student matter?

In general, I refrain from initiating any physical contact other than handshakes or "congratulatory" gestures such as high-fives or fist bumps. This allows the student to control the level of interaction if they so choose.

My suspicion about what would be considered "acceptable" is that it varies widely from country to country, depending on what is considered an "acceptable" level of contact between strangers or professional colleagues. For instance, in Muslim-dominated countries, the "side-hug" mentioned in the answer—or even shaking of hands—between a male boss and a female subordinate, or vice versa, would likely be frowned upon! Similarly, in other countries, I could see how a "side-hug" could be within the realm of acceptable contacts (although still on the somewhat "iffy" side).

If you are a man, I would avoid all unnecessary physical contact, any unnecessary 1-on-1 meetings behind closed doors, and all unnecessary socializing.  Does this sound absurd?  Maybe.  I recently read a good article on a similar issue focused on the workplace, but the idea applies in academia as well:

https://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/unfiltered-opinion/resetting-for-below-zero-tolerance-on-sexual-harassment.html

You can't know what will offend your students, and they could make an allegation ten years down the road that might cost you your job, even if the allegation is 100% fictional.  Leave no room for doubt!  Assuming you are male, I would avoid taking on female students entirely when possible.  This is unfortunate, but is it worth risking your career?


A bad feeling about first published papers I was taking a look at my first published papers, which are published in (peer-reviewed) A*/A/B level proceedings. Thanks to these papers, I finished my PhD a few years ago.

I was surprised by the quality of the papers and I felt ashamed that I wrote these papers -Of course, this was not my feeling a few years ago-. I found that my assumptions were naive and the conclusions can be valid only for the used dataset (there is a high chance that they are not valid for other datasets). I found also that I lacked some fundamental knowledge and I could explain my approach differently.

Overall, if I receive these papers now as a reviewer, I would definitely recommend to reject them.

I don't know whether this feeling is just because 1) I gained knowledge over the past years, 2) the domain (CS) has evolved significantly or 3) the papers were indeed bad and they shouldn't be published.

In the case of (3), I am wondering what I should do.

You should do nothing other than continue growing and learning. The most common reason would be #1. I can't say the most likely reason is #1, not having seen the papers.

But a lot of authors, even poets, look back on their early work with a sense of wonder about how they could have been so naive. It is a sign of growth.

Yes, #2 is probably also a factor to some extent as CS has been a fast moving field overall, not being much over 60 years old, compared to, say math and such.

And you haven't said that the papers are actually wrong, just a bit naive. Hopefully we all learn some things as we grow older. It normally happens because we are actively thinking about things.

Others at the time (reviewers, editors, advisors) thought that the papers were fine for the time. They were fine.

The crux of your situation is that years ago you published some papers, about which you now say "if I received these papers now as I reviewer, I would definitely recommend to reject them." Then you suggest three things and ask for advice if option (3) is true:

  "(3) the papers were indeed bad and they shouldn't be published.
  In the case of (3), I am wondering what I should do."

The other two answers essentially say "just ignore the bad papers and move on", which is certainly an option for you. But if you are curious for more options that you can do in situation (3), apart from just ignoring the papers, another option is to retract the papers.


is it normal to work as an university professor in engineering but have no real professional experience (in the industry)? I work as a university assistant professor, I teach engineering-related subjects.
However, I have no real professional experience in engineering (in the industry), I've never worked as an engineer or something, and in my country, you can't work in 2 positions obviously (you can't have 2 salaries) even if you are teaching at university, the only option is to start your own firm! and I don't think it's a good idea to start my own firm (my own business) without professional experience in the field.
BUT, sometimes students ask questions about the real world, about real problems and I find it sometimes "awkward" not to answer their questions because I don't have professional experience (in the industry).

so is it normal to work at university without experience in the industry? does not this make me look less compared to the rest of my colleagues?
if so, what are my best options to get some professional experience in the field?
finally, how should I answer students' questions if I stayed without experience in the industry?

What are my best options to get some professional experience in the field?

You could get a secondment to a company to do specific (applied) research for example.
When I was a student, some of the best professors had spent time in both industry and academia. One I remember had used temperature sensors to record brake disk temperatures on a testing rig - they were glowing... So he was slightly amused at how we were finding it difficult to calibrate a temperature sensor for use between ambient and 100 deg C... He got us sorted though.


Is it okay to record audio for a lecture? Sometimes the Professor will say things quickly, or say things before I can write them down. It would be of great benefit if I could record audio for the course, but I am not sure the legal guidelines around doing so.

The legal issues involved will, of course, depend on what legal jurisdiction you are asking about. However, there are some common factors that can be considered.

In the UK many institutions take the interpretation of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) that teaching staff cannot prevent students making private recordings (Audio or Video) of any teaching activity. The reasoning is that students are entitled to keep their condition confidential (as it may be a private medical matter) but also must be permitted to receive the appropriate adjustment for their condition. It would be expected, as a courtesy, that the student would inform the staff concerned that recording was taking place, but that this could not be enforced. (*)

Conversely, the Intellectual Property (IP) of the class and the material contained therein would be held by the University and the individual teacher to varying degrees. The recording could not be published or used for any means other than private study as this would then violate the rights of the owner of the IP.

Many aspects of disability discrimination, privacy and intellectual property legislation is common across many EU states, but there are variations in practice. I can imagine how these different statutes might interact in (say) the US, but I suspect it might vary from state to state and not always be a federal matter, and so I decline to speculate.

(*) I have responsibilities for assisting academic staff understand these issues in my department...

It doesn't have to be "okay" if no one knows it is being done.  Record discreetly and don't publish the recording.


If I write a really bad, but controversial, paper, can I increase my h-index? Imagine that I write a paper about a controversial topic like global warming denial, the link between vaccines and autism, why different races have different IQ. After publication, the paper gets the attention of mass media, and as a counter measure, serious experts start explaining why the paper is completely wrong.

Would that count as citations towards a higher h-index?

Yes, you can!

But that it is possible is by no means to say that it is ethical, practical, wise, or otherwise commendatory. I would be especially concerned about becoming known as the 'person with a kooky idea' rather than as a serious academic researcher.

The question becomes, "It is possible to write on a very controversial topic, create a media firestorm, attract a lot of attention, increase your h-index, and still keep your credibility intact?" The answer will be highly variable dependent on the validity of your research, your previous reputation, and the sheer capriciousness of luck.

First, assuming that your work is valid,  even if you have proven the viability of a very controversial position, your work is likely to attract some negative attention as well as attempts to disprove your research (or you-- ad hominem attacks are unfortunately common). However, if your work can and does stand up to scrutiny, all the brouhaha may actually work in your favor-- you have proven a controversial theory to be true, your h-index will increase and your credibility is not only intact but also bolstered by your success.

On the other hand, if your work does not stand up to scrutiny (which seems to be the scenario you are picturing), you will have made a public fool out of yourself and the slight increase in your h-index will be more than offset by the decrease in your credibility. Neither the counter-moves of serious researchers nor the attacks of fanatics are likely to help your academic career, especially if your work cannot stand up under scrutiny.

So, write a really bad, but controversial, paper only if you are willing to sacrifice your credibility for the slight increase in your h-index.

This is a clever idea, never thought of it.

You are famous for the wrong reason.  Of course, what's being worse than being talked about is NOT being talked about.  Unlike Hollywood, publicity does not equal fame, nor does it generate grants.


How to to deal with advisor's criticism of my writing? I am about to finish my PhD, which means I have to write a lot. I am also a non-native English speaker, so my English sucks a lot, especially when it comes to formal writing. In contrast, my adviser is a very good writer and good writing is very important to him.

Whenever I write anything, from an e-mail that gets CCed or a draft or a paper, it attracts relentless criticism. I know that I am supposed to use this feedback to improve, but I am a bit tired of this “tough love.” I often get desperate and anxious because I feel I can’t write anything worthy at all. It causes severe writing blocks because whenever I am about to write a sentence, I immediately imagine it being totally destroyed and thrown into a garbage bin.

I do try to improve my writing by reading a lot of high-quality English texts and practicing on my own. I took an online course on writing and developed my own writing routine: at first, I plan paragraphs and the flow between them, write a first crappy draft, then edit into something tangible during multiple rounds.

I also try to incorporate my adviser's guidance. However, my writing morale is currently so low that it stalls my productivity. I do try to not take my adviser's criticism personally, which is quite difficult sometimes, but I am just so tired of being judged all the time. I know many students lack feedback from their advisers, but I am just fed up with feedback. Is there any way to get out of this hole?

This doesn't answer your question, but I think your real problem isn't your writing, but the way how you and your advisor communicate. What I suggest is that you have a sit-down with your advisor and raise the issue with them. Tell them what you told us - that their barrage of negative feedback is hampering your motivation and productivity, and that you would have an easier time incorporating their feedback if they could find a more positive way to phrase it.

Of course there is no guarantee that this conversation will go over well (some people think that "tough love" is the only way to give feedback, and others understand on a rational level that a more "sandwich" style of feedback works better for most people but are unable to change). However, you will never know if you don't raise the issue with your advisor.

Edit: to say a little bit about "writing better", the actual topic of your question -

You should also try to understand if your advisor is really dissatisfied with the mechanical aspects of your writing (spelling, expressions, grammar, paragraph construction) or with your skills in scientific storytelling. It seems to me that basic command of the English language is not a real issue for you, so potentially what your advisor is actually dissatisfied with is that you do not know the terminology of your field well enough, common rhetorical moves in your discipline, how people like to construct arguments, etc. If this is your problem, a general-purpose writing course is not going to help - you will need to study papers in your discipline to improve.

Yes.  Improve your writing.  You are smart enough.  Put the effort in and do it.

Will you be perfect?  No.  Even most professional, native, writers are not capable of flawless flowing first-try prose.

But you could take more of a strain.  Seriously.  Like in your question, why do you write in one long paragraph?  At least chop it up.  And ditch the Schoen-like ellipses.

I am SURE that you could make a significant improvement.  Yeah, maybe you still get chipped away even after that.  And that's a different issue (basically requiring developing some rhino hide--life is like that).  But first improve.  I mean, heck, even if you NEVER get any attaboys/girls/things  from the critical fooker, at least YOU will have improved.  And writing well, in English, is a pretty damned important skill for academics.

Furthermore, I don't think all the issues are just native language use.  Sure, some very particular word choices and nuances of intonation may be.  But having a strong structure to your writing is a transferable skill to all languages.  As is proofreading (e.g. developing and using a checklist of common previous mistakes).

Oh...and don't shy away from writing because of the criticism.  Do MORE of it.  Wear the guy down with how much he has to correct you.  ;-)  And not because you troll him or make deliberate errors or don't give a shit.  But because you, while still trying to do your best, are continuously practicing and "out there". (This is THE WAY in foreign languages, written or spoken.  Plunge in!).

N.B.  I am guilty of every grammar flaw that I call out. But that does not change the points I'm making.  Take it as from a fellow sinner.


Is it acceptable to extend deadlines for coursework delayed due to student activism? This article from the Brown University Daily Herald describes a number of student activists who claim to have suffered due to excess levels of student activism. Some excerpts from the article are included:

“There are people breaking down, dropping out of classes and failing classes because of the activism work they are taking on,” said David, an undergraduate whose name has been changed to preserve anonymity. Throughout the year, he has worked to confront issues of racism and diversity on campus.

[...]

Sampedro worked alongside the group that presented the demands for the diversity and inclusion action plan’s revision. It was a Thursday, she recalled, and she had a research presentation that needed to be completed that week. “I remember emailing the professor and begging her to put things off another week,” she said. The professor denied her request.
“I hadn’t eaten. I hadn’t slept. I was exhausted, physically and emotionally,” she said. After hours of work to compile and present the demands, she forced herself to stay up to complete the project anyway.

[...] (emphasis mine)

Deans’ notes helped Gaines to complete academic work while staying involved in student activism.
In writing such notes, deans acknowledge the difficulties faced by a student on campus and demonstrate their support for the student’s requests, said Ashley Ferranti, assistant dean of student support services.
Though it is ultimately up to a faculty member to accept a dean’s note, Ferranti estimated that notes are accepted over 90 percent of the time. Students who take issue with the rejection of a note can discuss the incident with a dean, Ferranti added.

I was under the impression from my personal experience that extension of deadlines are generally only awarded for reasons such as personal illness or family issues such as divorce, death, or serious illness.
As professors, is it generally considered acceptable to provide deadline extensions or other accommodations to students who have fallen behind on their coursework due to their involvement with activism?

Much would depend on the concrete situation. But, by default, I would think that activism is part of student's life that the student needs to learn to manage themselves; if they do not have the resources or ability to manage their  activism effectively so as not to have them interfere with their studies, then, largely, I would consider this to be their responsibility. One would probably not see any concessions given for extracurricular sports/music activity, and the question is why political activism should be exempt.

Some may argue that political activism is important as a part of society and therefore of a higher rank than, say, sports or music, but how this is evaluated would probably depend on whose side of the activism one sees oneself.

That being said, times which are more tolerant of studies as an opportunity for character development would probably give more leeway to activism, while times (such as ours) where studies would be considered more a means to an end (development of employment skills) would probably be less tolerant. I would see the former as an ideal of times past, but the latter as the reality today.

Having attended Brown (long ago, but still...) I am not the least bit surprised.  That school has a long history of considering diversity and activism (both) as more important than scholarship.  Though, as I recall, in the late 80's Amy Carter was expelled from there "for academic reasons," specifically because she had spent too much time in jail and not enough in class, as a result of her activism.  Today, she would be more likely to receive a special President's award.

So, it certainly depends on the School.  I doubt the same consideration would apply to a student at RPI, for example.

I added this "answer" because I believe it is an important bit of context that was missing from the discussion.


What are characteristics of "high quality" graduate research as viewed by a hiring committee? When discussing the ability for a faculty candidate to find a job, SE users often say that the quality of graduate research overshadows the prestige of the school at which they received a graduate degree. As viewed by a a hiring committee, what are characteristics of "high quality" research?

Ultimately quality is a judgement call that every reader gets to make.

For example, a paper in mathematics might be considered to be "high quality" to half a dozen people worldwide who happen to be interested in the main result of the paper (or other work). Especially if the question has been open for a while. But other mathematicians may just say "meh" because that result neither interests them specifically, nor advances their own studies.

Reviewers at journals and conferences need to be able to make such judgements and, generally, they do a good job and we respect those judgments when we find published papers. But not everything that is published is of high quality.

But, some of the criteria that reviewers and others will use are as follows.

Is the solution correct? And reproducible?

Is the problem long standing? Or does it break new ground?

Does it open new areas of research?

Is it novel in some sense? Or just an easy derivation from what is already known?

Could I have done this easily? Or does it surprise me in some way?

Is the result widely helpful to either researchers or society as a whole?

Note that all of the above are judgement calls and all imply some scale with, not interesting at one end and very interesting at the other.

But I think the real intent of what you have read, is that it is more important what you do in your research than the general reputation of the place in which you do it. Reputation is based on many things, not all of which are directly relevant to the quality of research. In particular some places that seem quiet generally may be hotbeds of ideas in some niche of some field.

And note that hiring committees may rely on the judgements of others, such as the work being published. They might also rely on just the judgements of writers of letters of recommendations if those writers themselves are in a position both to know and to be honest. But they might also, in some cases, rely on their own judgement. "Well, yes, this is interesting, but not interesting to us at this time."

It's published in a reputable journal or reputable book press.  "Reputable" means it has a reputation for having some quality control, as opposed to a predatory publisher.


How does doing a PhD with a pre-determined project vs. formulating your own affect your later career? Between

Doing a PhD by joining a predetermined research problem
Doing a PhD by formulating one's own research problem

is it possible to say that option #1 is a more advantageous choice in terms of future career?

Why or why not?

By selecting route one you are taking advantage of the potential that as your supervisor is more knowledgable of the field and so will know:

What the important/fundable/publishable problems in the field are.
Be able to judge if a project is likely to be successful
If a problem presents the correct amount of challenge to a graduate student.

Thus if you choose option one, your project could be more likely to be successful and produce publications and lead to fundable options in the future. This does of course rely on the supervisor actaully being better at these things than you. While not all supervisors will be (or will care enough to think about them), on average this will be true.

On the other hand, if you choose route 2, then you will be able to demonstrate independence and initiative, which are highly valued attributes in the postdoc job market. A stock postdoc interview question, at least for me, is: "Name a situation where you had an idea independently of your supervisor and followed this idea through to its conclusion".

Within the context of my own experience (engineering), here are some thoughts:

PhD is overrated. Consider going to your chosen industry. Work for five years. Understand the problems and work on your favorite problem (on your own time if need be) while getting paid instead of accruing loans. If you can't live without a PhD, do go back to the graduate purgatory by all means.
Later career depends on the country you reside in and your subject area. For example, your PhD in journalism is not going to be very helpful in the Middle East. I can't think of a clear answer to this question. Usually people with advanced degrees in engineering require extensive company support to achieve something important (The company keeps the patents and all you have is a salary and bragging rights until the job ends). Even this can't be done remotely, so be prepared to relocate and compete with the rest of the world's PhDs with similar plans.
People in the software business can do somewhat better, but require significantly more time, if the group they are working with has fewer members. Nevertheless, they can collaborate more efficiently and don't need to relocate as much.
Humanities and other fields are often region- or language-specific. Advanced degrees in law are even more constrained. A degree is economics would be fairly globally accepted at job interview with a large bank or a multinational. This discussion will become subjective quickly.

Not many in the engineering industry care about your publications, or whether you came up with your own (challenging but impractical) problem and managed to solve the same. Here we are not discussing problems that end with ominous words such as 'conjecture'. It would be a folly to choose something that challenging for your PhD work. Your supervisor will often forget to mention that since they will have nothing to lose by cheering you on. Not everyone will be this cruel though. Supervisors with limited industrial funding would be more focused and goal-oriented. Those with tenured careers and stable sources of funding would let you dabble for years as long as publications keep coming. Choose wisely.

If you have the ability and understanding to come up with your own practical problem
to solve, then start a company. Let others work for you. Don't work for others. You can start small.
Pre-determined problems are dished out by industry or other financially stable parties looking for cheap labor, mostly. On the other hand, getting a job in a similar setup remains a possibility afterwards; unless of course, you want to explore the postdoc market further and eat canned food.
World is an increasingly job-unstable place as far as engineering goes. Consider how relevant, stable and global your particular industry is or will be in the next 25 years, so that relocation/online work remains a possibility.
Excuse my ignorance about other fields.


When to refer to a paper as "seminal" I am writing a paper that relies heavily upon some important work done some 10  years ago. The paper was well received gathering well over a 100 citations and is a must mention within my niche field. I would like to reference the paper as seminal as in "so and so, et. al., in a seminal paper..." but am not sure that would be appropriate. I recognize 100 citations isn't a lot in the scheme of things but at the same time this paper was very important within my niche field.

Under what circumstances can one decide a paper is seminal? Must the person citing it be well renowned? Must the author of the considered paper be well renowned? Is there a citation # that should be exceeded (I really don't like that one, it seems too inflexible)?

Neither I nor my professor are especially well established in the field we are publishing in (this will be my first publication and my professor mainly publishes in another field). Are we qualified to refer to a publication in this field as "seminal"?

I would understand "seminal" to indicate that  (a) the paper was the the first in some sense, and (b) that it led to a lot of subsequent research. For example, a paper proposes and tests a theoretical idea, and then lots of other people come along and test that idea building on the original study.

It doesn't matter that you are not established in a field. Anyone can use the word "seminal". It's just that using it correctly requires a good understanding of your field and the interconnections of research papers.

Having a lot of citations is necessary but not sufficient to show that a paper has led to subsequent research. Some citations don't mean much on its own.

Never, because it will make many of your readers think about semen and wonder whether you're sexist.  Pick a word that doesn't have as much baggage and which also more specific to whatever you mean.  For example you could say it was influential, foundational, or fundamental.

Note that all the above is true even if seminal doesn't have that connotation to you, and even if you think that it's not sexist language.  These are points where reasonable people can and do disagree.  But either way you're going to distract some nontrivial number of your readers from the actual point you're trying to make, and that's not effective writing.

Update:  I just want to point out that this is not a new issue that I made up.  Here's the British Sociological Association including it among a dozen or so words it recommends sociologists avoid (most of the others are chairman and the like).  Here are some other people complaining about this usage of seminal.  I've certainly heard people at the Joint Meetings grumble about the unfortunately named "Steele prize for seminal contributions to research."  Anyway, as I said I don't think this is as clear a case of sexist language as say chairman, but it is a usage that many people don't like and which has few advantages.  It's easier just not to use it.


Is it acceptable to have a research paper with no references? I (an undergrad) and 2 other profs from my department have been working on something and we were thinking of submitting our work to a conference (a pretty well known one) this week. The fact is there is no related work that has been done on the problem we are solving and therefore there is no paper which we can cite as a starting point for our work. The only existing things that we make use of are trivial definitions from mathematics (like Riemann Integral) and also definitions that are pretty well known in my area (CS). So again, we do not think there is a need to cite any particular papers for that.

Now my question as stated was - is it acceptable to have a paper with no references? Or do you think we should just mention some papers (we never had to use them) where those definitions were actually proposed?

PS: I'm sure some of you might suggest me to ask those profs. But quite frankly none of them have much experience as far as publishing papers is concerned. So it would be great if some one could give me a good advice and help me out.

Edit: Thanks everyone for the answers. Of course somewhere a little sarcastic and ridiculing, but I can understand since this is a little weird. Actually yes, I had the notion that a paper wasn't worth citing unless I use some results from it (say an algo or some theorem). But I guess that isn't the only reason why I should be referencing as many seem to suggest here. The fact is we had seen quite a few survey papers before we started this out and I was under the impression that there wasn't a need to cite them since anyone could find them. But now, things are bit more clear and I guess I should cite them and I will :)

Though I don't think there's any hard rule against having a paper with no reference, it seems pretty weird. Note that references are not only for citing other people's results (theorems, algorithms, etc.) which you have used, but more broadly to recognize other's scientific contribution. For example:

Has the problem never been discussed before? Who first realized it was a problem, stated it, formalized it?
You probably put the problem into the broader context of your field. And if you don't, you probably should. This sure requires citations on recent work on related problems, even if nothing was ever done on the one problem you're addressing.
For example, is your problem a specific case of another problem, or does it have generalization?
What are the consequences of your results/findings? They probably have some impact on other related problems, or practical consequences on real-life issues.
Didn't you or your co-authors ever do any prior work on this issue?

Finally, let's see it another way: you have solved a problem, that no one else has solved, worked on, or more generally discussed. And you did so using only elementary techniques, which have been known for so long that they do not require citation. Stated like that, it may sound like either you're a genius opening an entire field of mathematics, or you're working on a useless problem that nobody cares about. You probably don't want the reviewer to be thinking that way!

It's not a problem, you can submit your work with no references if nothing related to your work is done before. You and your team may get a Nobel Prize for the work you guys are trying to do, so keep it up and do great things.

References are used when we are going to extend the work which has already been done or we want to do something related to that. In your case if you have no references, then you can go for that Conference.


Is it better to have a single-author paper or a joint-authored paper? I am a new graduate student and I am about to start writing my first paper. Some of my adviser's other students have been working on similar topic to what I have been working on and he has been pushing us to combine our results into one paper. However, I feel my results could be a paper on their own. I want to start beefing up my CV so that I can get extra funding and, hopefully down the road, a research position but I am afraid that if I am only a coauthor on a paper it won't look as good as if I am the sole author (especially since I worked completely on my own for my section).

So my question is: would it be better to try and publish a paper in which I am the sole author or would it be better to try and publish a slightly better paper in which I have 2 or 3 additional coauthors? Do funding selection committees and the like give precedence to people with papers that they are sole authors over ones who have coauthors?

Edit: My field is math, in case this matters.

You should really listen to what your advisor says. "...he has been pushing us to combine our results into one paper." That about says it. Your advisor knows what works and what doesn't work as a paper in your field. He also knows (presumably) about the scope of your work and how it fits into what you and the other students have been doing.

There is little downside to this. The importance of the paper to your career has far more to do with how well received the paper is than with how many authors there are. Having more authors means the paper is stronger, means you have a network of people to help rewrite and deal with any negative reviews you may get, and (as suggested in Peter's answers) it shows you can collaborate with others.

It would not hurt to bring this up with your advisor, make your point (ask your question), and see how the advisor reacts.

I do not subscribe to single authorship. No man is an island. I strongly believe that there is power in team work (co-authorship) than single authors. You need to bring in different reasearchers from different faculties for you to have a QUALITY ARTICLE for publication.


Should I respond to emails (resembling spams) asking for my papers? I started to get emails like this:

  From: Firstname Middlename Lastname <someotherfirstname0000@hotmail>~

  Title of paper.

  I need the article to study.

  thank you!

  Firstname Middlename Lastname

Title of paper identifying one of my papers.

Is this the beginning of academic spam or phishing? Do you get such stuff regularly?

The first reaction I had was to answer with an ironic version of how I'd like such an email to look and how I'd have answered it.

On a second thought I decided that the email was so rude that I won't  answer it.

After a few hours I got the very same email a second time. I noticed that the sender name is not the one of the names in the "signature". Also, the sender is rather unknown to the more relevant part of the internet (including pubmed).

I don't even think this is for harvesting papers. My guess: it is to validate email addresses so that actual spam campaigns can achieve a better return on investment.

My guess is it's someone setting up a bot to try and get research articles for free. Once your paper is published, the copyright is owned by the journal. Unless you paid for open access, you are breaking the copyright by sharing the article. In addition, you are probably also breaking the terms of the subscription to the journal your university has.

In other words, ignore the email!


While showing my work to my supervisor, an adult website appeared. Am I in trouble? I will try to make this brief. I am a student at a prominent university in the UK, and while I was showing my thesis work, a website, to my supervisor, the website crashed. Then I was asked to close the browser and open it again.

When I did, it seems a tab of adult content was open from the previous day with explicit content, when that happened, I immediately (without thinking) pressed Cmd-W to close it but it was evident he saw it.

The conversation continued normally and my supervisor completely ignored it. I feel very embarrassed and I am afraid I could be reported or anything.

Am I in trouble? Will I face issues because of this? Thank you in advance.

Edit: My laptop is a personal laptop and not provided by the university. I've also used the University network to access the site from my dorm. I also don't think there are university guidelines that prevent us from accessing adult content.

It's embarrassing, but it's also understandable. I think if your supervisor has decided to ignore it, then you should take this opportunity to not ruminate. So silently thank him, and forget it.

I know advice is always easier said than done though. Rumination is defined as "to keep thinking about a problem which had already been, or can never be solved". The real problem had already been solved at the moment he decided to ignore it, so the only problem here is your rumination. To stop it, every time you feel embarrassed about this topic again, my tip is to shake the idea in your head, like it's just a toy. This will make you distract from the negative feeling.

Related:
• Why You Should Stop Caring What Other People Think (Taming the Mammoth) – Wait But Why
• Straightforwardness, Fearlessness and Improvisation: How to find the fresh perspective? – Ooker

If it's a thesis about security in computing science you will probably acquire serious troubles with a bad mark!
In the other cases that will just eventually decrease slightly your mark but if you know very well your subject most of the examiners will certainly forget this trouble to stay concentrate only on the subject.
As teacher, I try to remember only the good things because I haven't time to waste for others things. As professional, I will certainly suggest you to change your computer and the day I like to stop to work with you I will eventually remember to you that event. Anyway, if you are young we can understand more easily that situation but we can't accept it that why your examiner reject it immediately. Next time, I hope you will be more watchful with the security of your computer and be careful with Internet, backups...
It's not necessary to wear all the time a suit and to have in your hand a Bible but if you have piercing, tattoes and strange haircut that is more difficult to think about an hitch. in other way try to keep all the time the maximum chance of success in your career with loyalty and honesty to vanish pitfalls and traps


Friendship with Professor okay? My professor and I walk to and from for every class I have with her, I am a female senior student and my professor is in her 30's. I've gotten to know her really well, we even had a random dinner together. I go to her office hours everyday and share a coffee or cookie. I go to her for many incidents, including a man who has been harassing her and me. She has a partner who she mentions all the time and she even tells me about her family situations back home. We've had several meetings with the University officials and discuss them afterwards. We email constantly, I consider her a friend or a mentor.

I'm curious to know where the boundaries are between my Professor and me (student)? What is the difference between a Mentor and Friend for professors and does it apply to me?

In my opinion professors are normal people and can have friends as everyone else, as long as it does not affect your grades and how you are treated in the classroom. I used to give classes where I taught my friend who I started studies at the same university with (he took a few gap years...). In the classroom and when grading exams and homeworks I treated him exactly as other students.

There is also a possibility that your institution's code of conduct has regulations pertaining to this situation. Nevertheless, they should be more of concern for your professor than you.

I'm three years late to this question, but I'm going to respond because it's something I can relate to. The problem in these situations is that it can be difficult for a student to decipher between a professor's personal feelings vs. their professional attitude. For example, friendliness and even some degree of socializing may be perceived by the student as the professor wanting a personal relationship (whether platonic or romantic) whereas the professor may only be showing professional courtesy/kindness or concern. Even if they like you as student/person, they may not want to continue the relationship beyond the classroom/university.

That's not to say that friendships (or relationships) between students and professors never happen, but it can be devastating and embarrassing when the student gets the wrong idea. As to whether they're okay, I'd say the relationship should stay professional while you're in their class, but once you graduate and/or aren't taking any more classes with them, a more personal friendship/relationship can develop. (This depends on both parties wanting it, however.)

Since it's almost three years since you posted this, whatever happened happened, and I hope this turned out well for you.

Edit- I'm from the US, and this varies by institution, individual, and whether the student is an undergrad. or grad student. Typically, friendships don't form between faculty and students at the undergrad. level here, but there are occasionally exceptions. It also may be more common at private liberal arts colleges which have smaller classes and are more focused on teaching. I would say it's less common at public universities, at least in my experience. In grad. school, however, from my understanding, there is more interaction between professors/advisors and students, and the relationship is slightly less formal than in undergrad., so there's more potential for friendships to develop.


Quit PhD and reapply for another PhD? I am currently a year-three postgraduate student and aimming for a PhD (in my country 4 year for a PhD, and it's allowed to quit and gain master degree).

Although with fine results in the first three semesters (with publications), I got sick and had to live in hospital for almost one year. My health condiction is still not very good and needs more time for treatment. At least for now I find it's dim for my coming PhD thesis defense (not enough time & publications).

Because too much time was wasted in my early PhD studying, I plan to quit PhD (replaced by a master degree) and reapply for another PhD (like in US with similar research direction).

Is this moral? Will this quit bring some bad effect for my new application? And will this hurt my relationship with my current supervisor (I have'nt talk with him of my thoughts)?

There are no ethical concerns here. It is fine to quit and reapply. Given a medical history it is unlikely that you will suffer academic consequences. So, relax on that score.

However there are two things you should also consider.

First, you have an advisor who has views about your likely success. Work with them now so that you have an accurate picture of your probable success in your current program. You seem to think the future is dim there, but it may be overly pessimistic. They may be able to work with you on a good completion.

Second, if your health issues are continuing, you will need to convince a new program that you can be a success there in spite of them. If they come back to affect your performance you could wind up in the same place, but a worse situation, in a few years.

If the medical condition is actually caused or affected by stress, then you should, in addition, find ways to deal with that issue.

It is immoral. By moral, I used a philosophical definition from Stanford/Plato. My moral values differ from yours because of diverse background and upbringing. I don't know where you are from or how dropping out is perceived in your institution or society. So, take my justification with a grain of salt.

I consider exhausting resources (time and money) without substantial contribution in the field or addition to one's learning is negligence to the academic community. That said, by the time you complete the application and matriculate in the new program, you would have finished preparing to defend your dissertation. Nobody can predict for certain of anyone's failure/success in a PhD defense. Alas, having a good relationship with an advisor who can vouch on your behalf may help, at least at institutions that I know.

No, it probably will not have a "bad effect for [the] new application." Quitting a PhD program will not necessarily predict that you won't complete the next program.

The impact of your quitting the current program on your relationship with the current supervisor will depend on how current supervisor and your relationship was and has been. It's subjective. You won't get an answer unless you speak to them, honestly.


The meaning of "paper" in the context of undergraduate students The word "paper" on this site seems to be extensively used to refer to serious scientific publications/articles by PhD students and other researchers.

Now I am coming across its use by students completing a diploma in legal executive studies — which is not even bachelor's degree level. Here are real examples:

I live in ... and will be continuing on with my Legal Exec papers from home, having completed two papers last year.
I have finished 3 papers and I hope to complete 3 papers this year.
Only 2 more papers towards completion!
I am hoping to complete my two final papers this semester (Business and  Estate Law).

Never having been a student in an English-speaking country before, I am now struggling to perceive what exactly those "papers" are. Can someone please explain? The examples above are from New Zealand.

In this New Zealand context, a paper is a course and the terms are used interchangeably, usually with one or other being the formal label at any given institution and the other in common use as well. In either case, it is a single class that can be enrolled in individually, with its own final grade, that can be credited towards a degree, diploma, or certificate.

For reference, we can see this guide from Victoria University of Wellington:

  Courses are blocks of work that are taught over one or sometimes two trimesters—they’re often referred to as ‘papers’ by other universities.

or this glossary from the University of Canterbury:

  Courses are 'classes' or 'papers' that involve blocks of lectures usually taught over one semester.

as well as the University of Waikato's Catalogue of Papers, which lists all the courses they offer, or the similar "Search for a paper" page from the University of Otago, and similar items for the other universities.

It does not refer to an exam or to a term paper. "Exam paper" does refer to the physical document given in an exam and the set of questions on it, but never "paper" alone. All of these terms are often used differently elsewhere.

In the context of the examples, I think "paper" is (rightly) being used as a synonym for "essay." Source: http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/essay.

Academics have a plethora of terms to describe their written outputs, e.g., journal article, conference paper, technical report, manuscript, ... Moreover, those terms can be used to describe a single body of work. For example, "I have submitted my manuscript to a conference. I'll publish it as a technical report, if it is accepted, to enable dissemination prior to publication of the conference paper. Hopefully, I'll publish an extended version as a journal article."


Why don't most law schools show, let alone teach how to draft and interpret, complete contracts? The author's just referring to US. I don't know if Commonwealth law schools show students complete contracts and/or teach how to draft and interpret. But I'm flabberghast that you can graduate JD without actually reading a complete contract or sampling different types of contracts!

How "if you develop the critical thinking skills necessary to understand and interpret contract law, the ability to draft and interpret contract themselves will follow"? I don't understand this theory. At some point, won't new law graduates have to see and self-teach a contract before drafting and interpreting them?

If JD graduates have to work with contracts some day, why do law schools delay the inevitable? Even if not a mandatory course, why don't  law schools offer an optional 2L or 3L course on perusing, drafting and interpreting complete contracts?

      In class, most likely, you will never actually read a complete contract.  You will probably never study typical sections included in most commercial contracts. You will not see a sampling of different types of contracts. Instead, your contracts course will teach you contractual principles of interpretation. The theory is that if you develop the critical thinking skills necessary to understand and interpret contract law, the ability to draft and interpret contract themselves will follow.

Steven Sedberry J.D. (Vanderbilt). Law School Labyrinth: The Guide to Making the Most of Your Legal Education (2011) p 83.

I went to law school in Australia, not the US, but I also had this experience --- that courses on contract law never involved reading any actual legal contracts, and that this latter exercise was almost completely absent from the whole program.  Across my LLB and LLM, the only time we ever did anything like this was in a legal skills workshop in LLM (required for registration as a solicitor) where the teacher went through an actual legal contract and the class discussed the drafting of each of the sections, and their good and bad points.  This exercise was probably about one hour over the course of about five years in law school.
As to why this is done, I can only assume that legal academics believe that it is more valuable to focus time on discrete legal issues, and the theory pertaining to them, rather than spending substantial amounts of time holistically analysing an actual legal contract.  Furthermore, I think the law schools regard this kind of exercise as something you learn on-the-job in a legal firm, rather than in university programs.  There is some degree of demarcation between legal theory and ideas taught in university (which is more abstract), and the on-the-job knowledge you get from supervising solicitors when starting in a legal firm (which is more concrete).
To give some historical background to this, it used to be the case that law schools did not exist at all.  You became a lawyer by doing an apprenticeship under an existing solicitor, just as you would have to become a blacksmith, etc.  Throughout the middle ages the legal profession was conducted on an apprenticeship model, so students learned skills by performing or observing tasks from an instructing solicitor.  The size of the profession was small, and limited to upper-class males, so you might have had a solicitor who agrees to take on one or two apprentices who do clerical work for him while observing his practice.  In the 1200s an institution called the "Inns of Court" was established in London to teach young upper-class men legal skills and the broader social graces and skills of becoming a "gentleman".  Even then, formal legal training was light, and most of the learning was done on-the-job by apprenticeship under a practicing lawyer.  (Incidentally, this institution is still around, and is now a professional association for barristers.)  Students were also encouraged to learn by directly attending and observing court proceedings.  In more recent times, when the universities began teaching law, they had to demonstrate some value-added in conducting courses through their own institutions; they did this by taking the view that they would teach the kinds of higher-level abstract principles of law, while leaving other skills to remain within the apprenticeship.  Gradually the apprenticeship model has waned and disappeared, but there is still some degree to which the universities consider early career at a law firm to be a supplement for this.
I partly agree with the Sedburry quote --- it is descriptively accurate about what happens at law school.  I disagree with his assumption that academics assume that concrete knowledge of how to draft good contracts follows automatically.  To the contrary, I don't think that legal academics think that the ability to draft contracts automatically follows from conceptual understanding, but they do seem to regard this as a skill to be learned during one's early career in a law firm, rather than something to devote time to at university.  Personally, I think that is a mistake, and that it would be beneficial for the degree to include many more exercises involving full reading/critique of a whole legal contract, even if this crowds out some of the theory knowledge in the curriculum.
Finally, I will just note that you are probably not alone in viewing this as a deficiency in the law school curriculum.  This is a situation where you could take the initiative and start your own study group, with the goal of reading and analysing actual commercial contracts.  You could treat this like a book-club --- each week you all get a legal contract to read and discuss/critique for the next week.  If you can find ten or more other students who are keen on this, you could probably go to some of your lecturers and see if any of them are interested in helping you (e.g., attending a one-hour study session each week to help with discussion).  Some academics won't have the time for this, but if you've already done the leg-work of organising the group yourself (and if you meet in a room very near to their office!), you will probably be able to find a willing academic.

Writing or interpreting a contract is an applied skill. It doesn't make sense to approach it in the abstract. When you draft a contract, you're protecting a real client's actual interests. Not coincidentally, you're also bound by professional ethics not to share those interests with anyone outside your law firm — including students of the legal profession. What's more, many relevant and potentially pedagogically useful contracts are under an NDA, and therefore can't be disclosed at all.
Drafting a contract without a tangible client would be overly generic and sterile at best and misleading at worst. Law firms — who have specific clients, and even specific client industries they might specialize in — likely prefer to teach new hires with "hands-on" training, rather than have to "unteach" misapplied theory based on overly generic understanding of a fictitious client from an irrelevant industry.
The same is true for interpreting a contract. You have to prune your search of the infinite possible ramifications a contract's language could imply, and restrict yourself to consider those areas which practically affect your real client. You can't know in advance all the legal implications of a given contract, when you're reading it, any more than you can predict the weather.
There are many laws it could interact with in various scenarios between multiple and compound parties with sophisticated relationships between and within each other. When you don't know who's interests your protecting (i.e. who can sue whom?), how do you interpret how the contract will impact the future?
There are infinite possible ways that it could "go down" in court in infinite possible lawsuits against two or more as-yet-unknown legal adversaries.
I'm not a lawyer, or even a law student; this is just a "steel-man" argument from extrapolation. So, give me half as many up- and down-votes as you'd planned to. :-)


What sort of research experience does a college or university expect a professor to provide an undergraduate? A lot of universities nowadays expect professors to be able to provide research experience to their undergraduates. i.e. in job applications for new hires. What do they actually expect- Publications? Senior projects? Funding opportunities for undergraduates? While I agree research 'experience' is a great thing for undergraduates in principal, realistically the vast majority of undergrads aren't going to be able to make progress on real problems - so how will this reflect on a new professor?

Faculty in such situations might be expected to provide research experiences commensurate with the size and scope of the institution. Undergraduates usually cannot devote the time to a project that a graduate student does, so the outcomes are different. Publications are not generally expected; conference presentations are more common. Most importantly, the undergraduate gets experience working on a complex problem and develops transferable research skills. What the faculty member gets is not the same as what he or she would get from graduate students.

What an undergraduate does as research depends on the facilities, infrastructure, and culture of the institution. At a major research institution, undergraduates should be working on the same types of problems graduate students work on, but perhaps in a more limited scope. When I was a grad student, we had several undergrads in our lab, one of whom was grad student quality and got some publications. The others contributed valuable (if not always publishable) work to our projects.

At a smaller institution that maybe does not have a graduate progran (like where I am now), you give an undergraduate student work commensurate with the type of grants you are expected to write. My institution (and my department especially) does not emphasize pursuit of large external grants, and so the types of projects I can give to my students are more limited. At the undergraduate stage, the process is more important than the results. I regularly send my students to regional and national conferences, and I hope to eventually have them publish something, but I am not given low evaluation marks. However, if you are expected to apply for and get big grants, then your undergrads should be doing work at that level.

All in all, in the chemistry departments I have been a part of (large and small), most faculty have one or more undergraduates doing research and most undergraduates get the opportunity. However, not all undergraduates choose to, nor would their be enough opportunities to support them if they did. The onus is on the undergraduate to choose to do research, not on the professor to guarantee an opportunity is available to all students even if they do not want it.

There's always the masters thesis, which in some instances might include original research. Also, at my university, some undergraduate TA's gets involved in research a bit by professors giving them some problems to work on, usually involving doing numerics.


Is paying someone to fix LaTeX issues in one's thesis ethical? For my bachelor thesis in theoretical CS I paid someone to

fix some weird LaTeX issues I had
make some figures in LaTeX for which I provided exact (!) hand-drawn pictures
adjust the document class/template (font size, margins, ...) to university standards

In particular, all the text, formulae, figure sketches and remaining, say, 70% of the remaining typesetting were done by. Let me also say that I got the best grade possible to highlight that my contents were more than substantial for a bachelor thesis.

By academic standards, is it ethical to outsource parts of typesetting one's (BSc|MSc|PhD) thesis by paying someone?

Note that I am looking for opinions about the academic culture, not about legal situations. My university regulations are especially blurry and demand that one's thesis must be solely produced (in German: angefertigt) by the author. Whether that includes typesetting and in what proportion, is probably up to interpretation.

Related post: PhD student hiring a LaTeX expert to typeset thesis? asks about pragmatic reasons, not about ethical concerns.

I do not see any unethical point in this.
You were supposed to make an original contribution to your thesis in terms of your research. With respect to writing, you can take help from your friends, supervisor, or anyone else (free or paid).

In our university in New Zealand, there was a dept. which used to charge a small fee to fix language issues for students with English as a second language. I suppose this should also work for the images/pictures thing as you are not an artist but an expert in your particular field.

Cutting it short, I do not see anything unethical in it.

Is paying someone to fix LaTeX issues in one's thesis ethical?

No, it is not (but you should ask your advisor), but you should mention (in acknowledgements) that you did this.

Another important consideration : if you want to get additional degrees (e.g. a Master's or a PhD thesis) you'll better improve your LaTeX skills. They will be useful later (even in industry).

So pay someone to teach you how to better use LaTeX. You are extremely likely to need LaTeX later, if you stay in technical circles (a big lot of technical conferences prefer LaTeX to Microsoft documents). With oversimplification: LaTeX is useful for a technical career, MicroSoft Word and Excel is useful for management. A big lot of computer science or programming books (e.g. this one) are typeset using LaTeX. Doxygen can generate LaTeX documents (so PDF) from comments inside your source code. Pygments can do something dual.

If you write (later) any kind of computer software running on Linux (and most web servers are running Linux), generating *.tex files (or some \inputed parts of it) is an efficient way to automatically generate PDF printable files (even if there are other solutions, maybe involving Lout or Patoline or LibreOffice or libpdf++ etc).

At last, tex.stackexchange.com is a nice place to get help in LaTeX.

Be also aware of LaTeX to HTML5 converters such as HeVeA. They can be a nice way to write a documentation in LaTeX and have it converted to a set of web pages.

PS. A big mistake of mine was to write my PhD thesis in AI without using LaTeX (in 1990). That was probably the biggest professional mistake of my entire career (ending in a few years by retirement).


Advisor tries to reproduce my results to ensure my honesty. Is it the norm? I am a M.Sc. student in Machine Learning, about to finish my thesis this month. My advisor wants me to meet him in person to reproduce my results under his control. It is obvious that the main reason for this action is to be confident that I didn't manipulate the diagrams, etc.

I didn't do any cheating and I have no problem with that. But it is a little annoying for me that my advisor doesn't trust me. I want to know whether this is the norm in academia or is my adviser just a little skeptical of me?

I should mention that I am the lone M.Sc. student in the lab and I am nearly sure that the advisor doesn't do that with PhD students in the lab.

As many have pointed out in the comments (Nate Eldredge, Dan Romik, Per Alexandersson, etc.), the point is not to catch you cheating (as if you were intentionally trying to manipulate your results), but rather to verify your process of obtaining such results. We all should be so lucky as to have an adviser take the time out of his/her schedule to verify our processes.

I would also like to add that -- and this assumes your thesis could/will lead to an academic publication at a journal or conference -- that your adviser's reputation is potentially on the line by attaching his/her name to such a document. In other words, by becoming a co-author on your [future] publication, your adviser is essentially saying, "Yes, I helped work on this, and I am sure of the methods and the results contained within."

The bottom line (tl;dr) is that you shouldn't take this as a personal attack. You should be thankful to have someone who can invest the amount of time necessary to ensure the correctness of the work you've done.

In part, you are correct, but more than likely it's a lot of other factors. Once you leave the gates of college, whether it's your peers, your colleagues, or your professional community. If there is ever anything new or of significant value being claimed, than it MUST be reviewed. So definitely get used to people behaving skeptical initially.

In part it's to confirm your results. It can also be to potentially mimic results for future research or education. At the end of the day, his reputation lies on signing off on your work as "valid". Or at least to make sure that what you did is not mimicked work with minute, insufficient contributions to your field. Plus, if there's good stuff in your results, he might try and assist in finding you some serious grant funds or can help assist with private research funds.


Is 8:00 AM an unreasonable time to meet with my graduate students and post-doc? I am a recently graduated PhD, but for the past few years I have been on an 8:00-16:30 schedule with a lunch break at noon.  I arrive between 7:45-8:00 and get started immediately.

Now I am on as a continuing research scientist and have been assigned to supervise two graduate students and another post-doc that's new to the field.  It's important for our schedules to overlap, so I've instructed them to meet me at 8:00 to get started.

To clarify the frequency, this type of "meeting" would be once a week for the next 13 weeks. I use quotes because it's really just the time we agree to get in the lab and start work together, which is still a meeting but not the one we often think of when we see the word.

Someone I am close to, who has both graduate school and office (industry) experience, tells me this is unreasonable.  According to her, even in formal business environments, the first [half-]hour is reserved for checking your email, getting settled, going through voicemails, etc.

As I like to tell people, I was a student for 25 consecutive years, so I know the ropes regarding when academics typically wake up and get started.  I'm not asking if starting work at 8:00 AM is typical, but rather if it is unreasonable and why I should or shouldn't change my policy.

It depends entirely on whether you have consulted the other meeting participants. There is nothing inherently wrong about an 8 a.m. meeting if it is convenient for everyone involved.

If you have set the time without consulting the other participants, there are two serious problems.

You may be giving one or more of them a practical problem. For example, consider a parent whose child's school starts at 8 or later. You may be disrupting carpool arrangements. It may conflict with a class one of the students wants to attend.

The other problem is more subtle, and applies even if none of the participants actually has a problem with the meeting time. Setting the time for a small meeting without consulting the other participants and considering their views is very disrespectful. It tells them that you consider your schedule, your convenience, to be so much more important than theirs that you don't need to consider them at all. That sort of message is not good for a working relationship.

Based upon my research group at University, I would say it would be counterproductive.  Everyone: professor, grad students, post doc would be up to late hours either doing their work or catching up on tasks.  Even if people regularly sleep for just a couple hours of night, it can't be the most beneficial time to meet.

It comes down to the group of people, their willingness to give up sleep and their other commitments which might affect their rising time.  Scheduling assistants such as Doodle are very useful when several people have to come together at one time to get a consensus.  Generally, if it just the students to meet with each other, late at night might work and be agreed upon, but usually when a professor is involved the times seem to run from later morning to mid evening.


What are the implications of distributing a faculty annual salary over 9 or 12 months? It has been mentioned couple of times in this site that faculty could be able to distribute their salary over 9 or 12 months. What are advantages and disadvantages of each? And can faculty who distribute their salary over 12 months work during the summer? Do they get 1 month vacation and sick leave? Any effect on taxes, health insurance, and deduction for benefits? Does it affect the amount of summer salary from the university or a funding agency?

There may be some confusion here about the difference between 9 and 12 month appointments vs. arranging to have the salary for a 9 month appointment paid out over 12 months.

In the U.S., the typical faculty appointment is a 9 month appointment.  Under this arrangement, a faculty member is required to be present on campus and teaching (and doing research and service) from September through May.  They typically do not have formal vacation or sick leave but in practice can stay home (and cancel classes) if sick.  They can also go on personal travel when classes are not in session.  Faculty don't have to formally request time off as long as they attend to their responsibilities.

In this system faculty do not have to work over the summers, although many faculty do teach summer school or work on research grants and earn additional salary over the summer.  Faculty will also often work on unfunded research projects over the summer.

Many faculty with 9 month appointments choose to have their annual salary paid out over 12 months.  This doesn't create any obligation to work over the summer and has no significant tax consequences, but it is more convenient for household budgeting since summer salary can be quite variable and unpredictable from year to year.

For example, I just learned today that I will be able to earn a month of summer salary teaching a course that starts on June 8.  I'm still waiting to hear if some research funding for this summer will come through.  I've designed my personal budget so that I'm not dependent on summer salary, so I have my 9 month salary paid out over 12 months.

12 month appointments are quite common for academic administrators and some full time researchers.  These typically do accrue sick leave and paid vacation, which has some advantages but also has some disadvantages such as having to explicitly request time off.

What everybody on here is forgetting or not aware of, is that you can get unemployment during the off months if you are paid on a 9 months basis.  That could add up to over $7500 a year if you make 60000 a year.


Is it plagiarism if I use a text I wrote myself but put on the internet before? I just rememebered a case when I was still in school: we had to write an essay about a specific topic and one guy put big parts of his essay on Wikipedia before handing it in. When the teacher checked for plagiarism she indeed found big parts of his text in the Wikipedia article and thus accused him of plagiarism.

How would that situation be with journal papers (or other "official" ways of publishing)?
Can I reuse part(s) of texts I wrote myself but that are available publicly/online like on Wikipedia, my Blog, university homepage, etc.?

(Maybe consider that pseudonyms are used on Wikipedia, Blogs, etc.)

I think this is an interesting question that depends on separating three concepts that sometimes get intertwined:

plagiarism
copyright
legality

Plagiarism refers to using something without properly indicating its source.

Copyright refers to having the right to use material elsewhere.

Legality refers to whether you're violating a law or committing a crime by doing something.

If you've posted something anywhere (and especially to an openly editable place like wikipedia or SE), then there's possible issues with reusing it on each of the fronts.

With respect to plagiarism, what matters is if the prior posting counts as "published" or "submitted" for the purposes of the item in question. (The former being the standard for journals and books; the latter being the standard for classes -- though I suspect most classes would care if you submitted something you already had published).

For copyright, you may not have the legal right to use something in its entirety even if you're the one who wrote it. This would depend on which copy rights your retained from your first publication. If it's SE, for instance, you're under Creative Commons. Wikipedia seems to have their own thing (I'm not a lawyer and can't entirely parse their policy).

Finally, none of this means that you're doing anything criminal, but if you were publishing for money, you could have liability if you violate the copyright.

Two confusing issues are that copyrights can speak as if they create citation obligations (they don't) and act as if their violation is a crime, but at least in the US its only a crime when done for profit.

If you quote your source than it is not plagiarism, for example According to John Adam "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence".  You can also paraphrase and site your source, plagiarism is the practice of using someone else writings or work and trying to say it's yours without giving them credit according to Dictionary.com. Also I would avoid any and all wiki's when writing papers;however, most credible wiki pages site sources at the bottom of the page, you can often find the original article that the information came from,allowing you to go right to the source. Using paraphrasing will often get you past a plagiarism checker, although teachers read so many papers that they often know when they have heard something before and expect you to site where the information came from.


I was caught cheating on an exam, how can I minimize the damage? I got caught cheating in a two-hour engineering exam consisting of 100 multiple choice questions which was done online through the moodle e-learning software. I feel like my life is almost over.

Having not studied well and having no time to study, I decided to cheat. I know there are no excuses for cheating. Before the exam I dug up research about moodle exams, and it turned out you can take the exam anywhere you want to as long as you have the quiz password. Taking advantage of this, I went up to my engineering library and asked a close friend who was taking the exam to send me the quiz password before he starts.

What I had prepared:

Calculator (was not allowed during the quiz).
Printed material (consisted of more than 200 pages).
Google search engine (on a laptop ready to help).
Whatsapp (to ask questions for a friend who took the quiz last year).

As I sat down, I did the first 50 questions, suddenly the quiz froze and moodle told me:

  you are not allowed to take the exam from this location.

While I was leaving, one instructor responsible for the course (there are 5) came and found me. She accused me of cheating, took my mobile and made come with her to a huge office where two instructors searched all my mobile (took the name of my friend who gave me the password), and started talking to me, asking for all details of this crime. They took and confiscated my phone and looked at everything: Whatsapp conversations, all my emails, and images. The instructor took the mobile from my hand without asking me and kept it with her. It seems that the instructors are going to report me as well as my friend who sent me the password for the exam.

The university's Student Code Conduct said that cheating will result in one of the following: a Dean's Warning, Suspension, or Expulsion. If any of that happens, my future is over. A dean's warning will cancel my financial aid. A suspension would be for at least two years, and coming back would require a lot of work. An expulsion will be definite.

I've learned the lesson about cheating, now how can I fix this? How can I prevent the five instructors from reporting me? It's obvious that I should speak to them, but what should I say? What can I do? My future is almost over, but many of you are teachers and instructors here, what can I do to fix this?

EDIT: Wow, it has been almost 3 years. I would like to update on how I dealt with the situation.

Lesson: It was obvious to never ever cheat under any circumstances, and it was not whether you'd get caught or not.

Consequences: I received a Dean's warning but the financial aid wasn't revoked. However, I couldn't stay in the department as engineering was not for me and I was even ashamed to stay in the university.

What happened next: I transferred to an ABET-accredited Computer Science institution and I graduated with distinction in 2.5 years. It was extremely stressful as I had taken 6 major courses (18 credits) in one semester, but I had to do it.

Future plans: I'm going for an MSc in Computer Science in St Andrews next year.

I've learned the lesson about cheating, now how can fix this? How can
  I prevent the 5 instructors from reporting me. It's obvious that I
  should speak to them, but what should I say? What can I do? My future
  is almost over, but many of you are teachers and instructors here,
  what can I do to fix this?

From the way you wrote this, it seems to me that in your current mindset, you have not yet learned the full lesson. I say this because the second sentence above seems to me still in the same mindset where you are trying to control and engineer a result to essentially beat the system and get something better than your own actions have generated. That is not full understanding of learning that that whole approach is not appropriate. You're treating the system like an adversary, acting in a victim mentality, and trying to manipulate your way out of it. You have some lessons to learn about humility, honesty, surrender, and building integrity from the ground up. I would suggest accepting those.

I would suggest it may help for you to consider you may also be wrong-minded when you think things like:

  If any of those happen, my future is over. A dean's warning will
  cancel my financial aid. A suspension, will be at least for two years
  and coming back requires a lot of work. An expulsion, will be
  definite.

The "my future is over" fear is what led you to cheat in the first place. As your professor kindly observed, you didn't need to cheat in the first place, and it got you into far worse trouble than doing your best would have. Indeed, I think your future looks darker if you don't take full responsibility now. I would be more optimistic about your future if you lose your financial aid and have to leave that university, but actually learn your lesson and continue at some other institution.

Your future will depend on your mindset, your integrity, and how you do your chosen field of work (including how you feel about yourself and how you relate to your work). These things are built upon each other like the bedrock, foundation, and upper levels of a building. If your mindset is full of panic, it will undermine your integrity. If your integrity is unsound, it will undermine your work. Seriously. This is practical and not empty moralizing.

So, realize that if you really want to be an engineer, you can do this, even if you need to go to another university. Even if it takes another 2 or even 4 years. Then, restore your integrity by being completely honest about everything and taking full responsibility for everything you caused and continue to cause. Don't try to cover anything up, make anything sound good, look good, nor avoid looking bad. You will feel a lot better about it all when you let go of resisting and admit everything. Your instructors know all about it, and will notice any attempt to make this better for yourself, so even if you were going to cling to being a desperate manipulative person, it would be best to surrender and fully admit everything, and be as honest as possible in everything you do. If you can really learn these lessons, then it may actually make sense to give you some leniency. If you're still resisting, then it wouldn't be doing anyone any favors in the long run, to do anything less than suspend you.

The good news is, this lesson is FAR more important than the engineering content you were studying.

Every error carries potential for something good. This is quite possibly an example of being manipulated into cheating without even knowing. The school's error, quite possibly, may be that they are expecting unrealistic amount of studying to be done by a student. It takes time to absorb new knowledge; they may think "well others have done it before..." but no one knows how much previous knowledge others had. Usually those who are getting top marks have more than average or required knowledge about the subject. I know, I have certainly been in that situation (when I was a student, while others were struggling with math, I did not; but I used to win math competitions, and my mother and my roommate at the time were both math teachers).
However, this still does not give you a reason to cheat. The lessons is: no matter how badly someone else is behaving (and I have seen that in many institutions of higher learning), you should always do things that are ethical. Integrity is one thing that makes all the difference on this planet.
Yes, I think that your school lacks in that department, but you have shown to be just the same at that moment you cheated. Once you understand that, that we are often manipulated into "cheating" (e.g. when doing 85 mph on a 65 mph road, where the conditions, car, and even road survey make that 85mph perfectly safe) you look at your error in better light.

Ultimately, this is not a perfect world, and one needs to be aware of other people's errors so that we are not misled into doing more  of the same.
In the end, if your school is one of the nation's leading institutions, they are unlikely to budge; but if it is a "for profit" institution with questionable record, they may be willing to back down.
The point you made about too much work should be mentioned in your meeting. You can tell them honestly that in all that panic of not having enough time to prepare (they should know you need to sleep, eat, go to a doctor and whatnot), you could not think clearly and this seemed like the only way out. Perhaps you were under too much stress to think clearly and make a right decision.
You obviously did not feel you could honestly approach them and let them know that expectations were too high.
But, don't focus on their error. Your part of the error is what matters. Ask yourself - what it would take you to sell your integrity. Only when the answer is a firm "there is no way", is it a correct one.


I quit a master’s program for a PhD program. How do I list this on my CV? Before starting my PhD, I was enrolled in a master’s program for one year that I quit once I got accepted to my current PhD program.
What do you think I should write on my CV so as not to give a bad impression to potential employers?

University A, 2016 to present
B.Sc., University B, 2015

University A, 2016 to present
MA program, University B, 2015–2016 (quit to start PhD at A)
B.Sc., University B, 2015

University A, 2016 to present
B.Sc., University B, 2015 (followed by a one-year enrollment in the master’s program)

something else?

I would suggest something like "left to pursue PhD" rather than "quit" or "abandoned". The explicit meaning is the same, but there is an implicit negativity in quitting or abandoning something.

PhD student, Dept of Rocket Science, University A, 2016 to present (expected Spring 2032)
MA student, University B, 2015-2016 (left to pursue PhD)
B.Sc. Physics, University B, 2015

(I'd also probably add the program name/degree titles and anticipated graduation date)
In your case, it's a short enough window that you could also probably leave it off without any notice, especially if you are applying to industry positions.
One time to definitely not leave it off is anything asking for your full academic record - the cases where this typically applies are in graduate admissions (which likely longer apply to you) and some grant applications (which still could).

Your second version seems clearest, but the wording might be "Abandoned on acceptance to doctoral program". And state on the first line that you are in a doctoral program. Give complete years for BSc.

Doctoral Program, University A, 2016 to present
MA Program, University B, 2015–2016 (abandoned on acceptance to doctoral program)
B.Sc., University B, 2013–2015 (or whatever)

Opinion, though. Just make it as clear as possible. One line for each program.


Re-using a paper from one class for another? Last year, I wrote a 10 page term paper for a geology class that focused on the geochemistry of certain rock deposits.  I received an A on the paper.  This year, I'm taking a geochemistry class at a different university and have to write another thesis paper.  This assignment has the same criterion as the other paper did and the topic I wrote on before is on of the allowed topics.

Would it be acceptable (morally and/or academically) to submit a slightly edited version of the first paper I wrote in the new class?

The paper was not published/distributed in any way (to my knowledge), and is entirely my own work with proper citations.

Almost invariably, the answer to "Is it OK to submit X for a class assignment?" is "Ask the instructor.".

You do need to ask yourself whether your objective for the geochemistry class is to get a good grade, or to improve your knowledge and skills in the area of geochemistry, or both. Even if the instructor agrees with recycling the old paper, you may get more out of the class if you pick a different topic and write a new paper.

As far as I'm concerned this is perfectly fine as long as you make it clear that this paper is heavily based on a similar paper written on your own for another course. And includes any citations required by your academic institution.

This is also heavily dependent on culture of the country/school and the opinion of the person grading the paper. So if you are not sure just explain your opinion and ask what is the correct course of action. This way you will know exactly what the prof expects/prefers and there is no question regarding your intent (did you believe you were doing nothing wrong, did you not know and hope it will work, did you know you were wrong but counted on not getting caught, ....).

You might even be told that doing the same thing twice is a waste of his and your time and your old grade accepted or tips on how to improve your old paper and turn it in for a better grade if you wish or get another assignment.