id
stringlengths 8
14
| url
stringlengths 40
58
| title
stringlengths 2
150
| date_created
stringdate 2008-09-06 22:17:14
2024-03-31 23:12:03
| text
stringlengths 149
7.14M
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
thread-717 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/717 | PhD in Management Science and a faculty position in CS | 2012-03-14T08:34:41.037 | # Question
Title: PhD in Management Science and a faculty position in CS
I would like to know how willing would staff in CS department of reputed universities would be to hire doctorates from relevant non-CS departments, for example, say, management science or operations research students. I see a dilemma for the recruiters here: research-wise the new member may be probably better-equipped to span a newer vista of problems that are currently not tackled in the department, but academically, the faculty may not be trained to teach usual CS courses at undergrad level.
A few specific cases, in either case you can assume the applicant is interested in CS research, but does not have publications in top CS journals:
1. The applicant is a CS-graduate and a PhD in MS but has no CS teaching experience.
2. The applicant is NOT a CS-graduate but a PhD in MS who has worked on CS-related problems for his doctorate. Will he be excused for not teaching undergrad? Or will he have the liberty to formulate interdisciplinary courses himself and teach them?
# Answer
At least three faculty in my department (including our current head) have PhDs in electrical engineering, at least one has a PhD in mathematics, and at least one has a PhD in operations research. If a faculty candidate is actively publishing good research in computer science conferences and journals, which department gave them their PhD really doesn't matter. (And if they're *not* actively publishing good research in computer science conferences and journals **computer science research**, they won't get hired, period.)
Most junior faculty candidates don't have significant teaching experience anyway, so that aspect really doesn't matter much either. Sometimes it can be a bit tricky to find courses for new faculty with non-standard backgrounds to teach, but if they're really doing CS research, something always fits.
> 7 votes
# Answer
Within research universities, departments are generally interested in hiring faculty who will improve the department's research standing, both within the university and within their research field. The people who are most eligible in this regard typically have extensive research publications in a given field, and will have a clear path down which they plan on doing research for the next 5+ years. If you wish to compete with these indidivuals, you'll have to provide a good argument to the university as to how you will be able to advance their standing through your research. Depending on your experience and publication history, this may not be hard to do, but you'll still need to put forth the argument.
From my experience, within teaching universities, they want people who can (1) teach, and (2) teach the subject at hand, in that order. If you're a great teacher but aren't that knowledgeable about some particular CS subject - but have a broad CS knowledge base in other regards, and are willing to learn - then you're a great candidate. That's my experience, at least.
Finally, it's worth asking why you want to join a CS department without the relevant CS experience. You can always join another department and simply get listed as faculty in a different department; again, from my experience, this happens quite often.
> 6 votes
---
Tags: phd, faculty-application, interdisciplinary
--- |
thread-735 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/735 | When does a PhD end? | 2012-03-15T06:37:34.547 | # Question
Title: When does a PhD end?
When does a PhD end? I know this is a very general question on this forum, but let us consider a CS-engineering group. What is the usual and primary consideration for letting the student finish officially?
Is it the number of years spent, when the professor feels nothing more useful will come out of working on the problem (or of the student!)?
Is it the logical conclusion of the problem and the thesis? A student works to complete a problem in 3 years and publishes a couple of journal papers, and finds there is no more to the problem. Will he be allowed to finish or forced to work on some tangential problem simply to prolong his PhD?
# Answer
As a general rule, my PhD students need to do two things to get a PhD:
* Publish 3-4 papers on a coherent topic, mostly in top-tier theoretical computer science conferences, including at least one paper without me as a co-author (and preferably at least one paper that was previously rejected).
* Jump a bunch of administrative hurdles: don't screw up classes, don't screw up TAing, pass quals, gather a committee, propose a thesis, write a thesis, defend a thesis.
That's it. In my experience, most PhD students do way more than this.
A couple of comments on the original question:
* Very few students "finish" their thesis topic. Equivalently: If a research question can be closed in just one or two papers, it's probably not a good thesis topic. Good research opens as many new problems as it solves.
* Reaching the point where further collaboration with a student is unproductive means the student-advisor relationship has **failed**. Sometimes students really do exhaust their research potential, despite their advisors' efforts; in my experience, those students usually don't get PhDs. (Most successful students reach "critical mass" long before they finish.) More often, this happens because the advisor isn't giving the student enough appropriate guidance.
> 25 votes
# Answer
Intuitively, I would say there are two "extreme" ways of seeing a PhD (at least that I know of):
* The point of a PhD is to solve a particular problem (e.g. show that P ≠ NP), and in this case, the PhD ends when the problem is solved, and the dissertation explaining the solution is written. I have known some (brilliant) people who solved some problem hard enough to be considered worth a PhD in 2 years, and who spent the rest of their PhD funding publishing more papers. But technically speaking, the PhD was finished after 2 years, the rest was more like a pre-postdoc.
* The point of a PhD is to train a young scientist to become a (hopefully brilliant) researcher. The topic could then be a just an excuse to work on a sub-field, and as any other training experience, the PhD is over when the advisor believes the young scientist is ready to move on. Of course, writing a dissertation is a good way to convince your advisor, but it could be the case that you have a rather "weak" dissertation (i.e. that won't dramatically change mankind), but a good publication record, external collaborations, etc. In this case, it's even possible to consider writing a Sandwich/stapler thesis.
I would say that most PhD are a mix of the two approaches (and it probably varies from a field to another, from a university to another, from an advisor to another, etc), and the vision can actually be different between the advisor and the student. Personally, I know that I was seeing my PhD more like in the first case (i.e. I wanted to solve hard problems), while my advisor was encouraging me to be more diverse, saying that I would have my entire career to solve hard problems.
> 12 votes
# Answer
Generally speaking, there are well established "mile stones" for the completion of a PhD. This typically comes in the form of writing a dissertation - either in book form or a series of papers - and the presentation (and defense) of those results to a committee of professors (and sometimes a general audience).
It is usually not "years spent" or exhausting a project's potential (or the students).
There are however often some established timelines to prevent students from defending their dissertation too fast - required coursework, certain timing restrictions etc. This is usually intended to keep a student from rushing their studies and meeting the letter of the graduation requirements, but not the spirit - that they be well trained in their field and capable of doing independent work. But if they meet that, and defend their dissertation, no one is going to make them "run out the clock" or the like.
> 11 votes
---
Tags: graduate-school, phd
--- |
thread-749 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/749 | Ratio of faculty positions to applicants | 2012-03-15T19:03:53.580 | # Question
Title: Ratio of faculty positions to applicants
A few years ago for every fresh PhD graduate in Management Information System (MIS), there were three open faculty positions. Then the ratio of graduates to positions dwindled to 1: 2, then to 1:1.5, later to 4:1. Finally MIS departments all over started shutting down or being merged into Management, Operations or other departments and today hardly any schools offer a PhD in MIS.
It is possible that there are still many fields where for every PhD graduate there are 2, 3 or more open faculty positions. Are there any areas with faculty shortages these days? Animal Sciences? Genetics? Psychology? Sociology? Wildlife Sciences? Mechanical Engineering? Computer Science? Statistics? Any field at all?
# Answer
> 6 votes
At least in the US, I can't think of very many fields where there are shortages of applicants for available faculty positions, especially in this day and age with the current economy.
Even when times were booming back in the mid-90's and in the 2000's, you'd still have dozens or even hundreds of applicants for any available faculty position. With the economy still somewhat depressed, you still have lots of people chasing after an even smaller number of positions than before. So I still think that in any viable field of academia, you'll still see applicants outnumbering vacancies. It's only in subdisciplines or departments that probably should not have been separated out in the first place that would end up having gluts of available positions.
# Answer
> 0 votes
From what I've heard the situtation is really good for statistics in the UK. If you get a PhD and want to stay in academia, you're basically guaranteed a faculty position. This is certainly not the case in general though.
---
Tags: phd
--- |
thread-96 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96 | What kind of opportunities exist in the industry for someone with a Ph.D in theoretical CS? | 2012-02-15T12:51:04.227 | # Question
Title: What kind of opportunities exist in the industry for someone with a Ph.D in theoretical CS?
I'm curious to know what kind of choices does someone with a recent Ph.D in theoretical CS have, in the industrial research labs, and how to find out about existing opportunities. In particular, I'm looking for:
* Links to sites where such opportunities are listed, if something like that exists.
* Information regarding the scope of working on pure theoretical topics in industrial labs, which tend to be product-oriented IMHO.
It would be really great if anyone working in an industrial lab would share his experience (which lab, what kind of work you do etc), even if he/she may not be working on theoretical CS (or CS at all!).
# Answer
> 8 votes
AT&T, Google, IBM, and Microsoft all have thriving basic research labs that regularly hire PhDs in theoretical computer science, and whose members regularly publish in theoretical computer science conferences and journals. Yes, research at those labs is colored by the needs of their parent companies, but not as much as you might think. All four companies (and several others) have thriving internship programs.
As with any other research job, your best bet in finding opportunities is to talk personally with people at the labs. Go to FOCS/STOC/SODA, sit at the same lunch table as David Johnson or Muthu or Ken Clarkson or Yuval Peres, and just talk to them. (It obviously helps if you have some research results that they care about.) Ask your advisor to introduce you if you don't feel comfortable just introducing yourself.
(I'm about to get some angry emails from David, Muthu, Ken, and Yuval, aren't I?)
# Answer
> 6 votes
I'm not sure what is the "frontier" of theoretical computer science, but some companies, such as IBM Research or Microsoft Research, also make money by applying to some public funded research project, and as such, can work on rather theoretical work. For instance, I was involved in a project with some guys from IBM TJ Watson on security, and I can assure you that the work was rather abstract, and not at all IBM product oriented.
As for sites where such opportunities are listed, I'm not sure there are many, I'd say (but that's just my impression) that's it's usually by "networking" (i.e. you need to be involved with some guys from a company in some project, and then they might hire you). However, a good technique could be to apply for an internship first (if you're still doing your PhD), although it might a bit too late now, or even for a postdoc (if you've finished it). And in order to find the labs, I'd suggest to go to your favourite conferences, get the accepted papers, and scan for some big companies :)
EDIT: Concerning the sites where you can find job offers, I'd actually suggest to look for specialised sites in your topic of interest, where it can be possible to find offers from industry, rather than on larger sites. I guess most companies prefer to focus their search rather than dropping an ad on Monster, and receiving tons of irrelevant CVs.
For instance (although most ads will be from public academy, some are from industry, it can give you some pointers as to which companies can recruit, even if the ads are out of date):
# Answer
> 1 votes
I would strongly suggest you to join ACM (Association of Computing Machinery). The organization focuses on the advancment of Computer Science both as a Science and profession. Join the community and mingle with experts, share your knowledge and skills with them.
You can also find a lot of opportuites on their jobs page as well. Wish you all the best in your career!
---
Tags: career-path
--- |
thread-766 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/766 | Will PhD rejection return to haunt later? | 2012-03-16T17:38:15.013 | # Question
Title: Will PhD rejection return to haunt later?
Suppose a student applies for PhD at a university and his application is replete with problems: average academic record, poor SOP, so-so recommendations, etc and he is rejected outright. He gets an admit at another university, does very good work and completes his doctorate successfully. Now he deems himself to be a fit for a faculty position at the university which rejected his PhD candidature.
Will his past mistakes come back to haunt him? Will the university dig up his PhD application and count this against his faculty application? Or will he be judged by his work during the course of the doctorate alone?
# Answer
What was written down on an application years ago will generally not come back to haunt a faculty candidate later. However, actions that might have been taken on a faculty visit—or in later interactions with faculty members at a department—could have repercussions.
If the reputation that someone builds is being a person who "doesn't play well with others," that will be a tag that follows that individual for the rest of the career. It can make life a lot more difficult, because that person will have to work *a lot* harder and be a lot more successful than someone who is able to interact with current and potential future departmental colleagues in a civil and cordial manner.
But what's written in an application? Unless it's fraudulent, it shouldn't have a bearing on future ability to get hired somewhere.
> 14 votes
# Answer
I've never heard of this happening at all. Most people don't have that kind of memory, and even if they did, it's irrelevant. I know of at least one person who was
* rejected from high rank school X for UG
* rejected from X for grad school
* got a faculty offer from X (and turned it down) :)
> 10 votes
# Answer
Speaking from direct, personal experience: **NO**. Once you're admitted to a PhD program, your undergraduate record effectively ceases to exist.(\*)
First, professors' memories are just not that good. It's been five years since you were rejected, and we reject many hundreds of applicants every year. Why would we remember your application?
Second, at least in the US, rejected applications are probably destroyed/deleted a few months after all the decisions are made, to conform with federal privacy laws. So it's unlikely that anyone could dig up your old rejected application even if they wanted to.
Third, hiring decisions are being made by a different committee than admissions decisions, using very different standards. Graduate admissions committees are looking for strong research potential. Faculty recruiting committees are looking for strong research, with the potential for worldwide impact. If you've actually done good research, why should we care whether you looked like you might not have been ready to do good research five years ago?
(\*) With one exception: Since I hit the job market, it's become much more common for deans to request undergraduate transcripts, presumably to check whether the candidate has the right academic experience for teaching. But I've never heard of a faculty candidate being rejected because they had a weak transcript.
> 10 votes
# Answer
Applicants who apply with poor credentials (low grades, no experience, etc.) are judged at the time of application based on their *current* credentials. Unless either them or the admissions committee does something exceptionally stupid during the interview process, the subsequent rejection/admission is simply a sign of how good of a fit the person is *at that time*. In the same way that a grad school application does not "guarantee" a future professorship post, a grad school rejection does not automatically imply automatic future rejection for other positions.
> 4 votes
# Answer
It could - if they learned that you committed fraud on your application, which could potentially reveal character problems down the road (and which is not easily forgivable).
Now, I had some pretty painful rejections from programs that had openly courted me pre-application, and they really hurt not only because I'm in a small field, but also particularly because I'm not the type of person who people easily forget - I was very possibly one of the most unusual applicants in the entire history of earth & planetary science graduate school admissions, and I intentionally made each of my applications extremely risky (stuffing as much information as I could humanely stuff into them, and taking great care to link them to **all** of my social media profiles), because I knew that I was fighting an uphill battle (due to my GPA and Attention Deficit Disorder). While it turned out to really help with Brown (where I got a top student fellowship too), it probably annoyed the hell out of most of the other schools.
But in the end, I think it will all be fine, because at worst - everything I did can be attributed to immaturity or poor judgment - all of which can be improved with time and with actual publications in the future.
> 1 votes
---
Tags: phd, faculty-application, rejection
--- |
thread-754 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/754 | Keeping advisees aware of literature | 2012-03-15T21:53:59.730 | # Question
Title: Keeping advisees aware of literature
When advising students performing research in one's group, what's the best way to make sure that they keep on top of the literature?
* Is it best to forward any article of interest to the student?
* Should we keep a list of journals the student should follow independently of me?
* Are there other practices (reading journal, etc.) to make sure they stay up to date?
* Is this something that can be pursued at a group level instead of on a one-on-one level?
# Answer
As a current student, I find that the constant barrage of requests makes it very hard for me to keep up with the literature unless it is very pertinent to my staying afloat. Thus, reading should be tied to my staying afloat.
The most effective way seems to be a journal club with the advisor with the duty of presenting rotating between the advisees. As a side note, a journal club without the advisor falls apart rather quickly. There should be mechanisms to make sure that attendees actually read the papers as well as the presenter doing a good job with reviewing the prior literature. I've personally learned quite a lot in this format.
The other method would be to set up a system to share papers. Using an RSS feed is pretty effective along with using NCBI's email updates. Internally, Mendeley groups or Google+ work well.
> 12 votes
# Answer
It depends on the structure of the group, and the research area. I'm in computer science, in a specific subfield, and so I know when the main conference paper lists come out. I try to publicize these lists, and have meetings where we discuss papers that sound interesting - I also point out papers that have done something significant.
This only works well though when the research group is relatively homogeneous. If different students are working in different areas, then the basic principle is the same as above, but the sets of conferences tracked might vary.
The same could be done for journals that tend to release issues on a regular timeline. Or even with the arxiv.
Ultimately, the goal is to instill some good habits, rather than actually keeping the students aware of the literature. They have to learn to do it on their own.
> 11 votes
# Answer
If you really want them to keep up to date, just forwarding things will not be sufficient. You could organise something like a reading group where people present advances in the field. This would make sure that they not only know of new literature, but have also read and understood it to some extent.
What actually works will depend on your group though. If people can't be persuaded to take part in a reading group, you'll have to do something else.
> 5 votes
# Answer
At the beginning, I require the student to read certain papers and explain them to me, as preparation before starting any research. Afterward, I consider it the student's responsibility to keep up (and even to help me keep up) with the literature related to the thesis topic. To make it easy, we usually establish a Mendeley group and each of us posts relevant papers there.
> 4 votes
---
Tags: phd, research-process, literature
--- |
thread-802 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/802 | How to assess the chance to get accepted to a master's program in the United States? | 2012-03-18T16:56:19.317 | # Question
Title: How to assess the chance to get accepted to a master's program in the United States?
Currently I am a student in the Netherlands following a bachelor program in computer science. I am currently considering applying for a master's program in the United States. It is hard to asses my chances, because of the large difference between the systems in the Netherlands and the United States.
There are a few factors which probably affect my chances.
* I cannot directly compare my grades with grades used in the United States. In the Netherlands we use a 1-10 absolute grading system. I currently have a grade average of 8.0, only had 7s, 8s and 9s.
* One thing I noticed is that in the United States a bachelor program is not naturally followed by a master's program, unlike in the Netherlands where this is the default.
* The duration of a bachelor program in the Netherlands is three instead of four years.
* Currently I do not plan on applying for a Ph.D position.
Do these factors significantly effect chances to be admitted to a master's program in the United States and how do I asses my chance to get accepted?
# Answer
> 9 votes
I don't think that there's a huge enough discrepancy between the technical content of the European three-year bachelor's and the four-year American bachelor's to make that a big concern.
However, where you may run into problems is that your GPA might not be considered competitive for a top program, if it's only in the 8.0's out of 10. (It might get translated to a 3.3 or so, which would be problematic.) What will make up for this is some statement that you're near the top of your CS cohort, and good letters of recommendation will also help.
Where you'll also need to do some research is on whether the departments you want to apply to offer *terminal* master's programs; if not, it will make it a little more difficult, as the expectation would be that if you are admitted to the master's program, you will then continue on to the PhD program thereafter. (At such schools, a stipend is typically offered during the master's phase of the program; at schools that offer a terminal master's, the funding sources for the master's degree-only candidates is usually quite distinct, if it is available at all.)
---
Tags: graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-800 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/800 | How independent should an academic be? | 2012-03-18T13:20:38.430 | # Question
Title: How independent should an academic be?
I am a computational scientist and I often find myself much more productive when working with others with resonating mind. When working alone, my motivation level is lower, distracted more easily, and I feel the progress is slower. However, in academic jobs, I often hear that it is important to show that you are an independent researcher.
* Q1. What are the defining properties of an independent researcher?
* Q2. How can I show that I am independent?
* Q3. I like working in teams, is academia (esp faculty in research university) not a good career path for me? (I could think independently, but I could do better with others, so why be independent?)
# Answer
Collaboration is generally seen as a major strength in computer science and computational science, not a weakness. One of the biggest questions we ask about any faculty candidate in my department is "Who in the department/college will they work with?" We do occasionally hire faculty that work alone in their cave and occasionally emit theorems, but they're rare exceptions (and even they still work with their students).
The most important thing is to **establish a reputation as a leader** in your collaborations, rather than a follower. You need to establish your own research agenda, instead of just following someone else's. More importantly, you need to be *seen* to have your own research agenda, instead of just following someone else's. Your agenda must be visible in your publication record, in your recommendation letters, and (eventually) in your funding record. To this end, it is *very* important to do a few things:
* Limit your collaborations with more senior researchers, *especially* your advisor, *especially between getting your PhD and getting tenure*. As I've suggested elsewhere, publishing at least one paper without your advisor before you graduate is a strong signal of independence, even if you have other coauthors. Once you have your PhD, **DO NOT** publish with your advisor for at least a few years.
* Do not always publish with the same set of coauthors. It's fine to have two or three different groups of people that you always work with, as long as you can wind a consistent story that ties most of *your* work in those different groups together.
* (Once you have a permanent job:) Get at least one grant as a principal investigator, not just as a co-PI. Definitely join other grants as a co-PI, too, but you *must* have at least one grant with your name on top to get tenure.
> 37 votes
# Answer
I think I have a similar mindset. I like independent work, but I find that I am more motivated when working with others. However, I don't think that will hinder your ability to show that you are an independent researcher. As mentioned by @aeismail, the defining point of **independence is that you are able to generate and pursue your own research ideas and agenda**. If you do it alone or with others is irrelevant.
In a lot of cases, like when you applying for positions, etc. You will have **reference letters** to accompany your CV. Thus, the author-list is not the only place to show your independence. In the letters your coauthors and mentors can attest to your independence.
A **research statement** or cover letter also is a great place to highlight your independence. If you work with lots of different people, then you can show how all these projects tie into a broader theme which is distinctly your own. In computational science it could very well be a theme like "I like developing information theoretic explanations for neural and multi-agent activity" and then work with an auditory group, a cognitive group, and a population biologists can be great supporting evidence of the fact that your ideas and approach are unique and independent, not to mention widely applicable.
Taking a **leadership and organizational role** is another clear way to show your independence. A personal example: I prefer to read and discuss papers with others, so I organized a reading group that meets weekly (ideally). A bit of my time gets consumed in organizing and managing this group, but it is more than made up for by the extra motivation I get to stay on top of the literature.
As for the atmosphere; **group-work is not an antithesis to academia**. It is very important to show that you 'play well with others' and frequent collaboration is a great way to do so. Especially with the large push for multi-disciplinary work, being able to work with people of various background is a great asset. Further, as a faculty in a research university, one of the things you will be expected to do is supervise and teach students. This means you need experience in sharing and developing your ideas with others, something that working in isolation does not nurture.
> 11 votes
# Answer
The issue of independence is an important one, but it doesn't obligate you to work in isolation. Instead, what it means is that you are capable of generating and pursuing your own research ideas. This can be done in collaboration with others, but there's still needs to be some evidence that you can lead the effort.
Some ways to show independence are to have some collaborative efforts where you are in the "leadership" positions—first or last author. If you can do this across multiple independent collaborations, preferably in multiple disciplinary areas, that will show that you have some lateral flexibility, which is among the hallmarks of an independent researcher.
I don't see, in this day and age, the desire to work in teams as ruling out a career in academia. I might not lean towards it as a first choice—instead, I'd probably steer such a person into a research institute like a Max-Planck-Institut here in Germany, or a DOE lab in the U.S. Those offer more collaborative environments which would be a better "fit" for someone who prefers to be a team player than a team leader.
> 9 votes
# Answer
At least in my field (mathematics), there are people who do almost all their work collaboratively. Academia *can* be a good place for such people, but:
1. It varies a lot, not only by field, but by subfield, so you'll want to take that into account when choosing a specialty. (Math has a lot of single authored papers, while the lab sciences have very few. I gather CS is somewhere in between, and that it depends on the area. Even within math, it depends on the particular subfield, sometimes for reasons that have more to do with culture than anything intrinsic to the subject.)
2. If you're in an area where single authored papers are common, you'll eventually be expected to produce some, just to demonstrate that you're not be carried along by your co-authors.
> 7 votes
---
Tags: career-path
--- |
thread-768 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/768 | Deferring admission to a computer science graduate program | 2012-03-16T18:11:31.760 | # Question
Title: Deferring admission to a computer science graduate program
Background: I have the opportunity to pursue a Computer Science graduate degree at a well respected program (around top 20). I spoke with the professors at the university and I feel like I am a good fit with their research program. My ultimate pursuits are to complete a PhD in CS. I've done research as an undergraduate and it has only confirmed my notion that I want to pursue a research track career.
More background: I applied to jobs (in case I was rejected to all the programs I applied for) prior to hearing back from my respective graduate programs. I accepted a position for an industry job (this was to secure I wouldn't be both unemployed & not in school).
Dilemma: Turns out my top graduate school is very interested in me, and I'm very interested in them. I would rather go to graduate school than work in industry forever. The industry job pays very well. I am split between A) working for a maximum of 1 year(It would only be 1 year, seriously I do not care about the money enough to work past a year) and B) going straight to graduate school.
My concerns are as follows, if I choose A):
* Could I potentially defer my admissions?
* If I am not allowed to defer my admissions, would I have a good chance of re-applying and being accepted a year later?
* Would my potential advisers look *down* on me for deciding to work a year?
I already made my mind up it would be a 1 year gig if I decide A). I know some people say once you make money, you may not be able to readjust to the graduate salary pay. But I don't think that will apply to because I'm going to live very frugally with or without industry pay.
# Answer
> 14 votes
I'm afraid I have contradictory advice.
* If you've been offered a funded place, there is no guarantee the funding will still be there in a year. What you know is that you are good enough to get into a grad school, but there is a luck component too. The school I went to told us that 1 in 10 applicants was good enough to get in, but less than 1 of 3 of those "good enough" could have places any particular year. This is both because of funding constraints & because supervisors can only supervise so many people well at one time. So you are very likely really deciding whether to work before going through the application process again.
* Nevertheless, I agree with Sylvain that it is not a good idea to do a PhD always wondering whether you would have liked industry better. I worked for 5 years before doing my PhD, and now I'm an associate professor. Two things make this route hard though: 1) getting used to making money (I addressed this by putting most of my salary in savings) and 2) getting used to being treated as an adult. But there is a big win when you hit the hard parts of your PhD & think "would I be happier in industry? Nah, that was boring." Friends that were academically stronger than but lacked that certainty had a tougher time during the troughs than I did.
# Answer
> 9 votes
* You could defer admission, but it's a little unusual to defer for a year. Check with the departmental grad advisor and make sure everything is absolutely clear on this front
* It's a risk: admissions pools vary from year to year, and maybe the professor who wanted to take you on doesn't have funding, or already hired another student and doesn't have room for more.
* I doubt any advisor would look down on you for working a year. I don't see why, especially in computer science.
Other questions to ask:
* will the job make your application look stronger next time ?
* are you ok with not being able to get into this university and having to reapply and get in elsewhere ?
# Answer
> 8 votes
I will advise exactly the contrary of what bravo just said in another answer : go for A ! If you don't, there is a good probability that you will ask yourself continuously "was my choice to go for a PhD the best one?". With this year of experience, you will know for sure what you want, this is priceless. And this is the best way to be really focused on your thesis, if you finally decide to go for it.
# Answer
> 7 votes
If I were to make an opinion out of whatever you have said in this post, I will say go for B without further thought :)
Reasons: 1) A one year industry job is hardly helpful as an experience anywhere, let alone for a prospective PhD. There is another question on this forum analysing the worth of job before PhD.
2) You have said you are not too much into money and also live frugally. Bravo, you are tailor-made for the academia! You could surely earn more in the one year after PhD, and ensure you begin graduate coursework at the earliest.
# Answer
> 5 votes
This decision strongly depends on your character and goals, so you should ask yourself what you will gain and loose while working in the industry for a year / going to grad school right away. What skills will you learn while working that will help you with PhD later? Will you have enough motivation to complete your PhD if you do not take a year off school? Will your college wait for you / defer acceptance? Are you a kind of person for who it takes a while to get into a routine (of a job - or of taking classes)?
I guess these are just more questions rather than answers, but I do not think anyone can (or should) give you a definite "A" or "B" answer.
---
Tags: graduate-admissions, deferral
--- |
thread-810 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/810 | What does it mean when a paper is copyrighted by an organization? | 2012-03-18T21:39:02.230 | # Question
Title: What does it mean when a paper is copyrighted by an organization?
While I was searching for materials for my research topic, I found a research paper which is signed as copyright by "Some organization". Does that mean that I could not use the content of this paper nor the ideas it presents until the paper owner gives me permissions?
# Answer
Not necessarily. Copyright prohibits you from presenting the work as yours under any circumstances. In addition, it prohibits you from publishing or recopying large segments of the work, without securing the permission of the owner of the copyright.
However, the existence of copyright does *not* exclude you from citing the work of others, nor mentioning what their key ideas are. Such use of copyright is covered by fair-use guidelines (archived version). Under these circumstances, though, you are still responsible for following the proper citation procedures of your university or the journal to which you are submitting the work under question. Note, however, that this is a tricky balance, and you should be careful to directly quote only the material you absolutely need to duplicate, as fair use is not an absolute guideline.
> 8 votes
# Answer
No. Copyright covers the verbatim text and figures, not the ideas.
> 7 votes
# Answer
The short answer: unless the document is marked "confidential" you can probably quote short passages verbatim and you can certainly make use of the *ideas*.
To expand on some of the other responses given here: In most jurisdictions, copyright allows the protection of the *expression* of an idea (e.g. as written down in a book or article) but not the idea itself. Legal protection of ideas is covered by patent law, which is much more restrictive than copyright, with much shorter periods of protection.
It's also worth knowing that phrases like "All rights reserved" are partly redundant these days in most countries – all works are copyrighted automatically, whether or not they include this phrase or similar. However, it's still useful to know who owns the copyright to a particular work.
What is referred to as "Fair Use" under US copyright law may not exist or may be very different in other jurisdictions. For example, in the United Kingdom there is a rather more restrictive version called "Fair Dealing".
If you have some time to kill, Bound by Law is a useful comicbook-style introduction to copyright.
> 7 votes
---
Tags: research-process, copyright
--- |
thread-829 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/829 | Updating my CV post-Academia ( UK ) | 2012-03-20T18:00:25.170 | # Question
Title: Updating my CV post-Academia ( UK )
I've got *a pretty awesome CV* (I think), through hours of trailing through websites and reading tips. However that was back when I'd just finished University and now it needs updating!
I'm 25 and I am into my 3rd job since university and so have quite a bit of experience about these roles.
I have a few questions.
* It seems my job experience now out weighs my education. Should I move my Work Experience to page one and my education to page two?
* Do I still need my GCSE's on my CV? They don't seem very relevant.
* How much detail about my education do I actually need?
* Do people still care what A levels I did?
* Do people want to know my dissertaiton title and what key subject I learnt, or is my degree title now enough.
* Moving onto my work experience. I have had two jobs that are really relevant to what I'm aiming at and the third is less so. What is the minimum I should put for the third job, it's title?
Let's hope someone can help, everything I normally find is for new graduates CV's, bless them but I need some help too!
*EDIT* **Looking for UK or European answers, the US is too crazy. I don't have a GDP ;-)**
# Answer
> 5 votes
To answer some of your questions:
* While there's no set guideline, education often comes first. You should include the university where you earned your BS/BA (list major, GPA, and any honors), masters university (field, GPA, and thesis title if applicable), and doctorate university (field, GPA, thesis title). High school and similar degrees (including A-levels) should not be listed. Note that a brief (one to three sentence) explanation of your masters and thesis work may be useful here; most people in industry won't have any idea what "Detailed Sprockification of Remonstrantized Grommits in Hypernormalized Framistans" means, so a short layperson description will show (1) that you can communicate and (2) that you did cool stuff that they can understand.
* Work experience should include company, position title, responsibilities. You can summarize responsibilities in bullet points or short (two to three sentence) paragraphs, it makes no difference either way.
To answer some things you left out:
* Strongly consider adding an Objective Statement to the beginning of your resume. It should summarize your career goals in a sentence. Check out this website which I found on Google for some discussion of what this is.
* Include publications, teaching experience, grants awarded, trainees mentored, and notable community service (awards received, board memberships, etc).
# Answer
> 3 votes
If you're living in the US or Canada, an important question to ask yourself is:
> Is this a résumé for industry and business, or is this a CV for a research-oriented field?
Pretty much all of the differences between the two boil down to this key difference.
* If you are applying for jobs in industry or business—essentially, any non-research-oriented field—your CV should be converted into a résumé format. This format will generally put work experience before education, and will be in general much briefer. A résumé should in general not exceed two pages in length; a CV can be as long as needed. With respect to your questions, you would need to list your high school diploma, although you wouldn't need to go into a whole lot of detail (list the type of degree, plus any major awards). I would list dissertation title if it's relevant to your work. For your job descriptions, I would include key duties and accomplishments in bullet form with active verbs ("Directed X project." "Completed milestone Y.")
* If you are applying for further jobs in academia, then you need to maintain the CV format, so education should remain first. Your high school credentials don't really matter anymore, but the dissertation information remains important, and should be in the information section. Your job section doesn't need to be very detailed, even for the previous jobs: just the major areas worked on, and the major skills and accomplishments could be briefly summarized.
If you might go in both directions, you should keep versions of both up-to-date; if you're staying in one side or the other for the foreseeable future, then you can focus on that. But in general, I would recommend keeping it up-to-date at all times!
(Note: if you're living or working in Europe, then as Blundell comments below, and is corroborated by some web sites, you probably only need a CV.)
---
Tags: job-search, job, cv
--- |
thread-832 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/832 | Who determines whether or not a professor receives tenure? | 2012-03-21T01:31:55.453 | # Question
Title: Who determines whether or not a professor receives tenure?
Does the department determine it, or does the president determine tenure after the department recommends it? Or does the process go through both ways?
And how does this vary from institution to institution?
# Answer
Here's how it works at my university. There are several layers of votes; I've seen faculty turned down at almost every level. Once a negative vote is taken at any level, it is essentially impossible for the candidate to recover without an official appeal. (The appeals process is complicated.) On the other hand, I know of negative decisions that were successfully appealed at almost every level.
* April: the candidate submits their CV and other supporting materials.
* May: The department's promotion committee makes a go/no-go decision about whether to pursue the tenure case. **A very small number of negative decisions are made here**, but only in truly egregious cases.
* May: The department head chooses a subcommittee of three or four faculty from the promotions and tenure committee to shepherd the case through the department.
* June: The department solicits recommendation letters, some from people proposed by the candidate, but a majority from people chosen independently by the subcommittee.
* August: The subcommittee writes an internal evaluation of the candidate's research/teaching/service accomplishments/potential.
* September: The subcommittee presents the complete case (candidate's CV and statements, internal evaluations, and recommendation letters) to the complete departmental committee. The committee votes whether to recommend tenure. **Most negative decisions are made here.** Having a positive recommendation turned down at a higher level is fairly embarrassing for the department; it indicates that either the department did not do a thorough evaluation or (worse) tried to hide or excuse an obvious gap in the candidate's record. So this level tends to be the most stringent.
* October: The department head writes a one-page letter summarizing the case and the department's vote, and forwards the complete package to the dean.
* November-December: The college promotions committee does its own evaluation of the candidate and votes whether to recommend tenure. Evaluations are more likely to be based on measures of reputation and impact (reflected in publication record, citation patterns, funding history, and recommendation letters) than on actual quality of research. Faculty in the candidate's department are recused from any discussion. **Some negative decisions are made here.**
* January: The dean writes a one-page letter summarizing the case and the committee's vote, and forwards the complete package to the provost.
* February-April: The campus promotions committee does its own evaluation of the candidate (mostly, but not entirely, focusing on whether proper procedures have been followed) and votes whether to recommend tenure. Faculty in the candidate's college are recused from any discussion. **A very small number of negative decisions are made here.** Negative decisions at this level are more likely to involve problems with teaching (or raw politics) than with research, since measures of research quality and impact vary so wildly across campus.
* May: The provost writes a one-page letter summarizing the case and the committee's recommendation and forwards the complete package to the chancellor and university president. The provost also informs the candidate of the committee's recommendation. Officially, this is the first news that the candidate receives about their case.
* July: The chancellor and the president rubber-stamp the provost's recommendations, and then pass them up to the board of trustees, who rubber-stamp them again. (Officially, I think any of these three can overrule any recommendation for promotion, but I've never seen it happen, and it would probably cause a faculty revolt.)
Yes, the whole process really takes 15 months.
> 39 votes
# Answer
The process varies from place to place but in most places the technical determination is made by the department and to some extent the college. Higher levels of approval focus mostly on whether proper procedures have been followed.
Having said that, when things go wrong they could go wrong at any level. Usually it's politics that derails cases at the higher levels rather than straight technical merits.
> 3 votes
---
Tags: professorship, tenure-track
--- |
thread-835 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/835 | When addressing academic departmental assistants via email, should I use their first name or just Mr./Ms. X? | 2012-03-21T19:40:27.583 | # Question
Title: When addressing academic departmental assistants via email, should I use their first name or just Mr./Ms. X?
It seems very common for them to normally prefer being addressed by their first names (since Mr./Ms. seems to be very rarely used in Academia).
# Answer
My policy : the first time you contact the person, go with Mr. Doe (or Ms. Doe), but sign with your first name. The latter is a signal that you are OK with a "first name email relationship", from this point it will be so most of the time.
> 22 votes
# Answer
You should follow the traditions in the region where the recipient is located. For an American or Canadian, I would probably follow @sylvain's advice, as that is the usual standard in the US—formal at first, but becoming less so as time and familiarity grows.
However, here in Germany, I would continue to use the greeting "Dear Mr./Mrs." until such time as I was *directly* invited to use their first name (this would be the same as the "Sie" to "Du" switch).
> 10 votes
# Answer
In Sweden, and I believe other Scandinavian countries, email communication is very informal, and communication is mostly on a first-name basis, even if you haven't met in person previously. I can call anybody by first name, even the CEO or an esteemed professor, and nobody would frown upon. Even students address (or at least should, nothing makes me feel older than somebody calling me Mr T., or worse, Sir) their tutors by their first name.
I'd almost never use Mr/Mrs in an email when writing in Swedish, but I would do it more often if the recipient is foreigner and is not familiar with the small power distance in Swedish companies and universities. However, I'd usually be more formal when the circumstances require it -- applying for a job/grant, or sending official documents, for example.
**Pro tip**: -- *never*, **ever** call a Professor "Mr. Smith", if you are adressing them by family name. Always use appropriate academic titles, when applicable. I'd spare this for associate professors or below, but some academics in the country where I'm from are pretty prissy about this.
Some academics are prideful, and you need to play to their weakness. Gain favour of such people by addressing them with a higher title than they currently have. A certain (then associate) professor which some would describe as "a cerberus in a skirt" was very friendly to me and helped me with administrative matters on a few occasions since I consistently addressed her as "Prof. S.", especially in front of other people.
> 3 votes
---
Tags: etiquette
--- |
thread-849 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/849 | Can I pursue a PhD while working as an Instructor/Lecturer? | 2012-03-23T07:24:02.437 | # Question
Title: Can I pursue a PhD while working as an Instructor/Lecturer?
So, I'm applying for jobs as an instructor/lecturer. They explicitly only require a master's degree, which I have, in addition to some valuable industry experience. It's plausible that I could get one of these jobs.
If I get one of the jobs, I would be hoping to potentially stay in academia for longer, so logically it would help me to have the PhD I currently lack. Ideally, I'd like to pursue my PhD part-time while working as an instructor. My thought is that this would give me the opportunity to eventually get a professor position, later in my career, once I complete the PhD.
My questions:
* Is this something that universities are okay with their instructors doing?
* Or is it not okay for someone to be teaching undergrads while simultaneously doing graduate research?
* If I wanted to do this, would it be more appropriate to pursue the PhD at the same institution as or a different institution from the one that I'd be working at?
Some additional helpful info:
* All of the schools that I'm applying at have part-time PhD programs, so I have no reason to believe that the part-time study schedule is an issue.
* I'm not in the U.S., so the specific rules of American academia don't necessarily apply. For example, here, we rarely have grad students teach classes.
# Answer
Most universities are fine with having PhD students working as instructors/lecturer/teaching assistant at the same time, and it's actually quite common. I have personally been teaching at undergrads level while doing my PhD, and most of my friend who did a PhD were in the same situation.
However, it depends on the amount of hours you are spending a week with teaching: if it's taking all of your time, you might not be able to do research in good conditions, and it might be hard to find a professor that would agree to supervise you if you're not available to work on your PhD. Basically, if you combine a part-time teaching/part-time PhD, that should be fine, but if you combine a full-time teaching with a part-time PhD, that might not reasonable.
Concerning where you should apply for the PhD, in general, you can do it in a different university than the one where you're teaching. However, in some cases, it might be more interesting to do it at the same place because you might not have to pay the tuition fees.
> 7 votes
# Answer
Following up on Charles's answer, I think the situation depends strongly on what discipline you are in.
Working as an instructor or lecturer as a *primary* instructor in a course suggests to me that you are working in the humanities; in general, such positions do not exist in the sciences and engineering (with the exception of courses taught by "visiting" or "adjunct" industrial lecturers, who may have work experience but not the normal Ph.D.).
In contrast, in the humanities, it is, as Charles said, quite common for people with master's degrees to teach courses, although again it is, in my experience, more common for them to teach "seminar"-style courses, rather than large lectures.
It may or may not be the case that the instructor of such a course is enrolled in the department to study for a Ph.D.; it depends on the specific policies of the department, and you should ask if this possible at the time of application.
(These are my observations on what is "standard"; of course, there are exceptions to every rule!)
> 5 votes
---
Tags: phd, teaching
--- |
thread-846 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/846 | As a teaching assistant, how important are student evaluations? | 2012-03-22T16:57:31.460 | # Question
Title: As a teaching assistant, how important are student evaluations?
I have seen a number of résumés of doctoral students, but only a few of them listed their evaluation scores when presenting their teaching experience.
* How important are these scores in evaluating the teaching capabilities of a student?
* How does one ensure that the students are sincere in their evaluations?
In case a professor does a slipshod work of a course, not teaching in depth or cramming a lot of syllabus in a short time, there is only so much a TA could do to salvage the course for the students.
* How does the TA make the best of a bad job in such a situation?
* Apart from holding weekly office hours and lenient grading(!), what is the maximum a TA can do, after all?
# Answer
This is an *excellent* question, for faculty as well as students!
* *How important are these points in evaluating the teaching capabilities of a student?*
Obviously this varies significantly in different departments and institutions, but in my experience, the scores themselves are not that important.
My department does pay attention to these numbers when allocating future TAships, but definitely not in isolation. Narrative reviews from the instructors carry significant weight. The people doing the assignments also know which courses are unpopular, and which instructors are irresponsible, and adjust the evaluation accordingly, at least in principle. In practice, there are only three evaluations: (1) truly outstanding TAs, who are considered for teaching awards; (2) truly abysmal TAs, who are not rehired, at least without retraining (and since we have a TAship requirement, this has teeth); and (3) everyone else.
When we evaluate tenure-track faculty candidates, teaching ability is usually a second-order concern, but it is a concern. Poor evaluations on an applicant's CV are a red flag—why didn't they just omit them? Good evaluations are mostly a signal to look further. Teaching awards carry more weight. Recommendation letters that directly praise the applicant's teaching ability — with concrete and credible details — are even better. Similar issues arise when evaluating faculty for tenure, with one big difference: omitting the teaching scores is not an option.
* *How does one ensure that the students are sincere in their evaluation?*
You can't. Sorry.
However, I *believe* you can increase the fraction of sincere (and positive) responses by consistently treating your students with respect. Make your expectations clear from day one, and enforce them consistently. Invite feedback throughout the semester, and respond to it quickly and appropriately. Apologize quickly for mistakes, thank students publicly for useful suggestions, but do not buckle on high standards. Give timely, consistent, and useful feedback on coursework. Above all, **do not waste your students' time**; the correlation between hard work and low evaluations is much higher if the students don't see any benefit to doing the work.
\<Insert standard confirmation bias warning here.\>
* *How does the TA make the best of a bad job \[if the instructor is irresponsible\]?*
First, do your own job as best as you can.
Second, raise your concerns with the instructor; be respectful but brutally honest. If the instructor is unresponsive, raise your concerns with your instructor's boss; be respectful but brutally honest. (Note: Disagreement is *not* the same as being unresponsive.) If your instructor's boss is also unresponsive, your department doesn't really care about poor teaching; they're likely to ignore your evaluations, even if they are low.
* *Apart from holding weekly office hours and lenient grading(!), what is the maximum a TA can do, after all?*
There are many more things that TAs *can* do. At a minimum, hold office hours that the students actually find useful; don't just show up. Distribute practice problems, and offer feedback on the students' solutions. Hold weekly review/discussion/problem-solving sessions. As aeismail suggests, write review notes. If the instructor covered too much, distill down their main points; if the instructor didn't cover enough, expand on the key ideas they missed. Offer to give a few guest lectures, and then give *fantastic* guest lectures.
More self-servingly: **Make sure the students see you working to overcome your instructor's shortcomings.** If the students *don't* see you fighting on their behalf (even if you are), they'll write you off as yet another useless academic, like your instructor. But if you can make them believe you're on their side, they'll reward you. I think this is why students often reward "lenient grading"; if the students think the coursework is a waste of time, they'll see lenient graders as their allies.
Obviously this all takes time. As aeismail says, TAs usually have many other responsibilities, especially to their own classes, projects, research, families, and sanity. It is frighteningly easy for committed and caring TAs to find themselves being abused by less committed instructors (or even departments). **Set limits.**
> 19 votes
# Answer
From my experience, student evaluations are simply a measure of how well the *students* think you are doing in teaching them. Keeping in mind the phrase attributed to Henry Ford,
> If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse".
note that the students can often give feedback on your current teaching methods, but they rarely suggest *better* teaching methods. From my experience, the evaluations are not viewed as important, but are meant more for the TA to improve their teaching skills. You can ensuring sincerity by being sincere in your teaching. If you're appropriately enthusiastic about teaching the material, the students will notice and appreciate it. Beyond that, some students will be cynical and apathetic to the process, and there's really not much you an do about it.
The best way to make use of the situation is to use it as a learning experience, as it's intended! Chances are, you'll be asked to teach in the future, may as well use this opportunity to try out different teaching methods to see what works for you.
> 4 votes
# Answer
Frankly, I don't place much weight on an isolated number; it doesn't tell me much in practice about a student's teaching abilities. That would have to be judged via direct interaction—watching them teach or otherwise interact with students. It's really impossible to expect students to be honest in their evaluation, unless they've provided comments; then you can at least see how much they've written; the more extensive the comment, the more likely it is to be sincere.
As for what to do when a professor does a bad job, I don't think that it really makes that much of a difference in the nature of the TA's responsibilities; the main change is in the intensity of the work required. The TA, *along with the professor*, is responsible for helping students learn the material. If the professor isn't doing an adequate job, then that means the TA will probably need to work a bit harder and dedicate more time to achieve that goal. However, the TA should make sure she is taking care of her other requirements and needs at the same time. The TA position shouldn't consume someone's entire life (unless they are paid accordingly!).
One possibility for how to do things, though, might be to prepare review sheets and guides based on the lecture material (or what the lecture material should have been). This will be good review, both for the TA and for the students!
> 3 votes
---
Tags: graduate-school, teaching, teaching-assistant, course-evaluation
--- |
thread-866 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/866 | Getting the best out of a book-reading exercise | 2012-03-24T20:00:35.947 | # Question
Title: Getting the best out of a book-reading exercise
A doctorate involves plumbing the depths of a problem and often this involves a lot of knowledge breadth-wise in related areas. Though the latter is provided by coursework, education about a precise "tool" that a doctorate may need during solving his problem is unlikely to have been provided by the courses. Often the PhD may run into huge tomes of material which he has been introduced to by Wikipedia. Intuitively he/she may feel that somewhere in those volumes lies a theorem or an idea which can provide vital keys to solving his own problem. So I come to my questions:
* What should a student do to get the best out of a book-reading exercise? The question in turn assumes the student has arrived by some means at the best book for serving his purpose.
* There is a trade-off involved in reading books tangential to your field: you may spend a lot of time groping in the dark looking for a bounty which may never be there. How does one gauge the potential applicability of a book to his work? When does a student decide to pull the plug on such an effort?
*Related Question*: Skimming through a paper
# Answer
First, I would like to comment on some of your sentences. Then I will answer to your 2 questions.
* *Often the PhD may run into huge tomes of material which he has been introduced to by Wikipedia*: I am not sure that I understand this sentence well. Are you using Wikipedia for bootstrapping and then proceed from page to page in wikipedia, hoping to find something useful, or do you use another source of idea, but jump to wikipedia to understand in a faster way the entities/concepts you find in the first place ? BTW, in most cases I am not sure Wikipedia is something we should use at the research level. The quality is clearly increasing, but this is far from perfect, and some essential intuitions are missing sometimes (almost always ?).
* *Intuitively he/she may feel that somewhere in those volumes lies a theorem or an idea which can provide vital keys to solving his own problem.* This sentence makes me think that you maybe focus too much on a specific problem.
Now, my answers :
* When I read a paper or a book, I proceed the same way: First I quickly go through the whole thing (for a book, the whole thing is generally a chapter). Then I try to understand the key intuitions and results. At that point I don't try to understand how they are proven. Then I switch to other things. When I am thinking of a problem, or when I am on other concepts, sometimes a flash occurs and I have the intuition that something I have read can be useful, then I go back to the paper/book and try to totally understand the result. Here, this means more or less homework like in the old days ;)
* Reading tangential materials is a necessity. I proceed as stated above, and to make sure that I will not spend all my time on this, I decided to always spend the same amount of time reading on other fields. For me this is roughly 1 day a week, which is 1/3 to 1/2 of the time I can use for research.
> 6 votes
---
Tags: phd, books
--- |
thread-885 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/885 | Is there a rule or style guide on use of gender-specific pronouns in academic papers? | 2012-03-26T06:04:29.407 | # Question
Title: Is there a rule or style guide on use of gender-specific pronouns in academic papers?
Some authors use "her" whenever they employ a pronoun referring to a noun whose gender is immaterial to the discussion.
Is there any rule (university or journal or conference-specific) which dictates this? Is it good practice to stick to the same pronoun throughout a paper? Or is it better to get rid of the issue by using the gender-neutral 'one'?
# Answer
> 21 votes
The reason for using "her" more frequently nowadays is to correct an ongoing imbalance: in general, for a long time, "his" has been used, even where a more neutral pronoun ("one") should have been used instead.
Grammatically, however, any of the recipes you suggest would be appropriate: it is only the matter of the particular taste of the author. I would recommend, though, that when using both "he" and "she," that you use one consistently throughout a particular usage. Don't write "she/her" in one sentence, and then "he/his" in the one after. A few paragraphs later won't be a problem, though.
The reason "one" is not nearly as popular is that it is somewhat awkward-sounding; too many "one" and "one's" in the same sentence makes it feel too stiff and impersonal. (It's a bit of a catch-22, I know, but that's the way it is!)
One other option that you did not mention, though, may be the simplest route of all: simply use collective plural pronouns: use "they," "their," and "theirs." It gives you the benefit of including everybody, without having to contort your writing to do so.
(I would also comment that some books go out of their way to be gender-neutral, particularly through the use of "gender-neutral" names: Chris, Sam, Pat, Jean, and so on.)
# Answer
> 4 votes
Some authors alternate sexes between chapters or sections in an attempt to sound more gender balanced.
While "they" has historically been the correct pronoun to use when sex is unknown or irrelevant, some grammarians took offence to the usage of "they" as it is also a plural pronoun while he/she/it are singular.
---
Tags: writing-style, gender
--- |
thread-877 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/877 | What is the academic route to study Archaeology? | 2012-03-25T21:15:20.700 | # Question
Title: What is the academic route to study Archaeology?
I am really fascinated by ancient civilizations and cultures.
I do not know what subjects one has to take up to study Archaeology (like what subjects in A Levels or High School) at an academic level?
I would just like to know in general but would appreciate any details about United States and India.
# Answer
> 5 votes
It is very difficult to answer with very little information. Archaeology is a very vast transversal field. It can be decomposed by techniques, by periods or by the targeted cultures. So the first question you need to ask yourself is whether you want to be an archaeologist (expertise in techniques) or a specialist of a period or culture (egyptologist for instance).
In the first case, scientific majors in high school is probably better than others, but this is not very important after all. However, be advise that excavation techniques are related to "dirt on the hands" techniques, but also to some top notch scientific techniques (specially for the analysis, where you may need knowledge of stats, paleontology, zoology, botany, chemistry, etc.).
In the second case, I would advise to start quickly to acquire a strong background in art history and ancient languages (starting with greek and latin). I will be easier to learn linguistic and semiology afterwards. I guess that both art history and ancient languages can be learned at the high school level in most countries.
At the university, students usually progress concurrently in archaeology techniques and culture specialization.
# Answer
> 2 votes
At least at American universities, there are very few majors that require specific preparation beyond the "standard" high school diploma program. That would generally mean something like: four years of English, three years of math and science, two or three years of social sciences, and other courses as needed to round out the curriculum.
Schools in other countries may (and generally do) have different requirements. So you'll need to look up the specifics of the departments and programs you're interested in to find out what courses you'll want to take.
# Answer
> 1 votes
You may be potentially interested in anthropology programs. Although anthropology can be a very diverse field, all I am familiar with (not many FWIW) have a devoted concentration for archaeology related studies/methodology.
# Answer
> 1 votes
Anything skill can be used in archeology from comp sci to law to anthropology to zoology. Cross boundary is good. Pick something you like (mobile phones and CS from your bio?) and tie it in. If I wanted to work in archeology I would use my CS and Kinect hacking skills to make 3D models of sites, for example.
---
Tags: graduate-school
--- |
thread-901 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/901 | 1 or 2 Year Master's Program | 2012-03-27T03:46:34.953 | # Question
Title: 1 or 2 Year Master's Program
I originally posted this on math.stackexchange but was recommended to post here.
I have been admitted to two Master's Programs in math (both with funding). One is 1 year long and the other is 2 years long. I plan on obtaining a PhD directly afterwards.
The 1 year option lets me save one year. But I would have to apply to PhD programs within the first semester and it seems I would not have time to get good recommendation letters or make a strong impression from my Master's Program. The 2 years option would give me more chance to demonstrate what I've done.
If they are comparable programs, which would be the better choice?
# Answer
I would normally choose the two-year program, for exactly the reasons that you cite. One of the few reasons why I would consider the one-year program is if there is a particular individual you want to work with, or if it is your first-choice school for the PhD program *and* it offers a path of lower resistance to already be a student there.
Otherwise, as JeffE points out, you won't really save much time by going to the one-year program over the two-year program. (Besides, if it's a coursework-based program, you'll probably get more out of the two-year deal!)
> 5 votes
# Answer
Well, I originally posted the following as an answer to your post on stackexchange, and since you're posting it here, I'm posting my answer here as well in hopes of it being helpful to a wider audience (not everyone on this site is necessarily a frequent visitor of stackexchange--especially \*math.\*stackexchange).
Posting as an answer, because it is too long for a comment; however, treat what follows as a 'comment', please.
I can only say what I'd do. I would go for the two year program, would try to impress people to obtain good recommendations, would learn as much as I could, would explore my interests, would try to work on some projects with some faculty member(s) (which would also help with exploring interests and obtaining good recommendations), and, assuming good academic standing, would try to apply to top schools.
Now, in the process, I would also explore my strengths and weaknesses on the emotional side. Let me clarify... We all work differently, are most productive under different circumstances and see our place in life differently. When you go for a PhD, as was mentioned above, you'll be on the clock, you'll be under pressure to write a dissertation and, if you're planning a career in academia, to write papers (and try to publish them), make connections with professionals in the field (mostly by attending conferences and dissipating your research results through talks), you'll be trying to impress people and so on. I would use my time in the masters program to explore my strengths and weaknesses in regards to all of the above (as much as possible, at least). For example: 'is mathematics really my thing?'; 'what kind of environment is best for me - a big, top ranking school or a smaller department?'; 'what can I do to be more productive?'; 'what inspires me (especially about math or some special field in math)?'
By working with a faculty member on a project, you can also ask and (more importantly!) try to answer questions like 'what kind of a relationship with my adviser should I expect in a 5 year program, and what should I look for in my adviser?' By developing closer ties with faculty members, you can have some of your questions answered by the faculty members, such as: 'what should I expect in a PhD program?'; 'given my interests, how should I choose the school for the PhD program?'; 'are there any faculty members in potential PhD departments that I can communicate with before I actually apply to the program (this can really help sometimes with your application and chance of acceptance)?'
Last but certainly not least, you'll be gaining a solid knowledge base (but, as implicitly implied above, you can only learn as much as you want to learn). You shouldn't look at it as "losing a year", since it may very well compensate for the first year or two in graduate school when you're studying to pass the qualifying exams. Speaking from personal experience: a year and a half in the masters program helped me to get done with all the formalities (qualifying exams, identifying field of interest, choosing adviser) by the beginning of my second year, and from the middle of my second year in the program I was actively reading papers and thinking about potential research problems.
Good luck with whatever you eventually choose to do!
> 3 votes
# Answer
I would choose the two year program as a Master's program is just that: You'd want to MASTER a certain topic and two years or so is generally a decent amount of time in which you could hone your skills and defend your research (if you would opt for a thesis option).
> 1 votes
# Answer
If you are certain that you will continue on PhD program after you obtain your master degree, then you should choose the 2 year program. Others already explain why. I am not going to repeat the reasons.
However, if you are not 100% sure about obtaining PhD after you get a master, I would take the 1 year program if I were you. A plan is just a plan after all. How do you know what will happen 1 year from now? Why not get a master degree first? You will have other options after that, such as teaching at a high school, get a job in industry, etc. A master degree may be worth 10% more of the salary.
So, the bottom line is your desire to have a PhD in math. You are the only one who knows the answer.
> 1 votes
---
Tags: graduate-school
--- |
thread-879 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/879 | Does mentoring an undergrad give an edge on job or grant applications? | 2012-03-25T22:58:07.733 | # Question
Title: Does mentoring an undergrad give an edge on job or grant applications?
Simple and short question: as a postdoc (or a senior grad student), is it a good idea to mentor an undergrad? How much edge will it provide perhaps for a future (NSF) grant, or a job application?
# Answer
Assuming the mentoring has a measurable successful outcome (student goes to grad school, student writes paper), the NSF would definitely look kindly on such mentoring. Whether the time spent doing this will (minute for minute) be a better value than writing an impactful paper - probably not. But that reasoning is of course flawed - you don't know ahead of time whether the time you spend writing that paper will pay off :).
As with most other things, do it if you care about the mentoring process and enjoy working with undergraduates. Don't do it if the primary goal is to get the bullet on your CV.
> 6 votes
# Answer
I don't know whether your grant or job applications will benefit from the experience. However, it will provide you with some immeasurably useful management experience, which you may not be able to gain otherwise. I know that my experience managing undergraduates during my graduate career - directing their research project with them, helping them design and put together experiments, and helping them write papers (or, more likely, having them help you write papers) - was an excellent first experience for me in dealing with issues that professors managing a lab have to deal with on a regular basis. For that alone I would strongly recommend mentoring.
> 5 votes
# Answer
I have to take a middle road between Suresh and eykanal's answers: mentoring of undergraduates will most likely help you in job applications; I'd believe this to be true whether you're applying to academia or industry or to non-traditional jobs. The reason is that supervising students provides you with direct *management experience*, which is almost always beneficial when being considered for employment.
However, it is less clear that mentoring an undergraduate would help you in a meaningful way on a grant application. The reason for this is that, in general, there's no logical place to bring such information up in the grant application! In a standard CV, you could list "students supervised" as a normal part of the document; however, according to the current guidelines for the NSF reduced CV format, the only real way that they can be counted is if they wrote a thesis under you, and perhaps as an aggregate count. In the long run, though, the NSF is really interested in graduate students and postdocs supervised.
> 3 votes
# Answer
I've sat on graduate student committees that have met with faculty candidates for our department in a research university with a sizeable undergraduate population. The mentorship track record and the result of that mentorship are probably the most important factors that we considered after the intellectual capacity of the candidate.
In our case, dealing with whiny grade-obsessed premeds who don't understand basic concepts is part of the job description. There is also a noticeable volume of undergrads who do research. A future PI who doesn't want to be in a teaching environment is already in the wrong place. A future PI who hasn't considered the fact that they would be in a teaching environment doesn't have a clear vision of where they want to be.
As a potential faculty mentor, they are a potential mentor to a graduate student like yourself. An ability to mentor undergrads without a high attrition rate tells you that they are able to create an environment that doesn't scare the student away as well as an environment that keeps the student to come back. Sounds like a faculty advisor that I would want to have available for future students like me. Conversely, an inability to mentor suggests that they mentor either drove their student into pieces or wasn't able to or weren't patient enough to design suitable experiments to teach difficult concepts to a young mind. If one wasn't able to do this with an undergrad, what would happen with a 1st year PhD student who may be stuck with them for the next 6 years?
Mentoring undergrads provides a solid and universal metric of a candidate's ability to mentor. They are probably the most difficult type of advisee to mentor and the past history of mentorship does provide a nice projection to one's path as an academic.
> 3 votes
---
Tags: teaching, mentoring
--- |
thread-924 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/924 | How to contact professors for PhD vacancies? | 2012-03-28T04:55:08.567 | # Question
Title: How to contact professors for PhD vacancies?
I know many master's students who get an opportunity to talk to their potential PhD advisors well before applying. In most cases this opportunity is available by the professors with whom they worked for their master's. Moreover, there are many others who establish a contact with professors by mailing them and enquiring about PhD vacancies.
My questions are:
* How important is knowing an advisor prior to applying for PhD?
* Does an email interaction play a vital role when the department makes its admit decisions?
* If email contact *is* important, can a student send out mails to 2-3 professors (working in the same area) in case one of them does not bother to reply?
* To sum up, is applying of any use (especially in top universities) when you have no contacts and only your credentials to bank on?
# Answer
> 22 votes
Ultimately, the answer depends upon what admissions system a department uses.
* If you need to obtain admission to a group at the same time as (or instead of) the department as a whole, then it is of course absolutely critical that you make contacts ahead of time! In general, I'd even start contacting people well before the time of application. However, make sure that your contact is substantial. When it becomes time to apply, you will have a better shot.
* In many departments, you apply for admission to the department as a whole. After your admission, you select an advisor to work for. In such cases, it's not really critical for you to have a direct contact within the department, since it's not necessarily a given that the professor you want to work for sits on the admissions committee. In such cases, you'll have an indirect connection at best. That said, it's still a good idea to have a contact in a department during the admissions process. You don't lose anything by it—unless the professor has a bad reputation amongst his colleagues (and then you might not want to work for him or her, anyways!). By the way, I would caution **strongly** against going to such a school if there's only one professor at the department you'd be interested in working for. You're taking a very large risk under such circumstances.
Now to answer some of the other issues raised.
**Email or other forms of contact.** Face-to-face or phone interactions rank above email interactions. There's no doubt about that. However, an email interaction—if actually substantial—can also be viable. However, a quick emil telling someone you're applying and interested in working for them won't really get you anywhere.
**Number of people to contact.** There is of course no limit to the number of potential advisors you can contact. To some extent, they're competing for you just as much as you're competing for them!
**Can I apply on credentials alone?** At most top departments (where application is done at the department level), I think it's entirely possible to apply on credentials *and recommendations* alone. Having the contacts can obviously help, but not having it won't ruin your chances for admissions, either.
# Answer
> 24 votes
To supplement the other answers, here are some do's and don'ts for email contact.
> The worst thing you can do is make it seem like you're trying to cast a wide net and don't have a clear focus. That's a guaranteed delete.
Therefore,
* Narrow your search to the people whose work you're really interested in
* Read their papers (especially recent ones - I've had people email me about stuff I did 5 year ago - I've moved on :))
* Think about their work. Find something intelligent to say (even a question).
* Email the professor and focus on those questions.
That's most likely to get my (their) attention.
# Answer
> 16 votes
Just to add to aeismail's answer:
If you can send an e-mail that demonstrates that
* You are a strong candidate
* You wrote an e-mail specifically for that professor
* You are familiar with some of that professor's work
then it **may** have an important positive effect. Ideally, you would be able to suggest how things you know or have done could contribute to that professor's research agenda.
Sending a generic e-mail to multiple professors will not help your case and will probably hurt it. I mention this because a large fraction of the e-mails I receive from potential students are obviously part of a mass-mailing.
# Answer
> 3 votes
> How important is knowing an advisor prior to applying for PhD?
Super important.
> Does an email interaction play a vital role when the department makes its admit decisions?
Sometimes yes. An email + an visit in person to the university could surely increase your probabilities to get accepted.
> If email contact is important, can a student send out mails to 2-3 professors (working in the same area) in case one of them does not bother to reply?
Yes, sure, mandatory! Send as emails as you can!
> To sum up, is applying of any use (especially in top universities) when you have no contacts and only your credentials to bank on?
Yes, try to contact and visit the professor you want to work with.
---
Tags: phd, graduate-admissions, professorship
--- |
thread-948 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/948 | Publishing policies for conference papers | 2012-03-29T20:02:16.007 | # Question
Title: Publishing policies for conference papers
I got two papers accepted and I am just wondering how to know their policy towards publishing my papers also on CoRR. is it fine to publish the same paper in CoRR and in the conference?
# Answer
> 5 votes
Normally, it's fine, as long as you submit a pre-print and not the camera ready of the conf proceedings. You can also check these questions: Does publishing a paper on arXiv prevent me from submitting it to a non-open access journal? and Submitting a subset of my work to ArXiv.
# Answer
> 4 votes
In addition to Charles's answer, it depends on how the conference papers are published. If they're published as a special issue of a journal, then it may very well depend on the policies of the journal, as well as those of the conference. (And some conferences may have special restrictions on publications; in those cases, you should check with the conference organizers.)
---
Tags: publications, conference, copyright
--- |
thread-946 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/946 | Interview strategies for faculty positions - to focus on their research or your own? | 2012-03-29T18:36:07.420 | # Question
Title: Interview strategies for faculty positions - to focus on their research or your own?
What's the best approach for talking to faculty that are in distant/unrelated areas during a campus visit for a faculty position?
Is it preferable to show that you are interested in their research and open-minded about learning new things by asking them about their research, or to try to focus on your own research and the expertise that you offer?
# Answer
When you have a meeting with a "distant" potential colleague, you should let the interviewer determine the initial flow of the interview. The important thing is to not spend too much time trying to figure out if this is just for information, or if you're being "tested" in some way. (The answer is, yes, you're probably being tested.)
Sometimes, the interviewer will want to talk about his research, to see if you are willing to think about new ideas, and how to fit them into your work. Sometimes, they will want to talk about your research, to see how well you can explain your ideas and work to people outside of your field. And other times it will fall somewhere in between these two extremes.
> 6 votes
# Answer
You'll typically have between a half-hour and an hour to talk with them. In that time, you should be able to cover a number of different topics:
1. Your background (briefly)
2. Your academic experience, if any
3. Why you're interested in working in their department
4. Their research focus
5. Their ideas for future research focuses
6. Ways you could fit into their department
Of all those, the only ones you could probably skip is 1. Everything else is pretty crucial to getting a good idea of what the department's research agenda (if they have one) is.
> 0 votes
---
Tags: professorship, job-search, interview
--- |
thread-918 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/918 | "Challenging" Teaching Experiences for Math Grad Students? | 2012-03-28T02:15:53.370 | # Question
Title: "Challenging" Teaching Experiences for Math Grad Students?
I am currently a graduate student, who will (hopefully!) graduate in the next year (or two . . .). I have slowly come to realize that I enjoy teaching, and consequently want to do more of it! My main reasons are:
* to gain experience
* to bolster my CV
* to learn to be a better teacher
That last point is particularly important to me, because I feel I have received insufficient training in how to teach mathematics well.
Now, I have done the usual TA thing. For the past year, I have also been an adjunct instructor at a local four-year college, so I pretty much know what it's like to be "fully responsible" for a course. What I am looking for are challenging opportunities which allow me to do some–or all–of the following:
* teach fairly sophisticated math to bright high school students / undergraduates
* engage them in innovative thinking/research
* be consistently mentored/evaluated throughout the duration of this experience
Again, the last point is rather important to me. So my question is:
> Do such programs exist?
I am sure they do, but when Googling, I invariably come up with graduate summer schools, or "local" opportunities. (By "local" here, I mean those which are only eligible to students in that particular school's graduate program.) So I am hoping someone (or several people) here know more about it than Google does.
I know that most opportunities for this summer have probably already expired, but I want to stress I am not only focused on summer sessions. In particular, I would gladly forego my usual TA appointment for a semester, to be a part of a more difficult and rewarding experience somewhere else.
Thanks in advance.
PS - This is my first question here, so feel free to edit my tags appropriately.
# Answer
> 2 votes
One possibility is to get involved with a program like Learning Unlimited (full disclosure: a few of my friends are heavily involved in running it).
I've also heard (through the grapevine) that a short while back AoPS may be looking for instructors. I don't know whether the position is still/was ever available.
---
Tags: teaching, mentoring, research-undergraduate
--- |
thread-597 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/597 | How common is it to write out a script for a talk? What are the benefits? | 2012-03-06T02:00:40.300 | # Question
Title: How common is it to write out a script for a talk? What are the benefits?
I have never written a verbatim script for a talk. I have at times written notes or outlines, but I never read from them when presenting (and rarely when practicing). With enough (weeks) of practice, I can give a pretty good talk. With less practice, I sometimes digress and sometimes omit an important detail. But what I am most interested in is improving my presentation by removing awkward pauses (e.g. while I remember what to say about a slide) and by using appropriate intonation, phrasing, and cadence.
Recently, a friend of mine who is a writing studies doctoral candidate suggested that the first step toward accomplishing these goals is to write out a script for each slide. This is a difficult task, but one that I plan to experiment with. I do not plan to actually read the script during the talk, but to memorize it while practicing.
My questions are:
1. How common is it to write a script for a talk?
2. How does having a script help?
3. How early in the preparation should I have a "final" version?
# Answer
I think I have a similar process to the one described by Artem (apart from the popular talk, which I never had the opportunity to do). In any case, I never write a script. Actually, for my first talk in English, during my first year of PhD, I learned the talk by heart, which was terrible, and made me finish the talk in 12 minutes instead of the 20 minutes.
However, I try to carefully prepare my transitions, especially between different parts of the talk. I find it particularly annoying when a speaker finishes a part with a blank, moves to the next slide, and says something like "OK, next section now". Moreover, I usually include in a transition a brief summary of the key points of the previous section, and the motivation to go to the next section, which ensures that I don't forget any important point.
About how early should the preparation be ready, it depends on the kind of talks. For a 20/25 minutes conference talk presenting a paper, I usually already have a pretty clear idea of what I want to present and how to structure it (since I wrote the paper), so I start the slides about a week before the conference, have a decent draft 2 or 3 days before (i.e. the final number of slides, the correct titles), and the final version the day before. As Artem's said, after a while, you can project pretty accurately the duration of a talk from your slides, so there is no need to repeat to make sure you are in time.
For a 45/50 minutes seminar-kind talk, it's a bit trickier, because usually the audience is not the same as the one at a conference, and it's harder not to bore them. So I start preparing the slides about a month before, but only to get the outline, and I start working on the talking part, not so much the slides, to try to find nice ways to present the ideas (such as nice examples, nice analogies).
So, in summary, to answer your questions:
1. It is not very common (I actually don't know anyone who does it).
2. It can help if the speaker is very nervous, and tends to forget a lot of important things (which often disappears with experience).
3. It depends on the experience, and the ability to evaluate your presentation. If you feel very confident, you can start preparing the presentation the night before. But in general, I'd say that something between a week before and the day before is good.
**EDIT:**
As aeismail mentioned, my answer is quite subjective, and just describe what works for me and for some people I know. However, just one point I would add, concerning the "awkward pauses": I think that the quality of my presentations has tremendously increased when I stopped preparing my presentation around my slides, but the other way around. So I dropped all sentences like "this slide presents ...", "on this slide, we have the definition ...", etc. Actually, I even try not to say the words that are on the slides. I don't know if my presentation are better for the audience, but at least, I feel much more comfortable with them.
> 16 votes
# Answer
I think a script is actually more harmful than good. It tends to produce very rigid talks, and it often forces you to concentrate on the *script* instead of the *content* and *audience*. Usually, you know what you are talking about well enough to not need a script, and just pointers. Below are the tricks I use for different kinds of talks.
### Research talks
For technical talks on my research or guest lectures on topics I am intimately familiar with (these two have been the overwhelming majority of my talks), I do not make scripts or notes and just concentrate on making good slides. In the process of making slides, I produce an outline which I use to mentally check my timing. The day of the talk, I look through my slides carefully (hunting for typos and other minor mistakes), this reminds me of the exact details I was going to discuss. Since I tend to repeat similar talks, I have become very proficient at estimating my timing.
For some big conferences, I practice talks in my lab before heading to the conference. This greatly improves the talk, especially timing issues and comfort.
I find that this is easy to do because you are usually intimately familiar with your own research and unlikely to forget something. It also allows a relatively fluid and natural talk, and lets you answer questions during the talk without fear of losing your pace.
Usually, **I have my final version the day before** unless I rehearse in the lab.
### Teaching talks
I have done a number of talks as reviews for large bodies of students (50 to 300) to prep them for exams, and smaller groups (20 to 30) during weekly tutorial sections. Here I was talking not about my research, but course material that I had taken years ago. The topics were physics/math and my style was one of interactive problem solving at the board of hand-picked problems that illustrated key concepts. To prepare I had to invest time to carefully come up with good questions and I quickly checked that I could solve the questions as I generated them.
I write down the questions one per page with a few bullet points of the main concept/technique I want to show in the question. However, I do not write down solutions and solve the questions on the spot at the board. This puts a certain amount of stress on me (especially if you are teaching first year engineers) but I find it produces much better pacing for the students (since I naturally slow down a little at the harder parts) and actually solving the questions as you present them instead of copying a solution from your notes to the board keeps you in the zone and actually reduces errors. Not having notes in your hand (except to write down the problem statement) also lets you worry about just two things: the board and the students.
The caveat is that you have to very comfortable with the material (but why are you teaching it if you are not?!) and you need to have the confidence to laugh at yourself and recover from occasional mistakes.
Usually, **I have the final questions and plan a few days ahead of time**. However, there is no 'final version' of the actual talk, since it depends completely on the audience.
### Popular talks
My only opportunity to give a popular talk was at TEDx McGill 2009. This was incredibly different from other talks I am used to. Thankfully, all of the speakers were coached by the organizing committee ahead of time (including a full dry run through). The key message was to treat this not as a presentation, but as a performance. I did not prepare a script (and were were advised against preparing one), but I did make notes on cue-cards that I held during the performance. Except for the very beginning (where I was unusually nervous) I never looked at the cue cards, and mostly held them for comfort.
**I had my final version about a week before the talk** and my ready-for-dry-run version about two weeks before.
> 22 votes
# Answer
I think the most important factor to keep in mind is the personal comfort level of the speaker with respect to giving presentations. For some people—particularly people working in a non-native language—having a prepared script allows them to relax sufficiently and be able to get through the talk. For other people, having a prepared script acts more as an encumbrance than an aide. I've seen people rehearse talks to the point of practically being memorized—and then get completely flustered when they accidentally skip past a slide or are faced with a small technical glitch in the presentation itself.
So, I would disagree with Charles and Artem and say that you should find whichever method is most effective *for you*. Personally, I am not able to rehearse talks beyond going over what are the key points I want to address on a slide. If I go through a talk like that more than twice or thrice, I start getting "locked" into certain words and phrases, and then I start falling into the problems that the other posters mentioned regarding the pitfalls of a memorized talk. You may find a memorized speech is the most helpful possibility; if that's the case, then our opinions of what is the "best" approach don't really apply.
> 17 votes
# Answer
## Script only the introduction
I can only echo what Artem said about the disadvantages of a script.
That said, I often advise to write out the *introduction* of the talk beforehand in full detail. This way, you have a backup. So far, I have never ended up using the prepared introduction, I’ve always had at least slight variations. But if – for whatever reason – you get stuck, you can recourse to the prepared script. If nothing else, this is extremely comforting and reduces anxiety.
## A talk should not feel like a performance
Of the talks that I’ve heard (instead of given), those that were obviously based on a script were among the worst. They were bad performances rather than good talks. A talk (in general) isn’t meant to be a performance – it’s meant to convey information; like you would do in a discussion with friends:
The “chat with friends” should be archetype after which to model a talk, not the “theatre performance”.<sup>1</sup>
## Use cue cards
> I sometimes digress and sometimes omit an important detail.
This can be helped by notes (cue cards). But you have to train yourself to look at these from time to time (I can never remember doing this). I usually end up plastering my slides with huge sticky notes that only show up on the presenter’s display (supported at least by Keynote). Not elegant but effective.
## A word on slides
You said that you want to remove awkward pauses “… while \[you\] remember what to say about a slide …”.
This may be an indication that your talk needs revising for two reasons:
1. If you cannot remember a detail, is it really important?
2. You should have *nothing* to say “about a slide”. Slides are there to visually support your talk, not the other way round. If you don’t remember what to say about a slide, cut the slide. This sounds like a harsh judgement but it *will* improve the talk.
---
<sup>1</sup> Except when it isn’t, of course. TED talks were mentioned. But even here, all the best talks *feel* like a friendly chat rather than a performance, even if they are in reality a well-rehearsed performance.
> 13 votes
# Answer
Scripting is **great**. Do it. Write out every single word. And then redraft and edit it, just as you would if it were a journal article ... **except**, remember that the audience is completely different. So redraft and edit it, with the real audience in mind. You are scripting a performance; so redraft and edit it as a script for a performance.
Then rehearse it. Over and over. Until you know about 70%+ off by heart (i.e. word-for-word); and you've got a really strong opening and really strong close, each of which you know 100% off by heart. With each run-through, you'll find yourself doing a bit more editing, re-ordering words, shuffling sentences.
Now put your script away, and do a couple of dress-rehearsal run-throughs without the script at all, so that your performance is close-ish to the script, but by now, it's getting a bit looser, more natural. So you can concentrate on timing, breathing, pitch variations, body language, and saving some resources for picking up continuous feedback from your audience.
And now you're ready to go!
YMMV. It works sometimes for me.
Try it out, at least once, and see if it works for you.
> 10 votes
# Answer
I also tend to write out notes, but at an early part of the preparation, I tend to write out something very much like a script. I use this to make sure I'm covering what needs covering, and cut down where I tend to ramble on. This also helps me determine if I'm going to fit inside the time budget, and if not, what to cut down on. A couple practice runs with the polished script and then I reduce it to a single page of notes.
One of my most memorable professors appeared much smarter because she eliminated all those "err" and "umm" from her speech. Instead of an "umm", she'd be silent. I'm not successful in replicating this as most of my coworkers take that pause to be a sign that I am done speaking, so they can now start their turn speaking.
> 2 votes
# Answer
I really dislike memorising anything word for word as most of that effort will only be useful only for a single occasion. That said - I have to admit that sometimes a talk is important enough to be worth that effort - especially if the talk is one the you will be giving on many occasions.
However, the disadvantage of memorising a talk is that it is hard to sound natural. It's difficult, but not impossible. Actors demonstrate this. Generally it is much better to just us a script as a guide. Practise individual chunks from memory a number of times and play around with the various ways of wording it. Instead of having to remember the exact words, you now only have to remember one out of a number of options. You will become much better at discussing the topic and your ability to improvise will improve.
> 2 votes
---
Tags: presentation, writing
--- |
thread-958 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/958 | Priority of application materials for admission decision | 2012-03-30T09:59:07.560 | # Question
Title: Priority of application materials for admission decision
As I've already saw, many people here are related to admission process. And I want to ask their opinion on what is priority of all stuff from application: what is the most important (letters of recommendation or personal statement, GPA or maybe test scores), what is less important for admission and what is the least important? Would admission committee prefer applicant with good scores, high GPA, but with not outstanding personal statement and without letters from famous or well-known professors (for example, my scientific advisor in undergraduate school get his PhD only a couple years ago), or student with less GPA, test scores, but with letter from university's prof?
Some graduate schools require General GRE (Graduate Record Examinations). Would it better to send GRE scores (general or subject or both) even if it's not required (in case of relatively good result), or them wouldn't be considered at all?
# Answer
> 31 votes
As aeismail says, what we are looking for is **concrete evidence of research potential.** So, in decreasing order of importance:
* Decent grades and (if required) test scores; otherwise, no one will read your application at all. Here, "decent grades" means three-point-something from a good undergraduate program.
* Research publications, if you have any.
* Recommendation letters. You **must** have at least one (and preferably three) strong recommendation letter from a faculty member who praises your research potential in specific and credible detail. Letters that draw specific comparisons to other successful PhD students are best. Letters from junior faculty are perfectly fine; they can draw comparisons to their recent graduate school peers. Letters that say only "He got an A+ in my class" are useless; we can read your transcript.
* Research statement. Your statement **must** discuss your research experience and interests in specific and credible detail. A statement that only describes your sources of inspiration ("Ever since man walked on the moon...") and/or brags about coursework is useless.
* Other concrete evidence of independent research/scholarship/creativity.
* No red flags. Potential red flags include low grades in classes central to your proposed research area, missing key classes entirely, abysmal test scores, negative (or overly delicate) recommendation letters, recommendation letters obviously written by the applicant, spelling and grammar mistakes in the research statement, any evidence of immaturity or personality issues, and any evidence that the applicant is not prepared/informed/serious about research.
Notice what's not listed.
# Answer
> 19 votes
If we're talking about a PhD candidate, the most relevant factors, for me, are those that demonstrate the applicant's capability to be a productive researcher. That means a compelling statement of purpose (why the applicant wants to be a PhD student, with ideas for potential areas of exploration, if not necessarily an entirely thought-out project) counts for quite a bit.
Equally valuable are letters of recommendation that *actually talk about the candidate*. I don't care for a letter that regurgitates the student's academic performance, or that reads like a template in which the name of the applicant was swapped in for somebody else's. That does me no good in evaluating a candidate, and to some extent can work as a mark *against* a candidate, since it indicates a lapse in decision-making (why get a letter from someone who doesn't know you well?). A really good letter of recommendation, however, can sometimes make the difference between somebody who's on the bubble and somebody who gets an offer of admission.
Transcripts and test scores do matter, but for me are less valuable, because they don't give me a lot to go on—it's not easy to tell what's a "good" performance and what isn't, particularly when schools use "nonstandard" scales (such as reporting scores out of 100 without telling me what the average score is!).
The other factor that we do here that not all programs do is an interview (in person or via Skype). This is perhaps the most important part of the process for us, because we can see if the paper record matches the "actual" applicant. Sometimes candidates look good in writing, but can't really talk knowledgeably about what they have studied. That's usually a clear sign that someone really won't be a good fit as a graduate student.
---
Tags: phd, graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-920 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/920 | How could I calculate my GPA? | 2012-03-28T04:24:34.680 | # Question
Title: How could I calculate my GPA?
I have my GPA in the 100 point system, how could I calculate it in 4.0 point system? I searched, and I didn't find a good answer,
# Answer
> 1 votes
You should ask your university if they could provide a mapping to a 4-point system. If they don't, you simply have to calculate GPA\*4/100! In case you feel this undermines your prospects, ask your university for a rank certificate which will give the admissions committee a good idea of where you stood in your department.
# Answer
> 11 votes
Unless it is specifically requested, do not do it. Some school even urge you not to do it. It is highly probable, that they know your scale and understand what level means you are smart and hard working. Be sure to include thing like *cum laude*, merit scholarships, ranking within the cohort, ... These things are easier for them to understand and help them to compare you to the other students.
Miscalculating your GPA may result in unintentional deception or undermining your actual achievements. Be careful.
# Answer
> 5 votes
I know this already has an accepted answer but still:
* Why do you need it?
If you need it for grad school, chances are that the university would want "untouched" grades. In other words, they want to see your grades "as is" without any modifications, conversions or other such activities. I had my GPA on a 10 pt scale and most universities asked me to enter it as it is and that the job of conversion would be their headache.
* Has the university provided you with a conversion algorithm?
If a university needs converted GPA, chances are that it provides a conversion algorithm. For instance, University of Washington provided this (Warning! PDF) to international students. I've seen Berkeley, PSU and a few other universities do something similar.
* Are you willing to spend money?
Columbia University provided the reference for WES, a GPA Conversion tool.
Citatation : IEOR Dept.
Excerpt of the passage (In case the link dies):
*For the online application, though, you can enter an approximate conversion of your percentage grade. There are many websites that help you with grade conversion, and one of them is available through WES. Please note that we do not recommend this site over other ones.*
* Use your university's guidelines. For instance, some universities give students a rough conversion from their scales to US and ECTS scales. See if your university does so.
**Warning: Do not use random GPA conversion schemes from blogs or *shady* websites. While it might not cause much difference, don't risk it.**
# Answer
> 4 votes
I found the following conversion for Syria, 100 point systems differ so generally the conversion is not always the same. I would use this only as an indicator.
```
| Scale | Grade Description | US Grade | Notes
| 95.00 - 100.00 | الشرف (Honor) | A+ | Arabic: Sharaf
| 85.00 - 94.99 | امتياز (Excellent) | A | Arabic: Imtiyaz
| 75.00 - 84.99 | جيد جداً (Very Good) | B+ | Arabic: Jayed Jeddan
| 65.00 - 74.99 | جيد (Good) | B | Arabic: Jayed
| 60.00 - 64.99 | مقبول (Aceptable) | C | Arabic: Maqboul
| 0.00 - 59.99 | راسب (Fail) | F | Arabic: Raseb; Lowest passing grade
```
According to this source: http://www.classbase.com/Countries/Syria/Grading-System
# Answer
> 3 votes
I recently had to deal with this situation when applying. My University did not have an A/B/C... system and would not provide a GPA.
Some of the application forms that I filled out provided instructions for international students, eg: no not enter a GPA. So I would start by reading the application forms.
For those that do not, my strongest recommendation is to contact the person in charge of applications at the department that you are applying to. Ask them what you should do in your specific circumstance. There is usually an email address on the department website for application enquiries.
Unfortunately a few universities never replied to my emails. For their applications I left the GPA field blank if the form allowed. For forms that required a GPA for submission I simply made up what I thought was an appropriate system.
While this didn't seem to hurt my chances, I would only recommend this as a last resort if you can't get a straight answer from the department you are applying to.
---
Tags: graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-966 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/966 | At what point do you decide to jump into research? | 2012-03-31T20:37:19.167 | # Question
Title: At what point do you decide to jump into research?
Before diving into "real research", there are some students who prefer to learn bare minimum prerequisite courses/material and then start off reading survey papers and develop their skills.
There are others who prefer to go through courses from Introduction to Advanced to Independent Study before finally diving in.
The former would probably face problems of fundamentals while the latter spends too much time learning things which might not be completely useful.
**At what point should one (Assume, if necessary, that I am talking about STEM) decide to dive into research while making sure that one is neither being too hasty nor slow?**
Take for e.g. that a person wishes to code a software in Python which does engineering calculations. He would either read something like Intro to Python and then directly start coding or he could also read documentations of other Math libraries, similar libraries in C/Fortran, study coding efficiency and thumb rules and then start.
**How do you prevent yourself from taking up too little or too much time to begin?**
# Answer
> 8 votes
As aeismail says, there's no single answer. As with most things in life, it's hard to know when you're "ready" to do something. The best way is to jump in when you *feel* like you don't need to prep any more, and then be prepared to shore up weaknesses as you spot them.
Over time, you'll learn how to prepare yourself to embark on a new research topic: some people like to start solving a problem first, and then return to the literature when they get stuck. Some people like to read a few key papers to get a sense of the main open problems and techniques, and then go off and play.
The only important thing is that you do *something*, and not just wait on the sidelines for a mythical feeling of "readiness" to emerge. Be fearless, like a 2 year old who doesn't know enough to be afraid :)
# Answer
> 7 votes
I've never understood the dichotomy between “preparing to do research” and actually doing research. I have always learned best with a target problem in mind. I always have to learn new fundamentals to solve any new problem. Most of the time I spend on research is "wasted", and most of what I learn is "useless", and that's okay.
The difference between just solving interesting problems and doing "real research" is pretty small. In both cases, you're completely ignorant at the beginning; what distinguishes "real research" is that everyone else in the world is ignorant, too. As long as you're comfortable working with no hope of finding your answers in the back of a book, you're as ready as you'll ever be. Jump in!
# Answer
> 3 votes
This isn't a one-size-fits-all problem. People should move into research when they're ready to do so, and in consultation with their advisors, when appropriate.
That said, the approach I'd tend to advocate is to ramp down classwork while ramping up research. In that sense, the student controls the pace at which she learns, and can adjust the selection of coursework as time goes on to support or to complement the research work. Moreover, there's generally the assumption on the part of the advisor that the first few months aren't going to feature a lot of useful scientific results; they'll mainly be spent learning techniques and tools and basic concepts and understanding.
So the way to figure out if one is ready to start research is by doing some "low-hanging fruit" problems: if the student can handle the basics, then she can start moving on to the rest. If not, then at least she has a better handle on what she needs.
---
Tags: research-process, stem
--- |
thread-984 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/984 | What's the etiquette for a short visit to a US university department by a faculty member from another university? | 2012-04-02T17:48:00.540 | # Question
Title: What's the etiquette for a short visit to a US university department by a faculty member from another university?
In May, I'll be visiting a department at Columbia University in the US for a few days. What's the etiquette on visiting (answers relevant to US in general are welcome, to prevent this question getting too localised)?
I'd like to spend some time with quite a few of the researchers, and compare notes on ongoing work. I'll read their recent publications in advance. Should I be inviting staff out for a coffee and a chat; or dinner; or a talk in the lab?
Context: I'm a faculty researcher, and would be looking to spend a bit of time with postdoc researchers, and those professors whose jobs are primarily research, rather than admin or teaching.
# Answer
I think you are the person who would be invited out to lunch, dinner etc. as you are the guest `:)` ! However, there is nothing wrong with inviting your opposite number to talk in an informal setting. The only consideration is that you know the lay of the land!
Depending on how many days you would be spending at the US university, you might want to make a strategy on conversations and prospective collaborations.
I am assuming you would have results to show and tell and with a punchline at that. That generally helps.
> 18 votes
# Answer
Your host has a responsibility to make your schedule in such a way that it will be full and engaging.
Sometimes, it can be difficult to fill the schedule - it requires that people respond to the hosts invitations to meet with you. Your input can be helpful both in filling out the schedule and making sure that your visit is productive.
You can request to meet with specific people and ask for feedback from your host on who you might want to speak to.
I think it would be a good idea to request to meet with graduate students in addition to postdocs and senior scientists.
> 8 votes
---
Tags: etiquette, united-states, visiting
--- |
thread-975 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/975 | My research work stolen and published as his own by the co-author without my consent | 2012-04-02T08:06:56.997 | # Question
Title: My research work stolen and published as his own by the co-author without my consent
My research paper was stolen by the co-author and published as his own. What do I do? All the data the paper is based on is my own work. I got it accepted in another journal but now I cannot get it published according to the copyright terms and conditions.
# Answer
Let me echo scaaahu's excellent advice: Calm down. Obviously you're scared, and with good reason, but you need to approach the situation calmly and professionally. Otherwise, *even if you are in the right* it will be difficult for other people to take your concerns seriously.
Your comments suggest (to me) that the situation is not as straightforward as your initial post describes. Without considerably more detail about what happened — **which would be inappropriate for you to post here** — it's difficult to make specific suggestions.
I think you need to discuss the situation with someone who understands both the politics in your department and the publication culture in your field. Find another senior faculty member in your department (or in a different department, or in the dean's office) who you can trust to keep confidence. (Yes, this can be difficult, but ask around.) Write up a timeline of events in advance, and make copies of documentation for each event in the timeline. Calmly and carefully describe the situation. Just present the facts; don't panic, and don't accuse. (One of the facts is "I'm scared"; that's okay.) Ask your confidant how to proceed. **Listen to them.**
In the best case, this is a simple misunderstanding, and talking to an informed but neutral third party is the best way to convince you to relax. In the worst case, your department chair is being egregiously unethical, and in particular threatening your chances at graduation, in which case you absolutely need a senior faculty advocate to help you navigate the resulting political mine field. (Your primary goal in this case should be to graduate and get out, not to optimize your grade or to punish your department chair.) Most likely, the actual situation is somewhere in between those two extremes.
Good luck.
> 43 votes
# Answer
The first thing would be to contact the editor of the journal that published your co-author's work, and to explain the problem to them. If the proofs that it is your own research are sufficient, they might consider the previously published paper as plagiarism, which should unblock your own publication. In this process, it might be worth contacting also the journal to which you submitted, so that they can confirm the date at which they received your submission.
Right now, I would say that the best move is to contact the two journals editors with the proofs, and see if they can sort things out. You can also consider in the mean time publishing your paper to an open repository (such as arXiv), if it does not interfere with the copyright policy of the journal you want to publish to.
> 19 votes
# Answer
My first advice is to calm down.
Your question and your comments sound emotional to me. The more emotional you are, the worse situation you would be in. Since the other party is your prof, the burden of proof is on your shoulder. You need to deal with it carefully.
I am not even sure you have a problem. From what you have said in the question and comments, your prof submitted a paper with only his name on the paper to a journal without your prior knowledge. Then he gave you his approval to submit another paper of probably the same contents to another journal with both your name and his name on it(you said he is the co-author).
The above is what I understood from your question and your comments. If all are true, the issue is his problem, not yours. Because he is the one who did the double submission, not you. All you have to do to clear up this issue is to present evidence which shows that you got his approval before you submitted the paper to the journal.
> 17 votes
---
Tags: publications, journals, plagiarism, authorship
--- |
thread-973 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/973 | PhD opportunities when lacking publications | 2012-04-02T03:39:59.833 | # Question
Title: PhD opportunities when lacking publications
This question in some sense, complements this question. Suppose a good student completes his master's degree in a less-than-top-ranked university. He has excellent academic grades both in his bachelor's and master's, but unfortunately has not experienced the best research 'atmosphere' in his post-grad and so does not have any publications thus far in his career.
It is a hugely relevant practical issue: low-ranked universities woo good students by providing them full funding plus scholarships for their master's, so there are many cases where students prefer them to top colleges where funding is not assured. After completion of graduation, these students desire to go for a PhD in top universities. So the question is this:
* How does a bright student with excellent grades but lacking in publications secure an admit in a top school?
One obvious answer is to formulate an excellent research problem and to convince professors of his research ideas pertaining to the problem. Any other useful suggestions?
# Answer
> 23 votes
You have to make the case that your research potential outweighs your lack of research output.
The only places to make that case are your research statement and your letters. Both your statement and your letters should make it clear that *you are an active researcher,* even though you are not **yet** published. Your statement should describe the specific research problem(s) that you are pursuing, promising and specific partial results, and a specific and well-informed plan of attack.
Similarly, letters from faculty at your MS department should describe your independence, stubbornness, intellectual maturity, and so on, in specific and credible detail. **When you ask for letters, ask your references specifically if they can write a strong letter about your research potential.** Ideally, your references should admit that their department doesn't provide you with the environment that you need to thrive as a researcher. And it really hurts to write “\[Bravo\] can do better than us,” so it better be true.
Admissions committees (at least the ones I've been on) do take applicants' previous institutions into account when judging research records. We know that applicants from most 4-year liberal arts colleges don't have as many opportunities for computer science research as applicants from (say) MIT, so our expectations for MIT applicants are higher. So your lack of publications may not hurt you as much if your MS department is *known* to have a weak research atmosphere.
However: **Do not suggest in your application that your lack of publications is your MS department's fault.** You may believe it's their fault, and you might even be right. But if you actually *write* that it's their fault, you'll come across as someone eager to blame others for your weaknesses. No matter how good you are at research, nobody will admit you if they think you're a jerk.
# Answer
> 3 votes
This is another one of those questions that defies easy categorization. If you are applying, for instance, to a "hard" engineering discipline, it's not normally expected that a MSc would have any "external" publication record of any kind, and, as such, not having one would not weight against the candidate in admissions considerations. (All things being equal, of course, the candidate with a publication record might be prioritized over one without.) Similarly, any student coming from a European bachelor's/master's system, where the expected output is a master's thesis, but not necessarily journal publications, I would weight accordingly. (I might ask for a copy of the master's thesis.)
Similarly, if the degree is coursework-only, then this should be clearly stated as part of the application. The challenge will then be to get some support from the letters of reference of your capability to do research.
For fields where some publication record is expected, I'd follow JeffE's advice.
---
Tags: phd, graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-980 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/980 | How much do soft skills matter for admission decision? | 2012-04-02T15:04:14.213 | # Question
Title: How much do soft skills matter for admission decision?
By reading the very intersting question *Priority of application materials for admission decision* about which material is most important to be admitted as PhD candidate, or PostDoc or researcher, in a university, I started wondering on how and how much soft skills count, for the same objective.
As you know, besides academic degrees, grades, publications, reference letters, technical skills, project proposals, and etc., there are also **soft skills** that are considered by talent scouts to choose who engage.
For *soft skills*, I mean competence like:
* public speaking
* active listening
* ability to manage relationships
* ability to show interest
In scientific admission procedures, e.g. for PhD or PostDoc admission, **how much do soft skills count?**
# Answer
I don't really know for PhD, but for Postdocs, from what I've seen and heard, these skills count *a lot*, especially when the recruitment process is well structured, as I experienced it in the UK and in Germany. Basically, the recruitment process consists of three steps:
* Sending the CV, application, reference letters, etc. At this point, soft-skill do not really count, although knowing how to write a good cover letter can help.
* Seminar/Public talk: the applicant is invited to give a presentation of his research work to a public audience (usually including the committee, and the staff from the department).
* Interview: the recruitment committee interviews the applicant.
In the steps 2 and 3, the soft-skills are very important. Basically, all applicants reaching step 2 have good credentials, so it's somehow already established that they can write papers and solve research problems, so the quality of the talk and the attitude during the interview are crucial.
> 9 votes
# Answer
For a graduate student, soft skills matter only in as much as they pertain to good writing and to having good interview skills (if interviews are conducted).
If you write a poor statement of purpose with an otherwise solid application, it can severely hurt your chances of admission. Similarly, in a department that does interviews, a good interview can significantly improve your chances—raising you from "on the bubble" to "admit." Of course, the converse could be true—if you come off as arrogant or incompetent in your interview, that can completely kill your chances at admission.
However, those are skills that can be worked on via practice, and most universities offer workshops and training on how to improve writing and handle job interviews. Students should take advantage of those opportunities when they're available.
> 6 votes
---
Tags: graduate-admissions, application
--- |
thread-986 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/986 | How do you "grow your own" post doc opportunity? | 2012-04-02T19:45:07.137 | # Question
Title: How do you "grow your own" post doc opportunity?
I am a finishing doctoral student (graduation in ~7-9 months) and I would love to get an year or so of postdoctoral experience. I've come to understand that a postdoc is generally paid by funds created for the project (s)he is a postdoc for.
How should I go about "growing my own" postdoc opportunity? In other words, how should I go about soliciting for funds for research ideas? I know it is a rather daunting task. Although I have participated in writing several proposals (some of which were accepted), I have never been the PI or co-PI for any of those projects -- generally just one of the grad students working on it.
I am at a US university and have already taken at look at NSF's website.. Being an international student, I don't have all the options available to domestic candidates.
This is what I've thought of so far:
1. Come up with feasible research idea and approach advisor.
2. Discuss idea and possible collaborations.
3. Try to categorize it into NSF's or any other funding agencies categories.
4. Write a proposal in the summer and submit it during the next window of opportunity.
Any pointers, tips or funding agencies I might also look at?
Some background: I am a PhD candidate in Mechanical engineering with emphasis on fluid dynamics, applied mathematics, energy systems and space systems.
# Answer
From what I've seen, you've just described perfectly what many professors would view as the "ideal postdoc". As one of the main goals of your postdoctoral training is to gain experience writing your own grant proposals, your four steps are very close to what you should be doing.
The most crucial part for you will be finding a postdoctoral advisor with whom you get along. As is typical in research settings, look for someone with significant research experience who has a successful record of getting proposals funded. Given that this is your goal, this is possibly more important now than their publication record. You should be able to find this out by asking around the department and speaking to graduate students, and even just asking the advisor directly about their recently funded grant applications. Once you find someone, everything else should go fairly smoothly.
> 1) Come up with feasible research idea and approach advisor.
>
> 2) Discuss idea and possible collaborations.
You should do this both on your own and through talking to your advisor. Remember that one of the main factors driving whether a postdoctoral grant is accepted is previous experience of both the postdoctoral fellow himself and the advisor; consider ideas in areas where you have experience doing research *and* your advisor has experience mentoring.
While you can consider collaborations, my postdoc advisor told me that at *most* I should consider one other collaborator, other my advisor himself, as collaborative proposals are more complicated, both from a submission and administrative standpoint.
> 3) Try to categorize it into NSF's or any other funding agencies categories.
Your advisor should already be aware of relevant funding opportunities.
> 4) Write a proposal in the summer and submit it during the next window of opportunity.
I assume you wrote "summer" because you were thinking of a particular grant, but different opportunities have different grant submission deadlines. Again, talk to your advisor to see which grants the thinks would be a good fit for you, and check out their respective deadlines.
> 13 votes
# Answer
There are a few programs, such as the Newton Fellowships and the Humboldt Fellowship which are designed expressly for international researchers; however, those programs are based out of the UK and Germany, respectively. There is also the Fulbright Program which offers opportunities for students and scholars to come to the US. These may or may not be applicable.
However, this is largely a "chicken-and-egg" problem; coming from abroad, you won't be able to apply for your own money at US agencies (except ones sponsoring programs like the Fulbright). So the logistics of this might be very challenging to coordinate.
> 3 votes
---
Tags: funding, postdocs, online-resource, writing
--- |
thread-997 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/997 | A better way to train future Theoretical Computer Science researchers | 2012-04-03T12:51:08.307 | # Question
Title: A better way to train future Theoretical Computer Science researchers
My questions:
> 1. Are there universites offering a B.Sc. in computer science aimed solely at giving the best training to future theoretical computer science researchers?
> (in the universities I checked, the programs are a combination of training people for research and training people to be programmers in the industry).
> 2. As it seems not to be the case in most universities, is there a reason not to offer such programs? (financial maybe)
The motivation for the questions:
I am a mathematics M.Sc. student. I had several conversations with researchers (full/associate professors) in theoretical computer science when I was looking for a thesis advisor. Three of them mentioned to me that they wish they would have learnt more mathematics in their basic training (two of them had a B.Sc. in mathematics and computer science and said they wished they did an M.Sc. in mathematics as well and one of them studied computer science only for a B.Sc.). Their comments referred to funtional analysis (by a researcher in metric embeddings), to group theoretic constructions of expander graphs, etc.
This led me to check the program in computer science and here is what I found:
If a student really tries to get as much cs-theory and mathmematics in his B.Sc, he can study: 38% theoretical computer science, 40% mathematics with mathematics students, 6% mathematics with cs-students only, 16% technical courses. This amounts to 16% waste of time (for a future theoertical cs researchers) and 6% non-optimal use of time (as these math courses with cs-students feel a bit like high-school math).
I included the basic programming courses under theoretical cs because I believe they are essential in order to "know what you're talking about" when studying algorithms, computability, etc. The situation is even a little worse from the perspective of this student because I included all the graduate courses in theoretical cs offered to undergrads, so he will have less theoretical cs courses to take during the M.Sc.
It seems like a much better choice for a future cs theory researcher is to study mathematics and take the cs theory courses (together with the most basic programming courses) as the "free choice" courses. I feel lucky to have done that as it seems that I would not have received such an excellent training if I had gone for the university's fixed cs+math program.
I think that the cs world could benefit alot if universities offered both B.Sc. and M.Sc. programs in "mathematics and theoretical computer science". This can be good both in giving a better training and in encouraging future colloboration.
So here's another question:
> Do you agree that such programs ("mathematics and theoretical computer science") are a better alternative to cs-only programs or math+cs program which include many technical courses, as far as future theoretical cs researchers are concerned?
# Answer
> 10 votes
One downside is the "all eggs in one basket" problem. If you're sure you want to go into theoryCS, then this is great. But if you want to hedge your bets, then some more programming and general CS courses at the undergrad level would be helpful. Also, even within theoryCS, a solid understanding of computer science at large helps with asking *new* questions about other models of computation, or evaluating the value of theoretical questions motivated by some practical applications.
# Answer
> 10 votes
As Suresh points out, most majors aren't narrowly focused towards exactly one career track, because many people don't end up in the career they expect to. (The exception I know of is that some schools offer things like pre-med and pre-business majors, but note that 1) there are a lot more spots in medical schools than in graduate CS programs, and 2) many schools *don't* offer these programs, precisely because they're so narrow.) That 16% of time is only wasted, at worst, for the very few people who are absolutely sure of what they want to do.
The purpose of an undergraduate degree is to give someone broad knowledge of a field, not to make a bee-line for academic research. This is the same reason most schools require some level of "general education" requirements, under some name or another---they want their graduates to have a broad overview of academia in general, partially because some people end up being inspired by something they hadn't expected to, and partially because having a broader base of knowledge makes it easier to answer unexpected questions.
Finally, many schools offer some sort of "make your own major" program, which would be a way for the student who is actually sure they want to study CS theory to focus on that earlier.
---
Tags: research-process, undergraduate, theory, training
--- |
thread-977 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/977 | What to do when graduate admissions haven't gone well? | 2012-04-02T12:39:19.917 | # Question
Title: What to do when graduate admissions haven't gone well?
OK, here is the deal:
I am a computer science student in Turkey graduating this June. I have applied to PhD programs in the US to work in computer architecture. I have a decent bachelor's degree, and my college is reasonably respected. Before admissions, I contacted some professors, and they seemed very interested in my background. During admissions, I was interviewed by some other professors. However, it turned out that there was only one offer with a scholarship, which I decided not to accept. (You may ask why I didn't opt for that one, the response may make the issue personal. But at least I can say that I didn't waste a resource that can be used by someone more enthusiastic about it.)
Now, I am in the middle of nowhere. The opportunity to work in computer architecture in my country is really small. During my bachelor's studies, I took all computer architecture related courses, even graduate ones. Plus, I almost missed all the graduate program admissions in Europe (with scholarships).
What do you think are my options? My idea is to get into a graduate program and be an academic.
* I may start a master's degree in my country, but the area most professors teach that most relates to my studies is embedded systems. In fact, I doubt whether this may take me away from my intentions.
* I can reapply during spring term admissions. (I have been told that these admissions are way more selective than during the fall term and this brings extra financial cost.)
* I may work in the industry for a year, then reapply. (But how about my new profile for admissions? Plus, who wants someone, who is probably leaving soon, to hire?)
So I need some serious advice.
Here is some information about me: I have 3.6 overall and 3.85 major GPA. 6 different people have written references for me.
# Answer
> 1 votes
Do you want to go to industry or academia?
Turning down a scholarship to reserve the money for someone more "enthusiastic about it" sounds at odds with "my idea was to ... be academician \[sic\]".
If you want to work in industry, unless it's for some deep part of, for example, Google or AT&T, I would recommend getting a Master's wherever and begin getting real-world experience.
If you want to be an academic (and so almost absolutely need a PhD) then you should find people from Turkey who did something like what you are trying to do and get in contact with/ emulate them.
At the risk of being provocative and with the caveat that I doubt this is the main issue, your message gives the sense that money is an issue. It is for many of us- but consider if you conveyed that in an unproductive way as you tried to get admissions to graduate school. Some in academia are touchy about that.
# Answer
> 1 votes
There is always the path of a one-year research assistant-ship at an European University of your choosing. This won't give you any degrees but at least you'll get paid (little) and you'll have the chance to build up some momentum in computer architecture. An added plus will be that you won't waste any time getting a MS education in a field you're not interested in.
The only tricky thing is finding a group that you mesh well with and that will have funding to take you for a year.
---
Tags: graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-1006 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1006 | How should students approach quals? | 2012-04-04T16:42:31.700 | # Question
Title: How should students approach quals?
Most universities (at least in North America) have the concept of "Qualification Exams" taken one year after the student joins the graduate course. These usually encompass all that was done in the first year and as undergraduate and might also test some other (research abilities) of the student by asking him to present papers (s)he found interesting.
Some universities treat this as a formality and everyone who attempts usually gets through while some universities take quals very seriously and won't allow the student to continue if he fails the quals (maybe, they will allow for 2nd attempt). These universities might subscribe reading lists consisting of textbooks and papers which comprises of "must-have" knowledge of the field. The latter might constitute as a difficult phase for students who find themselves ill prepared in a certain portion of the exam. (For instance, a pure math undergrad moving to a PhD in Fluid Mechanics and asked to attempt an exam on Fluid Machines)
Assuming STEM graduate course in a university which takes quals seriously (with a structure of written test \> oral exam \> interview/research proposal presentation),
**How should a student approach these exams?** Specifically,
* How is it any different from the undergraduate exams that students give?
* Do you really "prepare" for these exams or should you bank on the courses you have taken and the homework you solved to get you through?
* Repeatedly, I have been told by students (across departments and across institutes) that the faculty is only interested in the oral section of quals as a sanity check and to see whether you have the urge for learning something new; is this universally true?
# Answer
At my university (in the US), the quals are a big deal -- both written and oral. The written quals are the tough ones because the oral quals, here, deal only with your research and as you should be reasonably well read in the literature in your field of research, no one really fails the orals.
The written quals need substantial preparation. For my quals (Fluids/Thermodyanics/Heat transfer) back in 2008, I had to work and study hard for about 10-12 hours a day for 3 months straight.
There were several students who didn't make it through the first attempt and had to go through it all over again the next year. Some (miniscule number) didn't make it the second time around and were discharged with a master's degree.
So to answer your question:
1. It is very university and area of specialization, the difficulty level and importance given to written qualifiers.
2. To be safe, study up hard like you never have before.
3. You may have other responsibilities like grants, classes to teach, assignments to do and research but you just have to balance all these.
Good luck! It is just a matter of hard work, thats all!
-Will be getting my PhD in mechanical engineering at the end of Fall 2012.
> 7 votes
# Answer
Qualifying exams are *never* to be taken lightly. Even when they prove to be a surreal experience, they need to be given the attention appropriate to their seriousness. These are exams that you typically only have one or at most two chances to pass. As a result, you want to get through them on the first try, so that you don't have to worry about them again.
How hard you have to work does depend a lot on the structure of the exam, and based on your previous preparation. If there are a lot of subjects to be tested with which you are not familiar, you may have to work harder than if you're getting A's in all of the classes that will be tested on the exam. (Even then, you'll still want to work through some practice problems to get a feel for the kinds of questions that are asked.)
As the original questioner mentions, in many cases the oral exam can be a "sanity check"—in more ways than one. If the decision has been largely made on the basis of the previous coursework and written quals, then the oral exam can act either to confirm the decisions of the panel, or as an effective psychological exam. One of my panels turned things into what amounted to a carnival side-show, with everybody acting completely out of character, and in a manner I found entirely unbefitting an oral qualifying exam. However, it made sense to see if there was any way to make me "snap" and lose my cool. (I was too busy trying to figure out why everybody was acting so oddly to really snap.)
> 8 votes
---
Tags: qualifying-exam
--- |
thread-1018 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1018 | A major journal in my field is published by Elsevier. How can we move the field to a less objectionable, more open publisher? | 2012-04-05T11:09:14.610 | # Question
Title: A major journal in my field is published by Elsevier. How can we move the field to a less objectionable, more open publisher?
Many people complain about Elsevier and over eight thousand are boycotting it, but actual solutions seem hard to find for certain fields- I'm thinking of research areas for which an Elsevier journal is very important and funds are not available to subsidize an open-access journal.
How can we move an Elsevier-dependent research community to a less objectionable, more open publisher?
I'll post a partial possible answer myself; I'm asking because I think we need more/better answers than mine.
# Answer
As a publisher who has launched an OA journal and seen what it takes to do so, I see the biggest problem for starting any journal being lack of an Impact Factor (IF). I've polled authors at ECVP and about 90% said IF is what determined where they submitted. Everyone knows why this is, so why don't academics turn inward and try to undermine this reliance on IFs? Doing so would insert true competition into the journals market. Maybe academics have tried to do this, though I've never read of any real substantial attempts. I could be wrong. The second problem after IF and before funding is loyalty. Ed board members are often tied to multiple journals and in those first few years you really need those big names on your board to commission for the journal. Big names often care more about another journal or just don't care.
You need a publisher, be it nonprofit or profit, that can put in the work to promote the journal and help commission. Financially, OA journals are very easy to start. Subscription journals require more financial backing, which perhaps could be gotten through grants if you don't want to be tied to a commercial publisher. The answer is long and requires lots of discussion and more important, commitment.
> 20 votes
# Answer
First one must assess whether researchers in the area agree that the community should leave Elsevier. If there isn't strong support for leaving Elsevier, then any move is likely to fail, as it will probably involve a new venture (such as a new journal) requiring the support of many, many researchers in the area, perhaps as authors, editors, or readers pressuring their university to subscribe to the new journal. If the research community is not supportive, this may because they have very good reasons or it may be out of ignorance / lack of imagination of the alternatives.
Discussion of the possibilities in your researcher community serves to explore the options, educate, and potentially build support. You may be able to start a discussion of the issues on mailing lists, social media, or run a conference symposium/satellite related to this topic.
If there is community support, there are a few possibilities for actually making the move. In most (all?) cases, Elsevier owns the journal and its name, therefore one cannot simply switch publishers and keep the same journal name. As a work-around, moves have occurred when all or most of the members of editorial boards of Elsevier journals resigned and started a new journal, usually issuing an open letter explaining their action and encouraging the community to submit to and subscribe to the new journal.
A new journal can use the traditional subscription model or be open access.
With a subscription model, one can use a traditional publisher- a non-profit university press may be less objectionable than Elsevier or one of the other mega-profitable corporate publishers. I have started a list of possible publishers. To get started with a new publisher, one must convince them that they will make enough from subscriptions for the new journal to be worth their while. This may be difficult, as new journals are frequently risky. It takes a few years for a journal to receive an impact factor, and may also take years to be indexed by the major databases, and many authors will only submit to journals that have already achieved these things.
An open-access journal can use the author-pays model, in which case a large publisher can provide all the traditional services (manuscript submission software system and reviewing workflow management, layout, copyediting, production, webhosting, accounting, exporting to databases, DOI registration, proper metadata, etc.) or it can be run on a shoestring, with academics handling everything perhaps with a few administrative staff. For research communities willing to submit all their manuscripts in LateX, this is quite feasible but for communities that demand layout (figures and text arranged to fit a standard page appearance and possibly typesetting) be done, this is more labor-intensive.
Several open-source software tools assist in publishing journals. Open Journal Systems is most like a traditional journal publishing platform but I hear it may be difficult for academics to use. Annotum is based on Wordpress and I believe it works by having authors write their manuscript directly in its software, so that it can guarantee that the paper will look exactly as you expect it (WYSIWYG). It is used by PLoS Currents and other journals. All of these tools could probably use more skilled programmmers contributing to the project.
I am only a researcher, not a publisher, so perhaps not everything I have written here is correct. I think we researchers are in particular need of estimates of the person-hours needed to publish and manage a journal by various methods, so that a research community considering a move can budget appropriately / be comfortable knowing what they're getting into.
> 6 votes
# Answer
It occurs to me that in our field (vision science), Journal of Vision already is an open access alternative to Vision Research. I haven't noticed a big difference in quality or acceptance rates between the two journals, they publish at a similar rate (JoV=270, VR=252 articles in 2011) and their impact factors are within 0.5 of each other. Also, around a third of the VR editorial board are also on the JoV board, and Denis Levi is about to transition from VR editor in chief to JoV editor in chief. Given these similarities, I guess the fact that the whole field hasn't abandoned VR suggests that people still feel there is a place for it. Or, from the other perspective, the success of JoV shows that lots of people wanted an open access alternative, and it's great that they now have one. {reposted from Google+}
> 0 votes
---
Tags: publications, journals
--- |
thread-824 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/824 | How should an educational institute woo good faculty? | 2012-03-20T04:14:22.110 | # Question
Title: How should an educational institute woo good faculty?
What steps must an educational institution wanting to recruit good faculty take? There is a cycle in the academia:
* Good doctorates from top universities invariably join other top universities as faculty members.
* Good students aspire to study in top universities under excellent faculty members.
Suppose a new educational institution or department springs up and desires to set up a top-quality group, how does it break into this cycle? I suppose this could take some years, but is money-power the only thing that could be wielded by the institute to achieve its end?
# Answer
**Money**
First, there's very little way - I think - for a university to improve its standing across the board. Institutional reputation on the level of say, an Ivy League school, where everyone assumes each department must be excellent because they're at *Ivy* is a tall order, and one that I suspect is impossible.
But in a particular field (or a particular School)? Money. And the willingness to take risks. A few ways to help:
* Find a few key faculty members. Established researchers with very solid reputations, and see if you can poach them. This might not just be a question of "how big of a check do we need to write"? There are other factors. A considerable bump in prestige. Quality of living perks. The chance to shape a promising new department in ways that you rarely get in established departments - a chance to be the formative voice in something.
* Be looking for promising potential new hires. Maybe they're coming out of the universities you hired these key faculty members from. Maybe they're coming from top schools generally. A generous start-up package, extra lab space and internal funding, a generous tenure process - these are things that might lure top candidates away from a harder path at a more prestigious institution. It represents a risk for both parties - you might get a dud researcher with a good degree, and they might get a department languishing in obscurity. But if it works, it works very well for both.
* Buy something big. Are there no Expensive Piece of Equipment equipped centers in the region? Become the people who have one.
> 21 votes
# Answer
In some countries, faculty members are public servants, since the state cannot give them more money, others ways have to be found to make positions attractive!
* Extra funding for PhD students and postdocs. The state gives "free" funding to universities (=outside grants), it is conceivable that, to be attractive, a university decides to give this funding to a freshly arrived faculty member.
* Less lectures/responsibilities. This is more touchy, but again, we can imagine that a new faculty member will have less lecture hours for a few years.
* Hiring in the same field. When you arrive in a lab where your field is not represented, it can be depressing. If your field become a priority, then the position become attractive (better to be with "friends" in a challenger university than alone in a top one).
* Preservation from bureaucracy. In some countries (France for instance), the administrative burden is heavy and a lot of faculty members are ready to sign up in any place that guarantees "zero" administrative tasks.
> 17 votes
# Answer
The most effective way to shoot up the rankings is to **focus** on a few areas, make a number of high-profile hires in those areas, and aggressively publicize the institute and recruit students. This is exactly what places like IST Vienna and KAUST in Saudi Arabia are trying to do, and is also what various departments have done in the past to boost their profile.
And yes, this takes a lot of money power.
> 10 votes
# Answer
@Sylvian raised many good intangible benefits, and I just wanted to add another one: **Lab relocation.** Labs take a while to set up, and training new techs takes a lot of time and effort, which translates into lost productivity. Offer to sponsor bringing over everyone from the old lab, including techs and large equipment, to speed up time to productivity.
> 6 votes
# Answer
Oftentimes PhD graduates from top schools join very low-ranked schools because their spouse or partner have tenure there or work in that region. Find a way to accommodate both of them and you have a winner.
> 4 votes
---
Tags: professorship, administration, recruiting
--- |
thread-368 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/368 | Is it a good or bad idea to list declined fellowships (for a PhD program) on one's curriculum vitae? | 2012-02-22T17:48:08.987 | # Question
Title: Is it a good or bad idea to list declined fellowships (for a PhD program) on one's curriculum vitae?
E.g. as shown in the example here.
> * 2011—Centennial Fellowship, Princeton University Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (accepted)
> * 2011—Top Student Award, University of Washington (declined)
> * 2011—Program in Climate Change Fellowship, University of Washington (declined)
> * 2011—Faculty Fellowship, Columbia University (declined)
> * 2011—Charney Prize, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (declined)
> * 2011—Regents Fellowship, Scripps Institution of Oceanography (declined)
> * 2011—Chair’s Award, Stanford University Department of Earth and Environmental System Science (declined)
# Answer
> 15 votes
Aeismail makes an important point about location: what's standard in Germany differs from what's standard in the US.
In a US context, I would strongly recommend against listing things like declined graduate fellowships. It will look strange, and even beyond that it can work to your disadvantage: everybody will already assume you declined several attractive offers, so giving an explicit list will do nothing but focus attention on what isn't on the list. (If the list of declined offers is short, readers will be disappointed, and if it's long, they'll spend more time speculating about what's missing than being impressed.)
The only time I'd recommend highlighting this sort of information is if for some reason you had to turn down a vastly more prestigious offer than the one you accepted. For example, maybe you were offered a tenure-track job at a top department, but ended up working as an adjunct in the middle of nowhere so you could take care of a relative. You should then make sure everybody knows this the next time you are able to apply for jobs. However, you should be very careful when doing this, because if the prestige difference isn't absolutely universally acknowledged, then you run the risk of offending people who feel you are unfairly denigrating a perfectly fine career path.
# Answer
> 29 votes
Bad idea. If you turn down an award (or an acceptance to a univeristy, etc), you don't get to reap the benefits of that award.
No one cares about the universities you *could have gone to* or the fellowship programs you *could have worked for*, they care about what you have actually done and that is all you should include on your CV/resume. Period.
To me, the resume linked to above reads "I had no one else edit or evaluate my resume before I posted it online."
# Answer
> 15 votes
Like so many other matters, your location plays a role in what is considered accepted or not.
In the US, I would limit listing "declined" awards to *national*, *competitive* fellowships which had to be declined because of the fact that you're not allowed to accept multiple fellowships. However, the awarding of multiple such fellowships shows that you are a "hot commodity," and therefore does confer some benefit to you. (As an example of other countries' practices, here in Germany, it is *expected* that you would list offers of faculty positions that you have declined, for exactly the same reason.)
However, I would agree with Amy and Ben that in the present case, those awards should not have been listed on a CV. On the other hand, "DOD Fellow" and "Offered NSF fellowship" would be a different scenario.
# Answer
> 12 votes
I don't think there's one answer to this question. Different people react to different things on CVs in different ways. The level of listing above is silly; if the candidate in the example had asked me for my advice I would have told them not to (they're basically listing jobs they were offered; interpreted generously, it looks like CV padding), but occasionally it can make sense to list a prestigious fellowship you declined due to circumstances.
---
Tags: cv
--- |
thread-1023 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1023 | Etiquette to take external help | 2012-04-05T13:16:45.510 | # Question
Title: Etiquette to take external help
Assume that the student (during his PhD) is faced with a problem which he and his advisor are both completely new to. The advisor is **trying to** help the student but owing to his lack of experience/knowledge/intuition in the field, is unable to help much. What is the etiquette for the student to seek external help (particularly professors who have dealt with such problems and maybe their grad students)?
* Is it necessary to inform your advisor before going to other professors for help?
* How should one introduce the subject of external help when the advisor is clearly interested in tackling the problem without any help?
# Answer
You absolutely should inform your advisor that you are going to seek external help, even if they are against it. They are partly responsible for your studies and should know what's going on.
You could try introducing the subject as a collaboration rather than seeking help. If the person you want to approach has written a paper on the subject for example, you could say that it would be beneficial for your work to collaborate with them. As long as you at least create the impression that you're looking for interaction on the same level rather than just getting advice, I don't think you would have too much trouble convincing your advisor.
> 3 votes
# Answer
The cardinal rule of interacting with advisors is that if you don't generally trust your advisor's advice, then you need a new advisor. So you should start with the idea that your advisor's approach to any given situation is probably worth trying, and only give up on it if it's clearly not working out or seems contrary to what everyone else is saying.
Beyond that, I'm sure it varies between fields. I wouldn't presume to offer advice to someone in a biology lab on how to sort this issue out, for example.
The most important thing, which you absolutely must do no matter what, is to inform your advisor in detail of any help you receive. This is a matter of intellectual honesty, while everything else is a matter of convention or wise strategy.
What you want to avoid is the following scenario: you meet with X, then meet with Y and explain what X said, then meet with X and convey Y's response to X's ideas, then meet with Y again and relay information back from X, etc. If you try this and are a little vague about the line between your own ideas and what you learned in your last meeting, then you can pull it off for a while, but eventually you'll be in big trouble when X and Y talk. Even if you never actually lied, but just let people assume you were contributing more than you actually did, they'll be very unhappy if they decide you weren't contributing enough. \[And this can be a particular danger for students: if someone says something cryptic and then you figure it out later, is that because you are adding new ideas and insights, or because you are catching up to where the expert already was? It can be hard for a beginner to judge, and this potential for confusion is a valid worry for advisors.\]
As to how to introduce the idea to an advisor who resists getting outside help, the main thing is to understand why. Is it because your advisor feels this is an important learning experience for you? Is the advisor convinced that the problem is not as difficult as you fear? (And, if so, can you make a compelling case that it is?) There are also more worrisome scenarios. For example, maybe the local expert in this area is notorious for competing with or undermining students, or has a bad relationship with your advisor. Your advisor may be reluctant to say this explicitly, so if he/she seems to be ruling out a natural collaborator for unclear reasons, then you should ask about other people you might talk with instead.
> 6 votes
---
Tags: graduate-school, advisor, etiquette
--- |
thread-1014 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1014 | Should undergraduate students be included on papers containing data they collected? | 2012-04-05T08:41:00.517 | # Question
Title: Should undergraduate students be included on papers containing data they collected?
Assume one or more undergraduate students are given a topic by an academic supervsior to use for their undergraduate honors thesis. The task is designed, programmed and set-up by the supervisor, who shows the students how to use the equipment and to conduct rudimentary data analysis/summaries. The students then collect the data and report them in a written, submitted thesis. Later, the academic supervisor analyses the data (from the summaries obtained), writes a manuscript in conjunction with his/her colleagues, and wishes to submit for publication. My question is: should the undergraduates who collected the data, and who did not contribute to the writing of the manuscript at all, be listed as authors? It seems that this decision is often left to personal preference. Thanks.
# Answer
> 31 votes
A few comments:
1. Were they asked to contribute to the paper or was the paper written without their knowledge? If they refused to contribute, then they shouldn't be a named author. If they weren't asked, then it's not their fault they didn't contribute ;)
2. I think the word *undergraduate* is a red herring. Substitute it with the word *PhD student* or *RA* or *Prof from the lab next door*, does this change your view? A person's title shouldn't influence their inclusion.
3. How much work are we talking about here? When I provide statistical advice, I'm happy to give up a few hours of my time for free. But once I'm spending days on the project, then I expect (and make it clear) to be am named author.
4. If data collection was "trivial", then I would suggest it shouldn't be used as an undergraduate project. Also, I presume that there was some skill in collecting the data?
# Answer
> 8 votes
Reading your original question, the scenario you describe makes this situation a little more complex.
If the paper is written in such a way as to draw significantly on the work reported in the thesis—to the extent of using figures and data prepared by the student, then one could very well make the argument that the student should be cited as an author. This is especially true if the supervisor uses any of the text in the construction of his paper.
More generally, I try to use the criterion that my postdoc advisor gave me: if someone believes that their contributions to the research are significant enough to merit co-authorship, then they should contribute to the writing and revising of the manuscript. At that point, they become fully entitled to co-authorship.
# Answer
> 4 votes
If the student (or anybody else for that matter) did not make a novel and significant intellectual contribution to the project, then they should not be included on the author list of the paper. In your question, it seems like all the intellectual contribution was by the professor (and colleagues) and the students just carried out tasks assigned to them or made very minor contributions. As such, the students should be mentioned in the **acknowledgement section** but not given authorship.
That being said, if your supervisor is only using you for drill work, then maybe you should seek a better supervisor. A good supervisor should encourage their students to take an active role of novel intellectual contribution. If your supervisor is not encouraging you to do this, then they are not training you to be a researcher, they are training you to be a lab-hand (although I guess in some fields you have to be a lab-hand before you are can be trained as a researcher).
Here is the flip side of this question, in particular my answer is inspired by @JeffE's answer.
# Answer
> 2 votes
Given that the students did not participate in writing the paper, I agree with Artem Kaznatcheev that they should not be named as authors. It is good scientific practice to only put an author's name on a paper if she or he has at least read the complete paper before publication and can judge its correctness. After all, each author is responsible for any misrepresentations in the paper. However, they definitely should appear in the acknowledgement section.
(Our lab has the informal policy that we ask students who contributed somehow to a research project if they want to take part in the paper-writing process. In this case, they are named as authors, otherwise mentioned in the acknowledgements section.)
# Answer
> 2 votes
The consensus (of course no such thing exists) that I have heard in the biological science goes, if your data resulted in a figure, you get your name on the paper. However, if the person wrote the paper and contributed immensely, they then get the first authorship,
I think part of the question is based on whether or not the ideas of the thesis were influential in the interpretation of the data and if the data had to be recollected. In the situation described our field would be very comfortable with having the undergrad in the middle, the least important position of authorship.
It is very important to acknowledge @JeffE's comment which is "**the correct answer depends on the standard publication culture in the supervisor's field**"
---
Tags: authorship
--- |
thread-1052 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1052 | Any chance for an overseas student to pursue online courses and get a degree? | 2012-04-08T04:10:29.010 | # Question
Title: Any chance for an overseas student to pursue online courses and get a degree?
I am planning to take courses in Mathematics, Computer Science from a US University. I am not in the USA.
How should I generally go about it? Is it an online degree that I am looking for?
And I would like to get a degree for that.
# Answer
> 4 votes
In mathematics, some graduate degrees are offered online, but you should be careful. There are real advantages to doing it in person, and most of the schools offering online degrees are not well respected, so if you select a program based on internet advertising, you will probably waste your money without learning very much or ending up with a valuable credential. (It's depressing how many businesspeople view distance education as just a money making opportunity, without any serious commitment to doing a good job. When you investigate online education, please keep in mind that many web sites are trying to sell you something of questionable value.)
One respectable example is the University of Washington, which offers an online M.S. in applied mathematics, and there are some others like this. They could be viable options if attending in person is impossible. I do not know of any well respected math graduate program from a 100% distance education university in the US, so you should be very suspicious of such programs, although perhaps they exist in other countries (Open University?).
There is no worthwhile online Ph.D. program in mathematics. If your only goal is to get the degree itself, for example to move up in a salary scale for a job you already have, then it might be possible, but you would have to look carefully to make sure the program is accredited, and even so it won't be an impressive addition to your CV. If you are hoping for a career in academia or industrial research, don't even think about an online Ph.D. If an institution offers an online Ph.D. in mathematics, and presents it as being just as good and respected as a traditional Ph.D., then you should be extremely suspicious of the entire institution.
As for computer science, I don't know as much about online master's programs, but the issues are similar and I imagine the conclusions are as well. The online Ph.D. situation is definitely the same as in math.
---
Tags: mathematics, computer-science, distance-learning, online-degree
--- |
thread-177 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/177 | PhD in pure mathematics for a student in computer science | 2012-02-16T18:43:23.173 | # Question
Title: PhD in pure mathematics for a student in computer science
I'm a student currently pursuing my masters in computer science. My present area of research is computational algrebraic geometry (theory of grobner bases and tropical geometry).
Afterwards, I'm interested in pursuing my PhD in pure mathematics.
I would like know if I'll be elligible for applying to pure math PhD programs? And if yes, do I have any realistic chance of getting into one?
What else can I do to improve my chances of being accepted?
# Answer
Short answer: Yes. Absolutely. You are already doing mathematics.
A few bits of advice:
* Ask your advisor and other references to specifically address your mathematical depth and maturity in their recommendation letters.
* Include a *technical* summary of your past research, including pointers to ArXiv preprints if possible, in your statement of purpose.
* Apply to math departments that employ computational algebraic geometers. Three that come to mind immediately are Saugatu Basu at Purdue, Frank Sottile at Texas A&M, and Bernd Sturmfels at Berkeley.
(I know at least half a dozen former CS grad students who successfully switched into mathematics.)
> 21 votes
# Answer
I've served on graduate admissions committees for a math department in a research university. It really won't matter what your degrees are in, as long as the substance is there, but you need to be careful of several points:
1. You need recommendations from people the committee is familiar with, preferably at least one or two mathematicians. The more they committee knows about your letter writers, the better. (For example, if someone says you are one of the best students in recent years, is that because you are great or because they give inflated praise to everyone? There's no way of knowing if the committee hasn't seen previous recommendations from this person.) It's also important for your recommenders to have enough of a feeling for math grad school that they can confidently address whether you will be successful; for example, theoretical computer scientists can probably do this better than people in more applied areas of CS. Finally, many people believe recommenders are a little less selective about recommending people for things outside of their own area, so recommendations from other fields are often given less weight.
2. You need to demonstrate that you have mastered the undergraduate material that is less relevant for computer science. For example, mathematical analysis along the lines of Rudin's *Principles of Mathematical Analysis*. Even if you know a lot about algebra and discrete math, you might still not be in a position to pass some first-year graduate courses in pure math, or you might discover that you don't enjoy them.
3. You need a compelling story for why you are changing departments. If you focus on not liking what you are currently doing, or on wanting a fresh start, then it will not go over well. There are much more positive stories, about gradually coming to appreciate that pure math is your real interest, but you should write carefully. This is tantamount to admitting that the last time you entered a graduate program, you didn't really know what you were interested in, and you don't want to leave the committee with any worries that this might still be true. If you can say this honestly, then it might help to say something along these lines: when you finished your undergraduate degree, you were unsure about pure math vs. CS, so you decided to write an extremely mathematical CS master's thesis, and this experience has helped you decide where your real interests are. (Being unsure in the past comes across better than having thought you were sure and then realizing you were wrong.)
> 13 votes
# Answer
(I speak from limited experience, and none on the "reading applications and deciding" side. Technically my undergraduate degree was in a program somewhere between math and CS, but I'd taken a fairly math-oriented slant on it.)
Having a masters degree in a related field certainly doesn't make you ineligible to pursue a PhD in math. The only disadvantage I can see for taking time to do a masters degree in a slightly different area, as opposed to, say, working in industry, is that you may need to work harder to explain why you're changing areas.
(Also you'll have some record of doing research, and you might be judged in part on the quality of that research where an undergrad might be given the benefit of the doubt.)
If you want to continue working in a closely related area that's a bit more in the mathematical direction, it shouldn't be very hard to explain why you've decided to continue that work in mathematics rather than CS. It's a bigger issue if you want to do something very different in math---the worry would be that whatever caused you to lose interest in computational algebraic geometry will happen again. That's not insurmountable, but it will be more of a hurdle to convince the faculty you're really interested enough in the new area to stick out a PhD.
> 6 votes
# Answer
I wouldn't rate your chances as very high, but the following factors might help nevertheless:
1. Your credentials (where you did your BS/MS from), and what balance of mathematics courses did you take - were there any electives, and of course, how you fared in them.
2. Since you didn't mention it, I'm assuming you haven't published in any decent mathematical venues - it helps your chances a lot if you had publishable results prior to your application. If you find it difficult to get published, post (interesting and useful) results to arxiv - that would boost your case in any case.
3. Mathematics is a vast field - it would help a lot if you were to continue along the directions to which you've already had some research background in (and maybe published on), and could get an interested faculty to have a look at your profile.
> 1 votes
---
Tags: phd, graduate-admissions, career-path
--- |
thread-1051 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1051 | What do principal investigators (PIs) look for in prospective post docs? | 2012-04-08T04:00:44.947 | # Question
Title: What do principal investigators (PIs) look for in prospective post docs?
I've always wondered if PIs look for a perfect fit for their projects. For instance, a post doc vacancy is advertised as follows:
* Must have completed PhD with 3 peer reviewed journal articles.
* Must have x,y and z skills.
* Must have had some exposure to a,b and c skills.
Now what if the applicant has only 1 journal article and is working on a 2nd manuscript. Has x and z skills and has had exposure to a and b skills but not c but some other skills that might be useful?
So would this applicant want to apply for said post doc? If so does how does the hiring dynamic work? Would this dynamic be the same whether it is an engineering/science post doc or otherwise? Would the applicant be overlooked because he/she isn't a 100% fit?
I realize that each situation would need to be judged differently but there has got to be a general thumb rule.
# Answer
Usually, I hire two types of postdocs.
The first one is the "zero expectation" postdoc, this is the postdoc that I hire when I already have the manpower to complete the project, and when the project is clearly on the good tracks. For this one, I just look at the research work he has done (I don't care about numbers/publications, only about the quality of the work) and make sure that he will be able to work alone (mmm, this means that I look for someone that should already be a faculty member somewhere, but which is not for various reasons).
But what is interesting you I guess is the second type. In any project the most important thing is to make sure that we will be able to complete it in time. If I hire a postdoc for that purpose and if the postdoc don't do the job, I will have to do it myself, I don't want this to happen. So, the only thing that interests me is the ability to complete the goals of the project. Publications? except if the goal of the project is to produce papers I don't care. Skills? this is what I am looking for, and more precisly I am looking for confirmed skills, not exposure (too risky).
> 10 votes
# Answer
Postdocs have an absolutely critical and unique role in a research group. They have more research potential than anyone else in academia, because they are both full time on research and yet experienced, not students. They are also very expensive and a rare luxury that comes only with heavy investment from a funder or university.
The first thing I look for therefore is demonstrated proof that the candidate will take good advantage of the expensive opportunity they are being offered. Forms of evidence:
* existing publications
* publications in prep.
* letters of reference
These should show that the candidate has skills in what needs to be done, and the determination and internal motivation to be a successful academic.
The next thing I look for is evidence that the candidate is very likely to employ those skills in the area that I am funded for them to research. This is done through open and frank conversations with the candidate about their research and career goals, what *I* need, what *they* need, where they intend to go next, etc. A postdoc is at a critical time in their career, and everyone should know that they need to produce papers out of their PhD and that they may leave early if the right lifetime opportunity comes along. I try to negotiate in advance about what research I absolutely need them to complete, what further I'd like them to complete, and to discuss writing and research schedules such that they can meet both of our needs and wants, preferably through some synergy (e.g. of the possible outcomes of this project, which would best suit both of our goals?) I then try to agree a schedule about what research will be done when, what is the earliest date they'll start looking for their next position, when will they or we start writing the next grant or fellowship bid etc.
These negotiations give me not only a sense of how much I can expect us to accomplish if I make this hire, but also how well we can work together and how similarly we understand our responsibilities as academics.
Finally of course there is a luck element: if there is more than one viable candidate, the one who seems likely to be the best fit wins.
> 11 votes
# Answer
As Sylvain implies, the freedom in selecting a postdoc depends strongly on the nature of the project. If I have a position for which on-going funding is available (because it's part of a long-term center, for instance), the "must haves" or more like "would like to haves."
On the other hand, if I have a limited-term position (one funded through something like an NIH, NSF, or DFG grant which has a time-limit attached), then I need to be much more strict in selecting my candidates. Then I want one with as close a match as possible.
That said, however, if the clock is already running, then I can't necessarily wait for a postdoc who has *all* of the qualifications to come along. In that case, I will pick someone who satisfies most of the criteria, and do extra due diligence to make sure that the postdoc is *teachable*: that is, that she is willing to learn the extra skills that she needs to complete the project in a timely manner.
> 6 votes
---
Tags: career-path, job-search, job, postdocs
--- |
thread-1035 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1035 | Do letters of recommendation typically include a biography of the writer? | 2012-04-06T23:35:56.260 | # Question
Title: Do letters of recommendation typically include a biography of the writer?
A student asked me to write a letter of recommendation for graduate school admission in London and the student insisted that I include a short biography describing my job title and qualifications. I find this information is a little out of place. First, my degree is in progress, so I do not have any impressive qualifications. Second, I think such letters are intended to introduce the applicant, not the writer.
* Is this common practice to include a biography of the writer in letters of recommendation?
* Where does this information typically appear in the document? In the opening paragraph? As a separate, attached document?
# Answer
> 6 votes
You are right, the point of the letter is **entirely** the candidate, any sentence(s) about yourself should be entirely to the point of facilitating communication about the candidate. I was told in school that all histories tell you as much about the culture that wrote them as the culture they describe, so you need to take both into account when you read them. I suppose this is true of reference letters as well. It's like introducing yourself before you ask an academic you don't know a question one-on-one over coffee at a conference – sometimes there's no need, but sometimes it's essential to framing the question & making the most of the other person's time & answer.
I have never been explicitly asked for a biography beyond "how do you know the candidate, for how long, and in what capacity". However, the UK is under a lot of legal pressure concerning letters of reference because some are so much better than others, not necessarily due to the candidate, but possibly due to how knowledgeable the writer is about writing letters. Possibly candidates deserve some credit for picking good letter writers, but this could be hard particularly for very junior candidates. So having guidance for writing a letter is useful, it's letting all letter writers know good practice by previous letter writers.
Personally I include biographical information (not a full biography) where I think it may be helpful and when I am trying to write a strong letter. Similarly, I also give information about our institution where I think it might not be known and be helpful. Examples: if I am writing a US institution from the UK, I let them know that I have attended US institutions & know what their programmes are like. Sometimes if I know someone well in the department I may point that out in the letter so that whoever is doing the search has the option of going to ask that person how seriously to take my opinion if they want to.
I put this at the end of the first paragraph or possibly as a stand-alone second paragraph, in advance of offering my verbose opinion of the candidate, so that the reader can have that information in mind when they see what my opinion is. The first sentence of the first paragraph says who the letter is for & for what position. The second sentence is my one-sentence summary of my recommendation. The third (or the second paragraph) is in what capacity I am writing the letter. That's where biographical details might be useful.
# Answer
> 14 votes
Yes, this is relatively common. (In my opinion, not common enough.)
Recommendation letters carry more weight if he reader knows the writer's qualifications. In particular, letters about qualification for graduate school carry more weight if the reader has some sense of the writer's track record for judging students' research ability. (This is why letters from senior faculty are more valued — not because of their vast research experience, but because they've presumably seen and evaluated more students.) The best way for the reader to understand your track record is to *tell them*.
But briefly, because as you suggest, the letter isn't about you.
I don't think there's a standard way to do this. Some people put their bio early in the letter, say in the second paragraph (because the first paragraph is the actual recommendation). I put mine in a footnote on the last page.
# Answer
> 9 votes
I would regard a separate biography as a bit odd; it's normal to sign with your current title (so I sign "Ben Webster, Assistant Professor of Mathematics") and of course, write on letterhead, so your current position is clear. In terms of context on how many students you've evaluated, you can slip that into various points in the letter. I would just stick a sentence into the second paragraph; one can unobtrusively give a short explanation of who you are mixed with the standard explanation of how you know the student.
---
Tags: graduate-admissions, recommendation-letter
--- |
thread-1066 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1066 | Doing bad in undergraduate but good in a masters program | 2012-04-09T04:36:29.023 | # Question
Title: Doing bad in undergraduate but good in a masters program
Suppose you do bad in undergraduate school in say computer science. But you do very well in a masters program in computer science. If you want to apply to a PhD program in computer science, will the masters degree grades offset the undergraduate degree grades?
# Answer
Sort of.
I was in exactly the situation you describe 20+ years ago. My undergrad GPA was horrible (even restricted to computer science classes); my MS GPA was near-perfect; I got into Berkeley as a PhD student. But I don't think the improvement in my *grades* was as important as the improvement in my *letters*. My undergrad letters said "He's smart but lazy", which is the kiss of death. My MS letters were much more positive. Also, when I applied to Berkeley, I had some research results in submission, so my positive letters had some substance to draw on.
Also, I got very, *very*, **very** lucky.
Now, as a faculty member who reviews PhD applications, I would certainly look at the improvement in grades as a good sign. But as I've mentioned elsewhere, above a certain threshold of "good enough", grades don't matter. Especially since you're applying with a master's degree, your demonstrated research ability is **much** more important.
> 13 votes
# Answer
In general, recent performance will tend to outweigh prior performance. I will look at a student with a graduate 4.0 and an undergraduate 3.2 much more favorably than the converse (unless there are obvious extenuating circumstances, such as a large jump in the quality of the graduate program compared to the undergraduate).
The source of the GPA drop is also important. A bad freshman year is almost certainly ignorable. A bad senior year is a red flag. Similarly, I will give much less weight to grades in "general education" classes, as I'm not hiring them based on their ability to analyze Shakespeare or Milton. Important classes for the major, though, can be deadly even if they are in the undergraduate years.
> 8 votes
---
Tags: graduate-admissions, application
--- |
thread-1065 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1065 | MSc with relation to Cloud | 2012-04-09T01:55:17.687 | # Question
Title: MSc with relation to Cloud
I wonder if there are universities having real-world MSc related courses. My focus is to understand cloud technologies and services(especially if it is Amazon). Preferably in UK, but can be actually anywhere around the world. Maybe general or specific like PAAS , SAAS etc. Could you suggest any?
# Answer
> 2 votes
There's an MSc specialising in Networks and Distributed Systems at St Andrews. There's also quite a large group that does cloud computing research and a cloud lab, so you would almost certainly be able to do an MSc project on that topic.
# Answer
> 1 votes
At the K.U. Leuven there is a lot of research done in distributed systems, with a recent focus on cloud computing. You could do a Masters in Distributed Systems and do your thesis on an issue related to cloud computing. (One would need to first check that the course could be done in English.)
---
Tags: masters
--- |
thread-1082 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1082 | Computer science degree vs. post-bachelor computer science certificate | 2012-04-10T16:18:28.640 | # Question
Title: Computer science degree vs. post-bachelor computer science certificate
My background: I'm currently 1 year out of my undergrad in psychology and I currently have a job working on a educational grant project at a university. I've lost some interest in the field of psychology as a whole and I'm considering going back to school for computer science. When I expressed this interest to an adviser at my old school she mentioned that I might be interested in a post bachelor comp sci certificate. The certificate is 30 credits and can probably be done in about half the time that another bachelors could be completed in. I asked her if any of the graduates of the certificate program had had any trouble getting into graduate school with said degree and she said no. However, I believe there is probably more to this than she let on considering that it is her job to promote this program.
Question: I'm wondering if anyone has any experience with these type of certificates? I know that I will have a more complete computer science education with an undergrad but I'm wondering if it is completely necessary. All said and done I would like to get a masters in computer science because it seems like the smart career move. Will I be limiting my job potential by only having a certificate and a bachelors in an unrelated field? Is graduate school really possible with just a certificate? My dream job would be working for a company in research and development for human to computer interfaces. I also have a fleeting passion for gaming and music production, but I consider these to be more hobbies than serious career interests.
# Answer
There are two issues: whether it will be a formal barrier (i.e., you'll be screened out before anyone ever looks at your application carefully) and whether it will impress people.
For graduate school applications, there's no way you'll be officially screened out for this reason. There are several programs aimed at encouraging post-baccalaureate certificates to help women enter computer science. They attract excellent students, so grad schools are happy to see these applications; furthermore, if any grad school ever turned down applicants with such a background just because they had no "real" degree in CS, they'd be in big trouble on gender equity grounds. So you have nothing to worry about there: grad schools are aware of these certificates and willing to consider applicants with them.
Of course, there are still issues of people's personal reactions, for example how rigorous or extensive they think the program is. It presumably depends on the program, and also perhaps on which courses you take within the program. If take you challenging courses and do well in them, ideally do some sort of project with a faculty supervisor, and get strong letters of recommendation, then you should be in good shape for grad school applications. As a sanity check, you should ask about the placement record of previous students in the program: without some reason to think otherwise, you can expect you would end up somewhere in that range. If they all do well, that's a very good sign; if some but not all do, then you need to make sure you end up in that top group.
As for industry, CS hiring is much less credential-driven than some branches of engineering (where there are more regulatory or liability issues). If you can demonstrate talent and skill, then nobody will really care what your degree is in (except sometimes for research jobs that require a Ph.D.). There are some tricky issues: for example, some of the top tech companies get enormous numbers of applications and have to filter them rather brutally. However, even there the filtering is more often by prestige (did you get impressive grades at a top university) rather than the field the degree is in.
> 4 votes
# Answer
I am a retired software engineer from a well known company in U.S. Your dream job is to work for a company in R&D for HCI. My advice might be useful for you.
In the old days, the HR department of those companies received hundreds of paper resumes everyday (I carried bags of job application letters for an HR staff before. Don't ask me why I did that, just guess.) Now, they receive hundreds if not thousands of e-mails per day.
The way they filter the job applications is by looking for key words. When they have an HCI job vacancy, they look for computer programming experience, psychology and others. So, your major is important for your future job hunting.
Now, your question, do you need a degree or a certificate is good enough? In my opinion, a degree is always preferable unless you cannot afford to it.
Many companies do not recognize those certificates. They would wonder why you didn't get a degree. Is it because you were not good enough? or some other reasons. You would be filtered out. Remember, they receive hundreds of e-mails everyday. By the time they read all of them, it's 5pm. When they see you have a CS degree, a psychology degree and some working experience, they'll call you for an interview.
> 4 votes
# Answer
It depends largely on how "strict" the employer in question is regarding qualifications. Some companies—particularly larger corporations—don't have the ability to recognize that the certificate might be equivalent to a bachelor's degree. Then, you really need to be able to demonstrate that you have the requisite credentials, and it's hard to "mix and match."
However, smaller employers are generally able to make those distinctions. However, the issue with these faster-paced programs is that you might not have the same breadth of experience as someone who has the bachelor's degree; the four-year degree holder may have internships and other work experience that will make them a more suitable candidate.
In general, though, you are right to be skeptical of what sounds like a "sales pitch," and do your own homework to make sure that it's recognized. One way to do this would be to contact some companies in the area and see if they've had any experience hiring graduates of this program. (You could also ask the sponsor of this program to identify some contacts for you—with the obvious caveat that you'll be getting the "success stories.")
> 3 votes
---
Tags: career-path
--- |
thread-1076 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1076 | How to increase the odds of becoming an invited speaker at science conferences? | 2012-04-09T20:57:16.593 | # Question
Title: How to increase the odds of becoming an invited speaker at science conferences?
Invited talks are important for moving up the academic ladder, so I'd like to know how one maximizes the odds of being offered to be an invited speaker at conferences.
I am aware of the most obvious things like having important results to report. However, apparently this is not always necessary: one often sees in the list of invited speakers some fresh PhDs neighboring the really big shots. So, are there any *non-obvious* strategies to increase the odds of becoming an invited speaker at a conference?
I realize that the advice may be field-specific, and I am most interested in the tips for conferences in mathematics and physics.
# Answer
Give some colloquia (departmental seminars or lab-specific talks) in the departments of organizers of conferences. You can sometimes invite yourself by writing to the organizer of their seminar series and offering yourself as a speaker but better might be having your phd advisor write and recommend you.
This will increase your name recognition with the critical people and can give you a reputation for giving good talks. Organizers are unlikely to take a chance on someone that is junior and none of them have heard speak. If you can give a talk somewhere that will be videoed and posted online, that would also help with this issue.
Finally, if you work with a more famous friend (or phd advisor) in the same area who is frequently invited to give talks, you could mention to them that you are trying to do this and they may recommend you for talks they have to decline.
> 23 votes
# Answer
* Do great research.
* Give great presentations of your research.
* Become known, not only for your research, but by actively participating in conferences, workshops and other meetings.
> 6 votes
# Answer
Find out which conference organizers your PhD advisor knows and see if he'll recommend you to them.
Present an amazing poster at a conference and spend some time getting the word about prior to the conference about your work, so that when the organizers come by the poster session, they see your poster mobbed with people.
One thing you shouldn't do is respond to any of those conference solicitations for conferences you've never heard of, usually located in some Middle Eastern or Asian country. It's spam and they usually just bought a list of email addresses and did keyword targeting.
> 3 votes
# Answer
Volunteer to help organise meetings yourself & invite people. Even if this doesn't directly help you get attention (which it might), at least you'll understand the process better.
> 0 votes
---
Tags: conference, community, science
--- |
thread-1110 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1110 | Career advice - Getting a Math PhD admit in a good program with computer engineering background | 2012-04-10T05:51:26.427 | # Question
Title: Career advice - Getting a Math PhD admit in a good program with computer engineering background
I have read other threads along similar lines but I am looking for slightly different advice. And I am posting this anonymously because I would rather my current employer did not find out my intentions!
So, I have a bachelors and a masters degree in computer engineering and currently work in one of the top microprocessor companies, which would otherwise be considered the "dream job" for someone with my degrees. However, every day I realize how much I miss Math and really want to go back and have an opportunity to work more with math, particularly in the field of numerical analysis, scientific computing, matrix algebra and the like.
Supporting factors -
* I have always done well in math. I can get great recommendation letters from math professors I have taken courses with.
* I am a CRLA level 3 certified math tutor. I used to be one when in undergrad.
* I am preparing for Math GRE and am confident I can do well in it.
* Good undergrad math and engineering GPA.
* My masters thesis involved quite a bit of dealing with numbers, since I worked with various LINPACK benchmarks and linear algebra solvers.
Negative factors -
* I am not from a very highly reputed school.
* I have not published any papers, even though I did write a thesis for my MS in Computer Engineering.
* My math courses are the basic math courses engineering students take, along with graduate level math courses in numerical analysis, scientific computing and the like.
How do I go about getting a PhD admit in a reputed Math graduate school? How do I begin to convince professors / hiring committees that I am capable of doing a PhD in Math? I am only looking at quitting my company and switching to PhD studies around either of Fall 2013 or Fall 2014, so I have time. What are some extra-curricular 'outside my day job' activities I can pursue that would further solidify my application in the meantime?
# Answer
A concern (raised by your background) that occurs to me is that do you really have a clear idea what graduate programs in math are all about? I don't think that any reputable grad school would allow you to study numerical analysis alone ... \[Edit taking note of Willie's remark\] *within a graduate program in pure math* \- the scene is markedly different if you are applying into a program in applied and/or computational math. I apologize for not knowing that such possibilities exist. My smalltown background left me with the false impression that math and applied math always come together. Such programs may be better suited for you!\[/Edit\] (continued rant) ... For the simple reason that doing research in math requires familiarity with a variety of tools and theories from adjacent, nearby and occasionally relatively remote areas of mathematics.
Is entering a computer science/computer engineering graduate program not an option? Probably you can specialize in scientific computing/numerical analysis in such a program. It may actually be easier to find an advisor in such a topic at a CS department? I don't know for sure, but it sounds like such a plan would entail less risk.
Our resident experts on numerical analysis/scientific computing can give you more useful advice. Below I will say my bit.
---
Before you burn your boats I would recommend, as an extra-curricular activity, that you take a look at what the obligatory 1st year courses of math programs have in store for you. The *core math* at a typical US grad school (for 1st year grad students) contains at lest topology, abstract algebra, real analysis (sorry the link is only to measure theory, couldn't find a more fitting Wikipedia article at this time) and complex analysis. Some places would offer/recommend/require also mathematical logic. After the first year, you are expected to display a working understanding of the theories and results that those articles link to, and be able to reproduce their proofs on demand (ok, the committees will likely give you some slack on the more esoteric proofs, but don't count on it). The depth of those course probably depends on how much ivy the school has. I cannot give details on that for the simple reason that my experience is from a reputable but not top notch grad school, and I have only heard rumors about the others :-).
Only after having covered those basics can you start specializing on a topic that interests you the most.
I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm. I just had a few fellow grad students who were surprised by the graduate curriculum, and either dropped out or had a hard time making through the 1st year. My concern is that you may not fully appreciate how limited your exposure to math actually is (given your background). GRE is a joke, but it does test that you can speedily pick the correct calculus concept/theorem off the shelf in your brains and apply it.
So if going through those links just makes you hungry to learn more, then 'full steam ahead!', but otherwise you may want to reconsider.
> 16 votes
# Answer
Pure mathematics isn't your only choice for a PhD, and may not be the best fit with a computer engineering background.
I'm currently a masters student in a MS/PhD program in computational engineering after getting a B.S. in applied math. Computational engineering is very different from computer engineering. It is a field which combines numerical analysis, linear algebra and parallel programming to solve engineering problems which are typically modeled as coupled systems of partial differential (or integral) equations.
In my program, the focus is on fluid dynamics, but there are others that focus on geophysics, structural dynamics, electromagnetics, etc. One of the advantages of this program is that it brings together people from mathematics, engineering and computer science, both in faculty and students, so you get a different perspective on problems than you would working strictly with other mathematicians.
If this sounds interesting, you may want to check out the Computational Science board here on Stack Exchange.
> 8 votes
# Answer
I don't know howto respond individually, so I am just going to respond here all together.
@Willie, thanks, I have registered an account now. @Zev, thanks for migrating to academia. I didn't know this site even existed till now, and I am hooked. I will be posting with my regular SO account here :)
@Tonymac, computational engineering would be ideal. That's exactly the kind of thing I am looking for as well, and that's precisely what excited me during my undergrad days and motivated me to take a lot of math grad courses as electives in my undergrad program.
Coming back, let me re-emphasize. I am currently employed, just moved to Austin, Tx. I am only going to be applying for Fall 2014 for the most part, and that gives me an year to prepare. My question is, how do I "best" use the time till then? There are some advise I have seen on here that say "use your time productively". What would "productively" be in this case? What are the things I could do in the meanwhile to improve my application when I do apply?
> 2 votes
---
Tags: graduate-admissions, career-path
--- |
thread-1140 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1140 | Master Degree or Job? | 2012-04-16T13:02:18.577 | # Question
Title: Master Degree or Job?
I am recent graduate from a UK university in computer science. As I am not sure what to study for my master degree, I went for a Web-Developer graduate job, and got accepted. As I will probably go for a master in 1-2 years, I was wondering if my undergraduate degree will be consider useless. And my master degree will possibly have nothing to do with the job I am currently accepted for. For example if I choose to do a master degree in computer graphics. Will that be a problem? (I have modules related to computer graphics in my degree, so my question is that will they be still valuable after 1-2 years as computer technology changes everyday) help? thanks!
(this may not be the best forum in stack exchange to ask these, but it is the closest)
# Answer
> 7 votes
Generally, the latest/greatest degree you have is considered the most important.
Technology does change quickly, but principles change less rapidly. So if you have a good degree, it won't matter so much that technology changes. If you know the principles, then you can learn new technologies and more advanced concepts. If you only know how to use some specific set of tool, then you might have trouble as technology evolves.
In general, a masters degree may help you get a better initial job, especially if you want to do something specialised, such as computer graphics, security or data mining, but once you have a job your experience will matter most, not your grades or degree.
---
Tags: education
--- |
thread-1136 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1136 | How can I improve my research experience for PhD application? | 2012-04-16T09:55:15.693 | # Question
Title: How can I improve my research experience for PhD application?
It's well-known that many grad schools (especially top-ranked) require some research experience from prospective students and consider this as main criterion for accept/reject decision.
During undergraduate study I was working on my research (hadn't finished it - had solved just one particular case) - but can't say it was great research. Now I work as software developer in subdivision of national Academy of Science. My position requires only coding, no problem solving (there's no projects here requiring any fundamential research).
How can I make any research (better related to my field of interests) without being undergrad or MS student, without working in lab. Can I simply choose interesting problem (e.g. my undegrad problem), work hard to solve it and then refer to that in research statement? Who should write letter of recommendation in this case? Or I must have any advisor (who can verify my results and then write recommendation letter for me)? Can it be unofficial advisor (just researcher I know well)?
# Answer
> 11 votes
From my experience, there are three reasons why potential advisors want to see undergraduate research:
1. Show that the student cares enough about research to actually have participated in research during their undergraduate years.
2. Student is at least somewhat familiar with the ins-and-outs of performing academic research in a university setting.
3. The quality of the performed research may give some indication as to how "good" of a student the candidate will be.
If you perform research yourself outside of the university settings, you'll provide a strong showing for (1), nothing at all for (2), and given that you're unlikely to publish anything, nothing of much use to the advisor for (3).
To that end, I would try to get a job as a research assistant before applying. (I'm not sure this position exists in all fields.) This is usually a paid position, and will give you an experience to work with research, help run a lab, learn about academia, and and even possibly work towards being acknowledged--or even possibly a co-author, although that's unlikely--in a paper. It should help your application significantly.
# Answer
> 7 votes
You can consider the possibility of **becoming a research assistant or research associate** in the research group you want to join, before applying for Phd program.
You can try to contact the reseach group leader and ask him/her if they have possibility (i.e. funding) and willing to assume you for some months as research associate. By this way, the group is able to know you and test you; you're able to work, get paid, do research, publish papers, and so **reinforce** your PhD candidacy.
Them, when the Phd announcement will be out, you'll be a A-star candidate ;-)
---
Tags: research-process, graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-1144 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1144 | The etiquette of leaving a faculty position | 2012-04-17T01:22:47.267 | # Question
Title: The etiquette of leaving a faculty position
If a tenure track professor wants to leave their university for another job, how much in advance should they inform their department chair? The standard two weeks notice probably doesn't apply.
And what times of the year are okay to leave? Only in the summer or between the fall and spring semesters?
The faculty member doesn't feel mistreated and doesn't want to ruin ties at their current university.
# Answer
The following rules are pretty standard:
1. It's not reasonable to quit in the middle of a class except in a dire emergency (for example, a serious health problem). In practice this means you can quit only between semesters, unless you aren't currently teaching. Many universities plan their teaching one year at a time, in which case quitting in between the fall and spring semesters may be a problem.
2. You should try hard to leave enough time for your university to find a replacement for your future teaching. For example, for a US-style semester system, announcing in January that you will leave as of the next academic year (starting in September) is probably reasonable. Announcing it in April is more problematic, but it might be OK if you have to. Announcing it in June is a serious problem, and announcing it in August is a disaster.
3. It's common for tenured, and sometime tenure-track, faculty to go on leave for a year or two rather than immediately resigning, even if they are sure they won't return. If your chair offers you that option, then you should definitely take it. Turning it down (and resigning instead) comes across as an insult: you are effectively saying that your new job is so much better that you can't imagine ever wanting to return.
> 42 votes
---
Tags: etiquette, professorship
--- |
thread-1148 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1148 | Updating a preprint when it is under review | 2012-04-17T07:00:58.423 | # Question
Title: Updating a preprint when it is under review
I know that preprints deposited into a preprint server should be in a polished state. However, what should happen once it starts the review process? Should those copy-edits be updated on the preprint? What about updates when replying to reviewer's comments? What if the manuscript is rejected and I am rewriting the manuscript to be resubmitted to another journal in another format?
# Answer
> 9 votes
In principle, anything that happens to *the content of* a paper **before printing** (ie, formal publication) should be reflected in the **pre-print**. So yes, if you correct a bug while the paper is in review, or revise the paper for a new submission, then you should update the preprint.
However, some journals object to authors' posting post-copy-edited (or even post-refereed) revisions. And posting a revision while a paper is under review could interfere with the reviewing process. When in doubt, ask your editor.
Frequent updates may earn you a reputation for being sloppy, especially on a system like the ArXiv that publishes the preprint's revision history. (Why didn't you fix those bugs before you uploaded the first time?) But that's still better than leaving a buggy preprint out in the wild, thereby earning you a reputation for not even knowing (or caring) that you're sloppy. The right answer, of course, is to debug your papers *before* you post them!
---
Tags: publications, preprint, copy-editing
--- |
thread-417 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/417 | Any reason not to apply for funding as a grad student? | 2012-02-24T00:28:08.210 | # Question
Title: Any reason not to apply for funding as a grad student?
The question is hypothetical, but it came up in a conversation and I'd like to see if we can come up with a logical analysis and conclusion. For various reasons, *graduate students* might not be inclined to apply for funding.
By *funding* I mean grants or scholarships intended to support graduate students directly in the form of money given *directly* to the student. That is, I am *not* talking about applying for research scholarships intended to fund an experiment, buy equipment, etc. Here are a few (made up) examples.
***Case 1 (Differential)***. I get 20000 of internal departmental funding but be encouraged by the department to apply for external funding. If I then get 5000 scholarship, then the departmental policy might be to drop the internal funding to 15000, so I don't apply for it.
***Case 2 (Rich Student)***. I am very wealthy and I have no need for funding. I am a brilliant student and could probably get many different scholarships but I chose not to because I feel other students with less money need the money more.
The "Rich Student" scenario is slightly different than the "Differential" scenario. If I am rich then for sure some other poorer student could have gotten the money, whereas in the "Differential" scenario, I am now only getting 15000 so another student will get the 5000 anyway.
The problem with not applying for scholarships is that I don't get scholarships, and in many fields winning scholarships is good for your academic career. Perhaps in some fields this is more important than others.
Overwhelmingly I've heard that one should always apply for scholarships regardless of circumstances because of this. Of course theoretically, I could bypass my "rich student morality" by using it to do something useful for the community.
Personally, although I am not in these situations, I feel that it is most beneficial to always apply for scholarships, I would just like to have some kind of evidence that support this.
**So to put this in a definitive question: for graduate students, is there ever a reason not to apply for at least a few available scholarships?**
# Answer
* Reward to ratio of the application. If you already have some funding, and the additional funding is small compared to the time required to apply for it. For example, you have an NSF fellowship at ~$30k/yr, so it might not be worth applying to $2k scholarships which take a week or two of time.
* Reward to ratio of the work. You don't want to take on a new project.
* The project isn't relevant to your line of work.
* You aren't qualified (GPA, citizenship, or status limitations)
> 18 votes
# Answer
Beyond @mankoff's answer of it not being worth it (I've chosen not to apply for fellowships with a poor reward:effort ratio), you might not be *allowed* to. For example, many fellowships, NIH training grants etc. have rules about what other funding you can get (especially for the same project).
> 9 votes
# Answer
Why didn't I apply to the NSF pre-doctoral scholarship during my second year of grad school?
1. **Time** \- I didn't have any. And since I was doing a different project from what I proposed when I applied my previous year, I would have had to write my application over from scratch.
2. **Feedback from previous year** \- my subject GRE score was not high enough. Even though I could have re-taken the exam for free, I didn't have time to study for it all over again.
3. **I had a stipend** \- Even though the award would have increased my yearly stipend by about $6k, the chances seemed slim and I felt my time was better spent being on top of my course work, studying for my qualifying exam, and getting a good start on my thesis project.
(Full disclosure: after passing my quals I opted to leave grad school with a MS instead of finishing the PhD. I've been employed full-time at academic or industry labs since.)
> 6 votes
# Answer
I refuse to abide by the **rich student** frame of thought. If the rich student has funding and works for a PI, then that PI is then able to fund another student. Graduate Fellowships should not always be considered a zero-sum game.
However, certain fellowships like SMART involve military service. Others like the NIH NRSA prevent you from taking summer internships. I see both as pretty valid reasons for not bothering to apply.
> 4 votes
# Answer
The "Differential" argument doesn't really even hold as much weight as you'd think, because many departments will reward you with a bonus for bringing in an outside fellowship. Then it becomes even more of an incentive to obtain an outside fellowship.
In addition to this, external awards make you more attractive to potential advisors, since you don't cost them as much in the long run to support you. In some cases, this even makes the difference between being able to work on a project of one's own choosing, versus a project for which the advisor has funding.
So, the only reasons I can think of why one wouldn't want to apply for at least some sort of fellowship support are:
* Being a fantastically rich student, who can pay his own tuition and stipend support for the full duration of the program, or
* Being a student of extremely limited means, who can't afford the costs of reporting GRE or scores or transcripts to the various funding agencies. (In many cases, though, "hardship waivers" are available that renders even this point moot.)
> 3 votes
---
Tags: graduate-school, funding
--- |
thread-1165 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1165 | Planning to do PHD, Masters Thesis important? (USA) | 2012-04-17T23:19:53.063 | # Question
Title: Planning to do PHD, Masters Thesis important? (USA)
I am a master's student in computer science. I have completed my coursework and will be graduating soon, with a project. I am planning to do a PhD in the future: is a master's thesis an important prerequisite for a PhD? Most people say yes, hence I am of two minds: (1) get an extension and improve my project into thesis, and then graduate or (2) graduate now, hoping that everything will work out fine. I already expressed my interest to work more on my project; my advisor said OK. Do I need to do anything other than this (improving my project, of course with research exploration) to get a thesis? My advisor seems to be a little uninterested, because he has to guide other students, too, rather than that I did a bad job on the project. But I am wondering which way to go: industry or master's thesis?
# Answer
> 2 votes
Your last question is a bit of a *non sequitur*, frankly: I don't really see the connection between going into industry versus doing a master's thesis with the rest of the question.
That said, JeffE's comment above is essentially correct: if you are interested in doing a PhD in the near future, an industrial job is probably not going to get you the research experience you need to be a competitive PhD applicant.
With respect to what you need to do to convert your project into a master's thesis, that's really something you ought to discuss with your project supervisor. Without knowing the specific policies of your department, as well as the specifics of what you did in the project, it's difficult (if not impossible) for us to know what needs to be done.
---
Tags: phd, professorship, masters
--- |
thread-1150 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1150 | When is it appropriate for a post-doc/grad student to be the senior author? | 2012-04-17T08:42:45.277 | # Question
Title: When is it appropriate for a post-doc/grad student to be the senior author?
This is slightly different from What does author order indicate?. Our group has debated when would it be appropriate for a student or a post-doc to be considered the senior ie. the corresponding author.
As an aside, for CV building purposes, would it be more beneficial to be the first author or the last author? Does it matter if one is an academic vs. in the industry?
# Answer
Assuming that you're not in a field where it's "strictly alphabetical order" (like economics), the question of which position is more important depends on what stage of your career you're in.
If you are a *beginning* academic—a PhD student or a postdoctoral fellow—then the **first**-author publications are most important, as these will show you taking an active and leading role in your research. As you move up the chain, however, and reach more senior positions, having the **last**-author credit becomes more important, as now you're showing your leadership role in directing projects. You don't want to be stuck in the trap of being a "junior" partner in research collaborations, with the senior PI getting all of the credit for the work.
> 3 votes
# Answer
In my field (Computer Science), I usually assume that the first author and/or the "corresponding author" is the one who "did most of the work" and the last author is the one who secured the funding to do said work. In some cases the latter does not exist (*e.g.*, if a publication is not funded by a research grant/contract) or these are both the same person. In my opinion and experience, the author with the greatest technical contribution should be the corresponding author. This is because most inquiries to the corresponding author will be technical in nature. If I were interested in contacting the authors of a paper for a non-technical reason (*e.g.*, an inquiry to team for a competitive proposal) and I were unfamiliar with the authors (which is unlikely), then I would do a quick Internet search to determine if any of the authors are advisors of the others and contact the most senior one in terms of academic rank.
Therefore, I think it is perfectly appropriate and even desirable for whomever provided the greatest technical contribution to be the senior author. This may vary by discipline and/or country, however.
> 7 votes
# Answer
A few points.
1. Most(?) PhD students don't stay in academia. If they a planning on leaving academia for some other profession, does it really make sense for them to be a corresponding author? Once a PhD student has left Uni it's hard enough to get them motivated to write any papers, never mind answer future questions on it! Ditto for RAs, not all RAs stay in academia.
2. Let's suppose a PhD student does stay in academia and goes on to do an RA. It's unlikely to be on the same topic, so they won't be able to keep on top of the subject.
3. As @aeismail mentioned, I really don't pay attention to who the corresponding author is. If you are doing a PhD with a well known researcher, anyone who looks at the paper will automatically assume that the senior person had the original idea. The junior author gets to dispel this "myth" by giving really good presentations or by "author order".
> 3 votes
---
Tags: authorship
--- |
thread-1085 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1085 | Software/App for electronic research notebooks | 2012-04-10T18:20:10.640 | # Question
Title: Software/App for electronic research notebooks
I want to keep a research notebook for my computational "experiments". Basically, I should at least be able to write text and attach images like plots. Other nice features to have would be
1. linking to past experiments/pages
2. latex equations
3. uploading papers, or other urls
4. being able to transfer data
5. dating and version control
6. open-source tool
I am already familiar with trello and tiddlywiki. Trello is good for attaching stuff and organising tasks, but I need a notebook where I attach a plot, write stuff around it, attach another below it. It doesn't have a paper or canvas. Tiddlywiki is a little painful for attaching pics and equations, the file bloats, it seems I am keeping a blog.
What is a good, free electronic notebook tool for research/lab work?
# Answer
For the last month, I have been using Gitit for this purpose. That link goes to a live demo where you can try it out. It satisfies all your requirements:
1. It's a wiki, so you can easily make links between pages.
2. It's built on pandoc, which understands TeX and uses MathJax to render it (it technically renders a subset of TeX, but it's a pretty substantial subset)
3. It's actually a Git repository, so you can upload anything you want to it. Or just put your figures out on the web (via figshare or a public Dropbox link) and link to them.
4. Same as 3.
5. Again, it's Git.
6. It is open source: https://github.com/jgm/gitit
As a bonus, you can put it out publicly on the web if you want (or just run it locally on your machine). I run it on an internal server at my University and my students and post-docs use it to. Thus it's a convenient way to share information as well.
> 12 votes
# Answer
For uploading papers and annotating them, I use mendeley. To organize my citations, I use citeulike which is nifty for it bibtex entry generation. I also use Jabref locally on my computer to manage my papers.
I am into numerical simulations as well and I generally add my results to latex documents (figures and all) as I eventually need it in a latex format for my dissertation! Plus this way, I save time!
Have you tried google notebook? I haven't used it in at least 3 years so I don't quite know how good it is now.
Good luck!
> 7 votes
# Answer
# Org-mode
I use Org-mode to organize and track my research. It is an Emacs major mode that seems to hit most of your requirements. The .org files are plain text which should guard against bloat and lets you access them anywhere, even when you do not have Emacs or Org-mode available.
> linking to past experiments/pages
Org-mode has linking capability to any type of file, as well as to specific locations in a document.
> latex equations
Org-mode has support not only for LaTeX equations but for a number of programming languages via org-babel. You can include the code blocks inside your .org file.
> uploading papers, or other URLs.
Because it is only a text file, this sort of behavior can be accomplished through the linking mechanism. The links can be to other documents/papers on your machine or URLs. Visiting a URL in Org-mode will open your browser to the requested link.
> being able to transfer data.
I am unsure what you are looking for here. Org-mode has a nice built-in table editor with automatic column width adjustment and some spreadsheet behavior. If you do not want the actual data in the .org file, you can always link to do the data. If you are looking to import data into the file directly, Org-mode has a function `org-table-import` that will parse TAB or whitespace separated data into an Org table.
> dating and version control
I use Org-mode to track my time spent on various research items. You can set the headings in Org-mode to behave like multi-state TODO lists and assign time to them. Most headings start as TODO, switch to STARTED when I clock in on them, and then I can update them to DONE when I am finished. It can also generate reports based on your tracked time. For example, I use a built-in report for the last week to help generate weekly research updates.
I handle my version control and distribution through Dropbox, but since the files are plain text any version control system you are comfortable with should work fine.
> open-source tool
Org-mode is open source.
Org-mode also can be set to display inline images, so even though the actual .org file stays in plain text for VCS, when you open the file in Org-mode you can view the images, and comment on them accordingly.
While the .org files themselves are plain text, Org-mode has a number of export options, including LaTeX, PDF, HTML, DocBook, OpenDocument and others. So if you want to turn your research notebook into something more visually appealing than a plain text file, there are many options. I would recommend this paper for a good description of what Org-mode can do in a research environment.
The downside is that it is a mode for Emacs. If you are not already using Emacs it has a steep learning curve and can require extensive customization to get things running exactly the way you want. Org-mode and AUCTeX (the Emacs LaTeX mode) are the reasons I spent the time to learn to work with Emacs and I have not been disappointed. However, if you are looking to get something up and running quickly (and are not already familiar with Emacs) it may not be your best option.
> 6 votes
# Answer
Check out GitHub hosted blogs using what's called "jekyll": -http://jekyllrb.com/ -https://github.com/mojombo/jekyll (see the wiki tab for example sites) -Easy way to start: use jekyll bootstrap or octopress
Jekyll is just a bunch of code that makes it easy to have stuff that you have on blogs/lab notebooks: tags, pagination, etc.
Some cool things are that its free, open source, versioned, handles images/papers/etc, can integrate comments (I use Disqus).
It does require a bit of a learning curve over other blog platforms, but its well worth it.
> 5 votes
# Answer
I personally use VoodooPad, which is basically a personal wiki, in conjunction with LaTeXiT for latex equations. I've found it to work very well; you can store many things in it, including papers. It's all text-based so you can back up using Git or whatever you like. They have a free version. Not open source.
I'm surprised nobody's mentioned Evernote. They claim you can put anything at all in it, and from what I've seen, that's true. Backup to Evernote cloud. Free, not open source.
> 2 votes
# Answer
It sounds like you're looking for something like http://figshare.com
It's part of Digital Science, which is part of the same family of companies as Nature Publishing, but I know the guy who runs it and I think he's really sharp & going about things the right way.
> 0 votes
---
Tags: productivity, tools, note-taking, software
--- |
thread-1162 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1162 | How useful is it to perform a systematic literature review? | 2012-04-17T20:34:33.430 | # Question
Title: How useful is it to perform a systematic literature review?
How well accepted has been (systematic) literature reviews in your research field, these days?!
I come from computer science field, more specifically Software Engineering. Some professors I keep in touch usually ask their students to perform a systematic literature review (SLR) as a research kickoff, rather than performing any kind of unstructured review. However, it's become harder and harder to get such kind of publication accepted in a highly-ranked publication (e.g., a qualified journal or conf). My feeling is that, in a certain extent, the community has already saturated the amount of papers reporting on reviews.
Hence, I'd like to know a point of view of people from other research fields, as well as their expertise on measuring the tradeoff time devoted to conduct a SRL vs. likelihood of having such a kind of publication accepted by a good venue.
# Answer
> 8 votes
A systematic literature review is never a bad thing. At the worst, you have a large database of literature that you can cite in future work. as well as a feeling for where the "low-hanging fruit" might lie. It will also give you a framework on which to build and grow your literature collection over time.
So whether or not you are able to publish it, a literature review is a good thing (within reason—don't spend six months doing nothing but reading literature papers!).
# Answer
> 4 votes
In Mechanical/Aerospace engineering it has been my experience that most research projects start off with a systematic review. Some journals will consider such reviews for publication, but the goal is usually not a publication, but to build a background in the area and to find potential gaps in current research.
Another thing I have found helpful is to periodically review your review. This is important especially for longer term projects (PhDs, continuations/extension of previous research). I try to do a quick followup review every few months or so to make sure my review stays current. The duration between updates will vary based on the research and the discipline. Once you have the initial review in place, keeping it current should take only a little bit of time and effort.
# Answer
> 3 votes
In Epidemiology (and medicine generally) systematic literature reviews - and the meta-analysis subset that come from systematic reviews that can report pooled summary estimates - are extremely well accepted.
A novel systematic review, while it will take some time, is generally speaking worth a publication at least somewhere - unless someone has already done said review, at which point your work is done anyway. They've also started to be parsed as "no more work than you should have been doing anyway" - in order to get good priors for Bayesian analysis, a truly comprehensive view of the literature, etc. you might very well already be doing a systematic review.
---
Tags: literature
--- |
thread-712 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/712 | How to prevent plagiarism of my papers? | 2012-03-13T21:54:24.333 | # Question
Title: How to prevent plagiarism of my papers?
I have recently discovered that several of my papers have been plagiarized in order to create one paper, and that this paper has been published at a conference. I informed the organizers of the conference and the editor, and there is now notice of violation attached to the online version of this paper, so this problem has been solved.
However, I came to know this paper only by accident (someone contacted my co-author, and told him that this paper looked a lot like ours), and potentially, we could have missed it. So my question is: are there some techniques I could use to detect such cases?
I don't think that it's possible to detect all cases in general (because sometimes, it can be hard to distinguish between inspiration and plagiarism, and I would actually be quite glad with being a source of inspiration) but can I at least detect the most blatant ones? (in this particular example, 3/4 of the paper was actually a copy/paste from ours, and they were citing some of our other papers).
Note that as a completely childish and probably useless reaction, I've actually stopped putting my papers on my webpage. I doubt it can solve the problem though, but at least I felt like doing something :)
# Answer
> 26 votes
I'd argue that you shouldn't worry too much about preventing plagiarism of your papers. At least in the areas I'm familiar with (math and theoretical CS), it's extremely unlikely to do you much harm.
To be clear, I'm talking about wholesale plagiarism of written text. There can be much trickier situations - for example, if your rival learns an idea from you in a private conversation and then claims you learned it from him - but that's a subject for another question.
Plagiarism happens all the time, on a massive scale, but you don't see it very often because it takes place at the margins: usually in junk journals or conferences, and occasionally in solid but low-prestige venues. This is by design, since plagiarists know that if they attract too much attention, they'll get caught. Nobody submits a plagiarized paper hoping to get lots of citations. Instead, they just want credit for having published something, usually because of some external pressure.
One fear people sometimes have is of being caught in an ambiguous situation, where it's not completely clear who the plagiarist is. In the areas I'm familiar with, this never happens. The community is always quite sure of who is to blame, and as far as I can tell they are always right. This is a valid worry in principle, but it's not worth losing sleep over.
Another fear is that the plagiarist will attract attention and citations that should have gone to your paper. As I mentioned above, that's not likely. These papers are typically almost unnoticed, and if they do get noticed, then that's just a prelude to getting caught.
Plagiarism is still a serious problem, and plagiarists are cheating the system, but in the fields I'm talking about, they are generally not specifically hurting the authors they are copying from.
Putting your papers online makes it slightly easier to plagiarize them, but it's not really contributing much to the problem, since there are so many possible sources. (There has even been a paper plagiarized from an advertisement for a consulting firm! See http://www.siam.org/journals/plagiary/index.php. It's amazing how much garbage there is out there, and how unscrupulous some authors are.)
Instead, making your papers as visible and accessible as possible makes it more likely that plagiarists will be caught. And, of course, this is in addition to all the other benefits of making it easy to read your papers.
Vanity googling can also help: I periodically do searches for topics I care about, or to see who is citing my papers, and I've caught several plagiarists that way.
The arXiv flags papers whose text overlaps nontrivially with a previous paper. This means in fields where arXiv use is widespread, plagiarists can't get away with using the arXiv, so they are further marginalized.
Unfortunately, after plagiarism is discovered, there is little or nothing you can do to ensure that the plagiarist is punished. Reputable conferences or journals will investigate the situation and flag or withdraw the paper; less reputable ones will ignore you and hope you quit asking about it, although they will sometimes act if you publicize it enough. The plagiarist's employer probably won't do anything, no matter how serious the case is. What I'd recommend is that you try to correct the literature, and report the incident to the plagiarist's employer (assuming the paper was published as part of their job), but not worry too much about getting any action from the employer. If pursuing the case further would give you some satisfaction, then that's a good reason to do it, but don't do it with the expectation of concrete results. If you're lucky, you'll get a letter explaining that something awkward might or might not have happened, that everyone involved is very sorry for any hurt feelings, that whatever did happen wasn't really anyone's fault, but that it won't happen again. (Sadly, it often does.)
# Answer
> 26 votes
You've handled the conference plagiarism very well.
But then you say you've stopped putting your papers on your website: and I'm afraid that that is completely counter-productive.
It would be far more helpful for editors, reviewers and publishers to have your papers on your website, indexed by all the usual search bots, and clearly copyrighted and time-stamped. That makes it easier for them to spot duplicate content, early on.
The point of publishing your work is to get it disseminated. Very many journals allow authors to host preprints or similar on their own university web pages: do so. Get your stuff circulated as widely as possible. That gives you the best chance of other plagiarism of your work being spotted early on, in the future.
# Answer
> 14 votes
I would even say post your work on some kind of arXiv as soon as you can. My reasons are:
1. You might be lucky, and the reviewer will actually find it, and catch the dishonesty early (I always try to google related works when I get a review request).
2. if your work is there for a while, it has more chance that people saw it and affiliate that result with you, thus recognizing the plagiarizing work as such.
3. You have a date-stamp. With such a time-stamp it'd be easier to claim that your work (publicly) appeared before the time that the other work was submitted/conceived.
The interesting question is, whether you should cite the other work in your "related work" segment, and claim it to be plagiarism?! (:
# Answer
> 7 votes
Unfortunately, this is not really a problem you can solve yourself. There are simply too many journals behind individual paywalls (sometimes even in different languages) for you to be able to monitor this sort of thing by yourself.
On more of a philosophical note, I would argue that it's the responsibility of the journal editors to ensure that the papers they choose to publish are not plagarized from other works. They are the only ones who can really prevent it, as they are the ones who actually publish the papers; you, the author, reader, and sometimes reviewer, are just a consumer of their publication. Teachers and professors have access to resources such as TurnItIn.com; I'm not familiar with such a resource for academics, but I would definitely argue that it is the *responsibility* of the journals to ensure that every paper they publish is genuinely novel research. (This is not to say that the author has no responsibility; of course every researcher should publish ethically.)
# Answer
> 5 votes
When reviewing a paper via the EDAS portal, you can always look at the similarity score with other papers. in order to compute this similarity score, the use the iThenticate software.
I have also seen the CrossCheck software, but I cannot remember where or when (note that it is also powered by iThenticate).
I guess all these softwares can be used for individuals. As long as you pay...
---
Tags: publications, research-misconduct, plagiarism
--- |
thread-1169 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1169 | How to proceed when PhD advisor leaves academia or moves to a new university midway? | 2012-04-18T07:54:43.260 | # Question
Title: How to proceed when PhD advisor leaves academia or moves to a new university midway?
How can a PhD student proceed when his/her advisor quits midway?
* What should be the student's considerations when the professor offers him a choice to move along with him? Should it be the comparative rankings of the universities? Or the relationship enjoyed with the professor thus far? Or the progress of the work?
* Do universities offer to waiver coursework and ensure faster-than-usual graduation for students accompanying new professors? Can papers published in the older university be considered a part of the thesis that will be written for the newer department?
* What should a student do if such an option is not available to the professor and also there are not other professors in the department who could or are willing to guide the student? Will the university offer a compensation for him?
# Answer
One issue is what your advisor is doing. If your advisor is leaving academia (e.g., going to work on Wall Street or for the government), then you are probably on your own, but moving to another university is generally not a big problem.
If you haven't started doing research yet, you should probably just switch to a new advisor, but if you are already making progress, then staying with your current advisor is often the best approach.
One possibility that wasn't mentioned in your question is moving physically to the new university as a visiting student while staying enrolled at the old university. You still work on research with your advisor, and at the end receive a degree from the university you started at. Maybe it varies between fields, but this is pretty common in mathematics, and it avoids some of the difficulties like transferring credit or different requirements.
If your advisor is supportive (and they should be!), then this is generally not hard to arrange. It's easiest if they are technically going on leave from the old university, rather than resigning immediately, but that's a pretty common way to arrange moving between universities, partly because it simplifies situations like this. (And even if your advisor is not going on leave, you just need a colleague to step in as the formal advisor, while letting your advisor handle the day to day interaction.) The major reason for difficulty would be if there was some serious problem at the old university, such as a personality conflict with the department chair, which could make the department unwilling to be flexible.
> 37 votes
# Answer
I went through this experience, and I have friends who've gone through this experience, and it's never fun. You ask a lot of questions; I'll try to answer as many as I can.
1. > What should be the student's considerations when the professor offers him a choice to move along with him?
Consider the following:
1. How far along are you in your work? If you haven't proposed yet, it's probably easier just to find a new professor and start anew. If you haven't done any serious research yet (1-2 yrs), *definitely* find a new advisor and start fresh.
2. Did you have a good relationship with this person? Do you *want* to continue working with them?
3. Often, your credits will *not* follow you. (I don't have a source for this statement, other than I've been told by numerous people that graduate credits rarely transfer between institutions.) Make sure they will transfer, or that you will be given some sort of pass, before transferring.
Other stuff (rankings, location, collaborators) should obviously be taken into account as well. In my experience, most students do not move along with their advisor.
2. > Do universities offer coursework waiver and faster-than-usual graduation for students accompanying new professors?
Almost certainly not.
> Can papers published in the older university be considered a part of the thesis that will be written for the newer department?
Probably, talk with the university before transferring.
3. > What should a student do if such an option is not available to the professor and also there are not other professors in the department who could/are willing to guide the student? Will the university offer a compensation for him?
That's pretty unusual. This happens all the time; people are familiar with the situation. In many cases, the department will be willing to help you find someone new. You should view the ordeal as identical to when you chose your initial advisor; you'll probably do (shortened) interviews with a few profs, talk to lab members, look into research, etc. The difference is that, by now, you should be familiar with those people who do research similar to what you've been doing, so your search will be easier; you'll know them, and they should know you, even if only because you've taken a class with them or something.
You will almost definitely not receive compensation. C'est la vie, my friend... welcome to the real world.
> 20 votes
# Answer
I generally agree with @AnonymousMathematician that the easiest thing to do may simply be to visit the New University while staying an enrolled student at Old University. It may require checking with both departments, but then again so will and out and out transfer.
Another option that hasn't been mentioned:
It may be possible to convert your current advisor to an "outside reader" or simply a committee member who happens to have an appointment at another institution. The formal title of your "advisor" can then be switched to a member of your committee at your current institution - preferably one sympathetic and supportive of your situation.
> 12 votes
---
Tags: phd, graduate-school, advisor
--- |
thread-821 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/821 | Different types of conference publications | 2012-03-19T14:32:17.653 | # Question
Title: Different types of conference publications
Consider a conference publishing papers related to any EC/CS engineering field. What is the exact difference between different types of papers published in such a conference, i.e., main conference paper, mini-conference paper and workshop paper? Is it inferior to have one's work published in a mini-conference or workshop as opposed to a full conference? Are there any other such sessions within usual conferences for these areas?
# Answer
For the value of the publication, it will matter more how it is published than whether it's a workshop or conference. If the proceedings are published by a well-known publisher (i.e. with ISBN/ISSN), a workshop paper might be as "valuable" as a conference paper. If on the other hand there are no formal proceedings or just something like a folder, it would be less "valuable". That usually leaves the opportunity to publish the same paper elsewhere though.
Most workshops in CS don't have formal proceedings, so in general it would be better to publish at a conference. That said, in some cases the reviewing process for a workshop/symposium might be more stringent. As smaller events are more specialised, the feedback you get on your work might be better than at a bigger event.
I personally would always go for publication at a conference if I thought the content of the paper to be good enough.
> 11 votes
# Answer
Miniconferences and workshops are usually considered to be satellite events to a main conference. Often, these are on specialized topics, and often what starts as a workshop becomes a spin off conference of its own.
So it's tricky to say that it's inferior, but depending on the workshop/miniconference it might certainly be more specialized.
> 8 votes
# Answer
I agree with everything that has been said so far, but I'd like to add that one way to more quantitatively judge the "value" of a publication is by looking at the acceptance rate of the venue. Many conferences in Computer Science are considered "terminal" publications because of their extremely competitive nature and low acceptance rates. There are other conferences, however, that have 50% or higher acceptance rates. Likewise, some workshops are very competitive while others have near 100% acceptance rates.
> 3 votes
---
Tags: publications, conference
--- |
thread-1192 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1192 | What are some guidelines to keep in mind when selecting members of one's PhD committee? | 2012-04-19T04:17:23.633 | # Question
Title: What are some guidelines to keep in mind when selecting members of one's PhD committee?
Selecting members of one's PhD committee is an important part of a PhD student's academic development. Committee members can have considerable influence on a student's PhD program, such as determining what topics are on the student's prelims exams. However, sound advice on this process can be hard to find.
*What are some guidelines to keep in mind when selecting members of one's PhD committee?*
(This should be a generalized question useful for many different student-selected committee systems)
# Answer
There are some general guidelines for choosing members of a PhD committee:
* **They should have some enthusiasm for the work that you do.** If they're not invested in seeing you succeed, you won't get as much utility out of that committee member as someone else who might not be as knowledgeable, but is more committed.
* **They should have the time to be on your committee.** If they're extremely busy, then it doesn't help to have them on a committee, because it will be difficult for them to attend the meetings—or it will make scheduling the meetings a nightmare.
* **They should not have conflicts with either you or your advisor.** A thesis committee is already a somewhat political body. There's no need to add extra politics to the situation by having interpersonal or professional conflicts before the committee even begins to meet!
* **Collectively, there should not be a power "imbalance."** If your advisor is a new assistant professor, don't overload the committee with a bunch of full professors holding named chairs, and *vice versa*.
When they will set preliminary exams, there's the additional qualification of:
* The committee members should be familiar enough with your area that they know what it might make sense to test you on, but not *so* familiar with your work that they turn it into a "gotcha" game.
> 17 votes
# Answer
aeismail's post is very good, and just to add another few:
* How difficult of a committee member are they? Some people will ask you to do far more work than others, and they typically have a reputation as such. It's worth trying to find that out and saving yourself the headache.
* Many universities allow one or two committee members from outside the university. If there is a particular subject matter expert you would like to consult, feel free to ask them to serve on your committee... it can help you build a relationship with them and get their feedback on your research.
> 6 votes
---
Tags: phd, thesis-committee
--- |
thread-1214 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1214 | Tips for engineering students applying math in their research | 2012-04-20T15:25:09.163 | # Question
Title: Tips for engineering students applying math in their research
I hold an engineering undergraduate degree in EC. When I went to a good school for my post-grad, I found that research in many EC/CS departments required a lot of core math expertise which my UG lacked. It took me a whole lot of time to accustom myself and complete the courses. At the end of the coursework, I was able to thoroughly appreciate the development of the theory (in my case, real analysis, measure and probability theory).
When working on an engineering problem, I was able to understand fundamental ideas in many papers, thanks to the courses. Yet when it came to using the math for solving my own problem, I found things arduously difficult. In other words, non-intuitive math was well beyond me.
I regularly find top academic researchers in engineering fluently pulling off sophisticated mathematical results in their work. What tips could you suggest for someone with an engineering (or non-math) background requiring mathematical sophistication for their research?
# Answer
> 9 votes
My background is in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, so I cannot comment on EC/CS directly. However, much of my work is mathematical in nature, so generally speaking I would offer the following:
1. Do not be intimidated those fluent mathematical results. In my experience, for every "hit" that has an elegant result there were probably multiple "misses" that did not lead anywhere.
2. Balance perseverance with distance. Even techniques that seem ideally suited to your problem will inevitably have challenges, otherwise someone would likely have published the result already. It is important to stay positive and keep working at it. At the same time, sometimes it helps to take a step back and work on something else for awhile and give your mind a break. When you get some distance from your original problem, you may find an insight that helps you to overcome your roadblock.
3. Read widely. I am sure you have been reading papers related to whatever problems you are working on, but oftentimes there are techniques used in tangentially related or even unrelated fields that may be adapted to work on a problem in your area. Even if such studies do not lead to a usable result for your current work, they may lead to inspiration down the road.
Just like in your classes, learning to apply mathematical techniques to research problems takes time and practice. If it is possible, try to scale down your problem as much as you can to something very basic. Finding a solution to the more basic problem will increase your confidence in the method. Then you can slowly start to scale your problem back up. By attacking the problem this way, you get a number of small successes that help build your background with whatever techniques you use. Overcoming the smaller problems can give insight into the issues you may be having with your larger problem as well.
---
Tags: phd, engineering
--- |
thread-963 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/963 | Considerations when negotiating a promotion from postdoc to researcher? | 2012-03-31T01:14:28.520 | # Question
Title: Considerations when negotiating a promotion from postdoc to researcher?
I am currently a postdoc at an American university, and have been offered a promotion to something between postdoc and faculty (there is not a specific title, yet, but something like "soft-money academic staff researcher").
Are there any job-related benefits (other than standard health and retirement) that I could request when negotiating this position? Are there any requests that I should *not* make?
For example, the following come to mind - are all of these appropriate requests, and what should I consider when making such requests?
* authorship on project-related publications
* research support
+ undergraduate assistants
+ misc research
* private office
* professional development
+ opportunities to teach courses
+ money to attend conferences
+ adjunct faculty status (so that I can advise students, apply for grants)
+ other opportunities to support later advancement?
* some projected timeline of raises and advancement
* my role (and degree of autonomy, or lack thereof) when managing students and postdocs. Although part of my position, these folks are are working for multiple PI's.
# Answer
This varies enormously between universities (see Suresh and JeffE's comments, for example). At some schools, having a soft-money position means very little. They are basically just saying you are allowed to use their name to apply for grants, and to pay for things like office space using grant funding (including overhead). In such a case, there may not be much to negotiate over, since they intend to make a profit from you, not spend money on you. You could ask for adjunct status, and the salary requested in grant applications might be determined by the university, but most of your other issues (space, travel, equipment, assistants, etc.) would be handled in the course of dealing with individual grant applications, rather than specified in advance. The key would be getting large enough grants to pay for them.
At other schools, particularly in medical fields but sometimes elsewhere too, being a research professor can be very serious: you may be a full faculty member, attending and voting in faculty meetings, with the possibility of tenure. Of course, tenure on a soft-money position doesn't mean much, since the university never gives you a salary. If you don't get grants, you don't get paid. But it does mean that as long as you get grants, the university cannot get rid of you. (This can be a genuine issue in some soft-money positions. If the regular faculty don't think you meet their usual standards, then the department chair may eventually be tempted to push you to leave, so you do not seem like a permanent fixture and start to affect the department's reputation too much, or to make your lower status clear in other ways. A tenured soft-money position is a real indication that the department values you, even if they aren't paying for you.)
How you should negotiate really depends on the sort of position. It can't hurt to ask how anything you care about works, and the worst case scenario is being told it's not negotiable.
One thing I'd avoid bringing up is authorship issues. This is something that should be discussed at the level of individual projects, and bringing it up here may make people worry that you are asking for something inappropriate (like guaranteed authorship just for providing funding), even if you have nothing like that in mind. If you do discuss it, you should make it very clear that you are just making sure everyone is on the same page, rather than trying to negotiate special rules that would be guaranteed to apply to your job.
One thing I'd add is grace periods between grants. If all goes well, you'll arrange overlapping funding, so you will not have a period with no active funding. However, it might well happen if you aren't lucky, so you should discuss how that would work. For example, if you had a gap between grants, would they immediately take away your office when the first grant expired? If you reached a state in which all your grant proposals had been rejected, with no pending applications, then would that be the end of your job? Or would they allow you some period of time to continue making applications?
> 12 votes
---
Tags: career-path, funding, job-search, postdocs, negotiation
--- |
thread-1219 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1219 | Why do so few universities offer OpenCourseWare videos of their lessons? | 2012-04-21T04:55:12.880 | # Question
Title: Why do so few universities offer OpenCourseWare videos of their lessons?
OpenCourseWare has become more and more popular over the years, and quite a good number of universities make their lessons available in the form of online videos. However, compared to the total number of universities found in the US or rest of the world, the offerings are quite small. It seems to me that OpenCourseWare is a great way for schools to draw attention to themselves, so why is the percentage of schools offering OCW courses small?
# Answer
> 19 votes
Making an OpenCourseWare course isn't as simple as getting a team of kids with videocameras and uploading the course onto YouTube. There is a surprisingly high standard that the Professor and the University attempts to meet when they prepare a course to be deposited onto OpenCourseWare.
Stanford had built entire classrooms for the purpose of sharing online classes. Many of them have 3-4 cameras controlled by two operators while another is entirely responsible for the sound. Classes that require a balance between boardwork, slides, and discussion require a very well-trained team of videographers to recognize what they are supposed to be looking at without breaking the rhythm of the course and capturing the intent of the lecturer.
Ask any Professor how prepared their lectures are. Despite how absent-minded most professors seem, there is a large amount of practice and slidology behind each lecture. OCW adds a whole other layer to preparation since the course actually has to run on schedule and conclude with the course completed. The materials used require additional thought since OCW is limited to only a single camera. Look at some of Yale's early OTC courses; the professor will make references to a figure and the camera will be focused on his gestures rather than the actual information that they are trying to portray.
Lastly online courses are extremely expensive and don't truly make the return on investment as one would imagine. For instance, Utah State was forced to end their OpenCourseWare initiative.
# Answer
> 11 votes
Along with @bobthejoe's excellent answer, I've heard a few other reasons not to post certain types of courses online:
* The notion of "supporting" the course. If you put your course online, are you obligated to answer questions, provide student support, etc.? I'm not talking about a contractual obligation as much as "If I put my lecture up there, how do *I* feel about 'Good luck with this material, you're on your own'?
* Based on your answer to the above, you may have to actually redesign your course so it can "stand alone" as a series of videos, rather than how you prefer to teach face-to-face.
* Some professors who run heavily student-interaction based classes are reluctant to post those lectures, because they want their students to be free to ask questions freely, make mistakes, etc. without those errors being archived on the internet for all time.
But I think the technical one is the biggest hurdle. OpenCourseWare needs to actually have production values in order to be worthwhile, as anyone whose remotely participated in a course where the lecture is in a room with poor acoustics and a single camera in the back will tell you.
---
Tags: online-resource
--- |
thread-1228 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1228 | How will this departmental restructuring plan affect students and faculty? | 2012-04-22T06:07:14.130 | # Question
Title: How will this departmental restructuring plan affect students and faculty?
I am an undergraduate Computer Engineering student at the University of Florida. In response to recent budget cuts to higher education in Florida, my department (Computer and Information Sciences and Engineering, CISE) could be undergoing some restructuring, namely the following:
* All of the Computer Engineering Degree programs, BS, MS and PhD, would be moved from the Computer & Information Science and Engineering Dept. to the Electrical and Computer Engineering Dept. along with most of the advising staff.
* Roughly half of the faculty would be offered the opportunity to move to Electrical/Computer Eng. (ECE), Biomedical Eng. (BME), or Industrial/Systems Eng. (ISE).
* Staff positions in CISE which are currently supporting research and graduate programs would be eliminated.
* The activities currently covered by TAs would be reassigned to faculty and the TA budget for CISE would be eliminated.
* Any faculty member who wishes to stay in CISE may do so, but with a revised assignment focused on teaching and advising.
(click here for additional information)
The Dean of our college claims that eliminating research and TA support within the CISE department will have no effect on the quality of the education future students will receive. She also claims that existing research in the department will be unaffected, except that it will be moved to ECE, BME, or ISE.
As an undergrad, I don't feel qualified to challenge these claims. Therefore, I would like to hear your opinions:
* Will the quality of education in the CISE department be the same after this restructuring?
* Can software-oriented research take place in a department which, until now, has concentrated solely on hardware/electronics?
* Since only half of the faculty will be moved to a research department, half must remain in CISE and focus solely on teaching (with no TA support). Do you think these professors will remain at UF given the circumstances?
* Will the teaching-only CISE department be able to attract quality professors? Top students?
* Will employers value a UF CISE degree as much as they do now? \[thanks for pointing this one out JeffE\]
Faculty and graduate students in the department know exactly how these changes will affect them (and they aren't pleased!), however many of the undergrads are a bit uncertain. I (and the rest of us undergrads) would really appreciate any wisdom to help clear things up. Thanks in advance!
# Answer
One of my former PhD students works in the CISE department at UF, so my opinion is not exactly objective. But here it is:
* **Will the quality of education in the CISE department be the same after this restructuring?** Absolutely not. Teaching computer science well requires serious manpower. Unless CS courses are limited to a *very* small number of students, which seems incredibly unlikely for a flagship state university, educational quality will plummet. The near-certain increase in faculty teaching loads only makes this worse. If nothing else, with less individual attention on students and more automated grading, cheating will increase dramatically. (Also, in the longer term, educational quality will suffer because the instructors are not themselves active researchers. Computer science changes fast; if the faculty aren't leading that change, they'll fall behind. Obviously. But in the short run, the removal of TA support is a much bigger issue.)
* **Can \[CS\] research take place in \[an ECE\] department?** Maybe, but probably not at existing levels. If faculty treat the incoming CISE faculty as anything less than full-fledged intellectual peers who should be judged by the standards of their own research communities (as opposed to ECE community standards), then no. Most recent CS-EE mergers have failed for precisely this reason. This has far less to do with the distinction between "software" and "hardware" than cultural differences about intellectual values, publication standards (conferences vs. journals), funding, intellectual property, entrepreneurship, and the like.
* **Do you think \[teaching\] professors will remain at UF given the circumstances?** I expect some faculty will stay, either because they prefer teaching anyway (or even support the restructuring), or because they have eternal constraints that make moving impossible, or because they are close enough to retirement that they're willing hold their nose for a few years, or perhaps because their recent research records are not strong enough for them to land a tenure-track position in a comparable department. But I would expect most CISE faculty—*including the research faculty forced into other departments*—to leave at their earliest opportunity.
* **Will the teaching-only CISE department be able to attract quality professors?** Not as easily, and not as long as the current political players are in power. Setting aside the common assumption that quality is correlated strongly with active research, I expect most strong teaching faculty would have trouble accepting a position from a college with such blatant disregard for academic freedom and shared governance.
* **Top students?** Undergrads, yes, although probably in smaller numbers. Because UF is a flagship state school, it attracts a significant fraction of the top high school graduates in the state (at least by STEM standards). The number of such incoming students is unlikely to change very much, but many of those students who would have studied computer science will go into other majors instead. Graduate students, probably not, for the same reasons as faculty.
And one question you didn't ask:
* **Will employers value a UF CISE degree as much as they do now?** I doubt the restructuring would have a significant effect on the job prospects of *current* CISE majors, except possibly if some of the software companies who've recently announced plans to open offices in Gainesville change their mind. But if the quality of education (and the strength of incoming majors) suffer as I expect they will, then a UF CISE degree will be less valuable than it is now, even for the best students.
The flagship state university where I work has attempted a few similar restructuring efforts, and currently faces similarly severe budgetary constraints. Some of the resructuring attempts were successful (for example, our Theoretical and Applied Mechanics department was recently merged into Mechanical Engineering); others were not (for example, our Nuclear Engineering Department survived a proposed closure). In the years leading up to the TAM closure, a significant majority of the TAM faculty moved or retired. Although TAM survives as a degree program within our MSE department, it attracts considerably fewer students and faculty than it did as an independent department.
> 16 votes
---
Tags: research-process, teaching, education, undergraduate, teaching-assistant
--- |
thread-1233 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1233 | PowerPoint presentations including Latex both under Windows and Mac OS | 2012-04-22T19:48:48.667 | # Question
Title: PowerPoint presentations including Latex both under Windows and Mac OS
> **Possible Duplicate:**
> How to make a presentation that includes math symbols?
I have been using TeX4PPT for PowerPoint under Windows for a few years to include matematical formulas in PP presentations. Recently, I got a Mac notebook and I would like to use my PP presentations both under Windows as well as under Mac OS X. However, I cannot find a program that would allow me to use LaTeX generating formulas in PP under both operating systems (so I could use my presentations freely on both OS). Any ideas?
# Answer
On Mac Os only, you can use Keynote and Latexit, as explained in this question: How to make a presentation that includes math symbols? I've been using this technique recently, and it's very nice! However, as far as I know, you cannot show Keynote presentation on Windows. A possible solution could be to export them as PPT, but I've just tried, and it's not very nice, especially for the included formulas. You can also export them as PDF, in which case it's graphically nice, but you lose any animated transition.
Another solution could be to use Latexit to generate PDF, and to include the PDF directly in Powerpoint. If you use a white background, that can do the trick, since formulas will be exported with a white background (but maybe it's possible to set it up, I've never tried with Powerpoint to be honest, so maybe you can import SVG format directly in Powerpoint).
> 4 votes
# Answer
Another possible solution is to work directly in tex (that is, via Beamer) and get a cross-platform presentations. Although, if you want to do presentation animations and sophisticated tricks, this is inferior to PPT/Keynote.
> 0 votes
---
Tags: online-resource
--- |
thread-1240 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1240 | Should I Cite a Journal's Page Number, or an Article's? | 2012-04-22T23:39:13.290 | # Question
Title: Should I Cite a Journal's Page Number, or an Article's?
When I'm citing a page in a journal, and the article has an independent page numbering system, should I cite the page number of the journal or the article?
# Answer
I'm not certain what you mean by an article with an independent page numbering system, but I assume you mean the following. The published journal article is, say, on pages 25-48 of the journal, but there is also a preprint available online with different formatting, and it is numbered from 1-23. Not only the page divisions, but even the number of pages differ, so there's no easy way to transfer a reference between these numberings except approximately.
The most important rule is to be clear and correct: you should leave no doubt or ambiguity about which numbering system you are using. If you cite only one version of the paper, then you should use the same numbering used there. If you cite several versions, then you need to make sure your references are clear.
The second rule is that you should focus on the "most official" version of the paper, whatever that is. In most cases, a journal paper is more official than a conference paper, which is more official than a numbered technical report in a series, which is more official than a random preprint. You want to cite the most final, complete, and authoritative version, and the one most likely to be accessible to future readers. There may occasionally be subtle cases (for example, a paper that has been reprinted in books with corrections or additions), but this generally means the journal version.
P.S. The only other interpretation of the question I can think of is for journals like Physical Review, where an article has its own page number (like 032326) and then the individual pages are given subsidiary numbers (like 032326-1 through 032326-8). In that case, if you want to cite a specific page you could refer to it as 032326-3, or maybe just 3 if the context is clear. In the bibliography, you would write 032326:1-8 or just 032326, depending on your bibliography style.
> 10 votes
---
Tags: journals, citations
--- |
thread-1243 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1243 | Apply to PhD after expulsion from another | 2012-04-23T01:54:46.553 | # Question
Title: Apply to PhD after expulsion from another
I was in a math PhD program for one year during the 2009-2010 year in US (with funding by school). I was expelled due to low grades (nothing related to violence/cheating). During the Fall of 2010, I took some classes at a local university and applied to Master's programs during that time. I went to a Master's program in math in Canada from 2011-2013 (currently there).
My plan is to apply to top PhD programs in the US in math this Fall and enter at the Fall of 2013. I have a 4.0 Masters GPA, \>95% GRE math scores, publications, and excellent relations with Master's advisors. I have developed great focus and motivation and have rid myself of procrastination which plagued me the past. I am also sure I want to continue doing mathematical research.
I am sure that when applying to PhDs, mentioning the expulsion from years ago will only hurt me so I intend to not mention it (I have not told anyone about this either). My question is if PhD programs will discover this hidden information when I apply? What if when I apply for fellowships?
# Answer
> 39 votes
I would strongly recommend mentioning it briefly somewhere in your application, with a very short explanation of why it is irrelevant (for example: you were less mature and motivated, so you procrastinated and your grades suffered, but your performance over the last few years proves that these issues are no longer a problem). Don't emphasize it too much, but your best strategy is not to hide anything.
You are right that it might hurt your chances, but I do not think it will hurt them much. If it came up in a committee I was on, I would argue against worrying about it, if the rest of your application was compelling. If you do not mention it, then you'll have an unexplained gap of a year in your CV, and that will also raise suspicions, since such a gap is usually a sign of something that did not work well. If you don't want to mention it or have a gap, then the alternative is lying.
You should definitely not lie, by giving an incomplete list of previous schools attended if asked for a complete list, or by giving a different explanation of what you were doing during that year. You might get away with the lie, since it can be difficult to detect missing information or disprove vague excuses, but if the lie is detected then it will ruin your chances of admission. (And committee members might even mention it to friends at other schools, if they are irritated enough about the lie.) Even if you get admitted, the lie may also come up again to haunt you in the future. For example, a faculty member from your old school may someday visit to give a talk, recognize you, and mention the connection to your advisor. Or you and your advisor may someday end up attending a conference at that university. You probably won't get kicked out of grad school if the lie is discovered later, but it's technically possible (at least at some universities), and in any case you do not want to be known among the faculty as someone who lied about his/her past.
You've already done the hard part of moving beyond this issue and demonstrating that it is no longer a problem, and that will minimize the risks of honesty. By contrast, the risks of dishonesty may follow you for years.
---
Tags: phd, graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-906 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/906 | Why do universities place a weight on GRE/TOEFL scores? | 2012-03-27T10:05:54.190 | # Question
Title: Why do universities place a weight on GRE/TOEFL scores?
This is one question that has been bugging me for a long time now. Why do universities consider GRE/TOEFL scores at all? Perhaps it is fine for master's degrees, where there will be an enormous number of applicants whose language abilities cannot be otherwise established. But what is the necessity for a PhD degree? Why not zero in on a small group of candidates based on their profiles and then conduct a Skype interview? That way the professor gets to know both the verbal and the research potential of the student. Why isn't this the case for PhD admissions?
# Answer
> 19 votes
GRE/TOEFL scores are used in a number of different ways (some of which are alluded to above)
* GRE scores are sometimes used as a university-level filter (if your GRE score is \< X, then you'll need a strong support letter from your department to get admitted)
* TOEFL scores are used as a filter for giving people TA funding (if your TOEFL score is too low, you can't be assigned to be a TA, and if it's lower, you can't even get RA funding)
* More informally, the GRE/TOEFL scores are used as a "do you even care' filter: for a CS program, a quantitative score less than 600 might be considered to be a warning that the candidate doesn't even care enough to prep for it.
But for Ph.D programs, the GRE/TOEFL are either used as a high-bar disqualification filters to prune applications (in top schools), or as low-bar disqualification filters to prune the non-serious applications.
# Answer
> 21 votes
On the admissions committees I've been on, GRE scores have been used primarily for one purpose, namely dealing with students from out of the way places. Every year, we see a number of applications from students at not very prestigious schools but with perfect grades and letters saying they are the best in years. We suspect that the courses are easy and the competition is not impressive (being the best is meaningless if we doubt the second best is very good), but we don't want to reject someone unfairly. GRE scores give a simple, consistent way to compare these students with those from other schools. Most of them have unimpressive GRE scores, but occasionally they do very well on the GRE, and in those cases we investigate further.
TOEFL scores are another case in which consistency is very helpful. Skype interviews would give more information, but different interviewers would be more or less demanding (plus the interviews would be a lot of work). If you want to set a consistent cut-off, for example for TA support, then a standardized exam may be the right approach. Note also that the administration may not trust faculty interviewers not to exaggerate the English abilities of students they want to admit.
If it weren't for its usefulness in screening the applications from out of the way places, I'd be in favor of eliminating the GRE entirely. However, even making someone jump through a meaningless hoop can actually be a useful filter. In practice, having a successful career requires occasionally doing things you don't care about, for reasons that may not be clearly explained (and might or might not turn out to be justified if they were explained). Some students run into serious psychological issues here. Maybe they can't overcome their disorganization if they don't feel motivated, or maybe they just refuse to participate in anything without a clear justification. It may be unfair, but these students are not likely to be successful in the long run, and it's a waste of time and energy to prepare them for a career that isn't likely to work out. Jumping through hoops like the GRE is a mild test in this direction. If you are too disorganized to sign up for it in time, or if you aren't willing to jump through such a hoop at all, then that's a bad sign for your future career.
# Answer
> 10 votes
My (computer science) department does not require GRE scores at all. A few faculty still use them to evaluate applicants—there's no accounting for taste—but there is certainly no official cutoff (as Suresh suggests). In practice, they're only useful if they're really low.
However, by state law, an international student at my university cannot be hired as a teaching assistant if their TOEFL spoken English score is below 24. (Too many courses were being taught by foreign students with thick accents.) Since my PhD program has a TAship requirement, we *must* filter out applicants with low TOEFL scores. We can still admit applicants with scores below 24 if someone offers them an RAship, but they have to bring their score up to 24 by the end of their first year. So in practice, you have to have at least a 20 to be considered at all. (And we do conduct phone interviews with borderline cases.)
# Answer
> 5 votes
Firstly, not all schools place weight on GRE/TOEFL for PhD admissions. Some do, Some don't.
A publication and good grades but bad GREs/TOEFL does not immediately guarantee rejection. Nevertheless, I had done some research on this and here is what I learnt :
**GRE:**
* GRE (I talk about the old pattern, I have no clue about the new one) tested both Quantitative and Verbal aptitude along with the ability to write and analyze arguments.
* **Quant** section is essentially a sanity check. A 780/800 or above indicated that the student has well founded basics and he is able to solve *everyday math problems*. This was meant to test only those parts of mathematics which everyone applying to graduate school does encounter. Thus, no Calculus or Linear Algebra. Universities find this score useful since it is a good indication of the mathematical basics of the student.
* **Verbal**. This initially irritated me since I saw no benefit in testing my vocubalary for a technical PhD. But later, I learnt that the verbal section actually varies with IQ. There were numerous high IQ societies which gave out invitations on the basis of GREV marks. This is a comparison of the different high IQ socities with their GRE marks requirement. The GRE (together with Quant) was an instrument for checking IQ without making it too blatant. Here are a few citations:
Mensa:
`from 5/94 to 9/30/01
(quantitative + verbal + analytic) 1875`
Triple 9 Society :
`Graduate Record Exam (GRE), combined verbal, quantitative, analytical (June 1994 through Sept 2001) : 2180`
One in a Thousand Society :
`GRE (verbal + math + analytical scores) 2180 (6/94 till 9/01)`
Prometheus :
`GRE (“old”): a score of 1610 on the “old” GRE (taken before October 1, 1981)`
*Personally, I think of all this as pseudo-nonsense but c'est la vi*
* The **argument** section is (arguably) the most useful for PhD admissions. The 2 parts (writing and analyzing) are along the lines of how one writes research papers. The writing sections teaches/tests for rigor in ones' arguments and requires that each statement be backed up appropriately. The analysis section tests the students ability to read "actively" just as how one would read a research paper. The question requires the student to point out flaws in the argument presented and the more the number of (realistic and nontrivial) flaws you find, the more you score. GRE tests students for critiquing general arguments such as building a new library since "the old one is far away from campus" and similar flawed arguments while in research a paper could state something similarly inane in that field.
**TOEFL**
Among Reading, Listening, Speaking and Writing, I think none of them are useful. Reading gets covered in the Comprehension questions in GRE (with a notch higher difficulty). Listening and Speaking are almost useless since it is fairly simple to memorize generic things to say and still get above the 24/30 marks threshold. Writing gets covered in the GRE as well (At higher difficulty). If the university needs to know if the candidate can speak good english, I think an interview is a good alternative or (as some universities seem to be tending to) IELTS is a good option since you actually interact with a examiner rather than recording answers for "The city you love most" to be evaluated later.
But, I Think TOEFL does filter out students with extremely poor English skills (beyond repair for the university), so it does help in spite of having overlaps with GRE and being inherently flawed (IMO).
---
Tags: graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-1246 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1246 | Should I include publications where I am a "team member" in my CV | 2012-04-23T06:05:50.703 | # Question
Title: Should I include publications where I am a "team member" in my CV
Related to but different from Should I include a publication where I'm only acknowledged (and not one of the authors) in my CV?
I'm a part of some publications which officially are written by author A and B and then the Team Members. Should these publications be on my CV? I contributed to the project (hence the team co-authorship) but don't want to seem like I'm trying to pad my CV.
Currently I have my publication list broken up by sections: Journal, Talks, Technical Reports, and then Other, and I have the Team Member publications listed under Other.
Is this appropriated and/or reasonable, or should I remove them?
# Answer
Looking at the CV that's linked to your website, I don't see anything inappropriate about what you've done. The only thing to make sure of is that when you have a team listed explicitly as the author in a paper (e.g., "Author X, Author Y, and The A-Team"), you will need to make sure that there is a publicly available listing of the team members available for reference. This could be as a supplement to the paper online (as "supporting information"), or it can be on a permanent web site for the team's endeavors. However, people should be able to confirm that you are a member of this collaboration beyond just what's on your CV.
> 13 votes
# Answer
* If you are listed as an author in the paper, then you can always include the paper in your publications list.
* If you are pruning your resume to be a 2-page one and if you have better publications (say where you are the lead author) to show, then have a single category titled "Selected Publications" and exclude this paper.
* If you are making a very detailed list of publications, say one on a webpage, then do consider including the name of all authors in the same order as in the published paper.
> 8 votes
---
Tags: publications, cv, authorship
--- |
thread-1239 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1239 | Research in "Research Engineering" | 2012-04-22T23:17:49.497 | # Question
Title: Research in "Research Engineering"
from Wikipedia:
> **Software engineering** (SE) is the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the development, operation, and maintenance of software, and the study of these approaches.
I was wondering if there is something similar for research, something that we could call **Research engineering**. I imagine it to be a research field on its own, with students "researching on how to do research". I believe software development has benefited a lot from research in SE. Maybe research could also benefit from Research engineering.
The questions are:
* is there some institute or some university department in the world where they work on Research Engineering?
* in which faculty you would position such department/institute?
*Edited*: After getting a couple of good answers, I am still not completely satisfied, so I would like to clarify my question. What I am really interested in is indeed a "software engineering" approach. I am not interested in philosophical or sociological research. In fact, the question I had originally in mind was whether it's possible or not to apply actual software development methodologies to research. In more concrete terms, I am wondering whether anyone has studied the application in research of models similar to the waterfall, or the spiral model, or things like extreme programming, Scrum, etc... (Note: these are just examples, please don't comment to each of them one by one).
# Answer
There is plenty of *"research on research"* (or *"science of science"*).
There are dividid into different fields, e.g.:
* Scientometrics \- measuring citations, networks of collaborators, relations between topics and other quantities characterizing the scientific output.
* Sociology of science \- treating science as a activity of groups of people, with its history etc.
For example there is a great book Ludwik Fleck, Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact.
* Research on *collective intelligence*, *innovation* (when, where and how does it happen), etc.
* General fields related to education, didactics, teamwork and management.
As you asking about *engineering* (i.e. how things work in practice), I don't even mention things like philosophy of science. Also, as you see, the answer depends on scale - from an individual, through a group or an institution to a country, the world nowadays or our civilization.
Typically it is done under umbrella of complex systems, complexity, network science, econophysics or data-mining and modeling in sociology. There are institutes doing it, see e.g. the front page of the Santa Fe Institute. Also, there are some projects on it, e.g. QLectives.
ADDED:
As you are interested in the optimization (not only the observation) and on the micro scale: some findings may implicitly give hints, e.g.:
Other things may be harder to find, as in science it works a lot in apprentice-master mode, with approaches differing from a group to a group. So it may be not as easy to be serialized (as in different fields, countries, etc. one may need to have different approach); and when you don't a large enough sample, you cannot use quantitive methods in a meaningful way.
Moreover, now we are in the phase preceding formalized studies, as only recently people started to share with the world their *soft and subjective* findings on that matter, e.g.:
and on things like academia.SE, for a bit of self-reference.
> 13 votes
# Answer
I've never heard of a field dedicated to the study of research methods. There are journals dedicated to advances in methodology (e.g., \[1\], \[2\]), but the closest concept I've encountered to a field dedicated to researching research is Thomas Kuhn's classic work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and other similar philosophical works, which discuss how science, as a field, progresses and evolves.
I would guess that the reason for the lack of such a field is such research is part and parcel of the actual work done in the field. In order to study biochemistry, one must understand *how* to study biochemistry; in order to study mathematics, one must know the types of questions and the methods used to find answers in mathematics. Each field is unique, and each field will find specific methods that will optimally serve the needs of that specific field. While there may be broadly-applicable research techniques, each field will solve the problem of "how to do research" differently, in the way that best suits that field.
> 5 votes
---
Tags: research-process
--- |
thread-1252 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1252 | On getting reviews for research work as independent learners | 2012-04-23T17:23:41.813 | # Question
Title: On getting reviews for research work as independent learners
Consider an undergrad student (who wishes to dive into STEM research) in an obscure university in an obscure town who has a few ideas which he converts into a well documented article. All of this by learning completely on his own. He has no faculty within his institute (or locality) to turn to (they aren't as active in research) for help.
Where should such students/learners try to get comments/criticism on their work?
* Sending it out to publishing is not a good idea because it will get rejected with cliched answers and will rarely help the candidate improve his work.
* Stackexchange/Quora/Reddit etc. are great for small answers but it is too much to ask to read and rate someone's work
* One can send out mails but Professors/Grad Students/Researchers in the field might not have the time to reply to such mails. Further, if the work is fundamentally flawed, the student might never get replies.
* Any other repository site (ArXiv?) might cause the paper to be drowned by more successful ones and the student might never get comments.
What can he do?
# Answer
> 7 votes
You want to try a combination of **networking** and **learning how to ask good questions**.
1. Networking—you have to find people in your field in order to grow, and you can only find people in your field by networking appropriately. Try to find money in the department/broader university to attend a conference, or even just email authors of papers you cite. Describe your situation (briefly). If they're local, ask to meet with them for 30 minutes-1 hr; if not, try for phone calls.
Do note that, generally speaking, graduate students/postdocs will be more willing to give you time than advisors; try to get in touch with them as well.
2. Asking good questions—you can and should assume that no one has time to act as your advisor. Because of this, your interaction with those whom advise you will be brief. Make the most of those minutes. Give a summary of your work, ask very directed, substantial questions. Make the most of your meetings.
Personally, the most productive meeting I had in the entirety of my just-under-five year graduate school stint was one with a member of my thesis committee, and the entire meeting lasted 15 minutes. I gave the right background, asked the right questions, and came away with what turned into my thesis project. (I don't think I've done that well since.) Do your homework, and you may benefit nicely.
# Answer
> 4 votes
It may be that even if the faculty at the institution are not themselves active in research, they are likely to know people they are (after all, they got their own degrees somewhere). The best route, if at all possible, would be for one of the the local faculty to put the student in touch with someone who is active in research. The personal introduction makes it much likely that the work will get actual feedback. (I'm assuming here that the student has actually talked to the local people and determined that they're not interested; just because a faculty members isn't currently active in research doesn't automatically mean they don't care and won't be able to help an interested student.)
If that's not an option, the student might be able to meet researchers through some sort of event, either one aimed directly at undergraduates (for instance, in the US, there are many summer programs for undergraduates), or even just by attending a conference and trying to meet people. This may not be an option (summer programs require being accepted, for instance, and attending a conference on one's own can be expensive).
If that's off the table as well, it may be time to personally e-mail researchers in the area. It's true that there's some risk the work will be ignored, but there are steps that can be taken to minimize this: choose a person to contact carefully, making sure it's someone actually interested in the exact topic of your research (on the one hand, you want it to be someone you cite, or at least someone who's worked directly in the area, but on the other hand, you don't want to e-mail the biggest name who has anything to do with the subject); and write a personal e-mail which makes your situation clear without being too verbose, and which explains why you're e-mailing this particular person.
---
Tags: research-undergraduate
--- |
thread-1249 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1249 | Four papers accepted for publication however not published due to some monetary issues? | 2012-04-23T12:15:51.423 | # Question
Title: Four papers accepted for publication however not published due to some monetary issues?
I have successfully got my papers accepted in different journals. However, due to some money issues, I couldn't get them published. Now I have my final project presentations.
Will it hold value for me? I have slogged day in and out to accomplish this, but money constraints have shattered everything.
How do I manage my presentation in such a scenario?
**EDIT** : I do have all the email conversations and acceptance notifications and do have the feedback as well.
# Answer
> 23 votes
Reputable journals will waive publication charges for authors who cannot pay them, so you should ask about that. If everything goes well, then that will simply solve your financial problems. I see only two ways you can get stuck:
(1) The journal insists you can pay, perhaps because your advisor has plenty of grant money, but your advisor refuses. In that case you have a serious problem, and it is much deeper than just paying for these publication charges; you need to sort things out with your advisor.
(2) The journal does not have a procedure for waiving the charges. In that case, the journal acceptance is worthless. The journals in this category are money-making operations with no academic validity. Nobody will care that they accepted your paper, because they just wanted your publication fees.
The first thing you need to determine is which case you are in. For example, one valid reason for an advisor to refuse to pay is because the journals are not reputable. If you are in that case, then you need to rethink everything. Otherwise, it sounds like you may be in a complicated situation with your advisor.
# Answer
> 17 votes
This would raise a red flag for me generally - I've never published in a journal that had publication fees just for publishing the papers themselves. Color charges, sure, and if I had submitted to an open access journal they have fees, but nearly every one of them has a mechanism for waiving the fee in the case that the author can't pay. My four suggestions are this:
* Make doubly-sure, as @AnonymousMathematician has stated, that you're not accidentally trying to get published in a for-profit vanity press journal. These won't actually do you much good.
* Contact the journal and see if you can get the fees waived, if they are indeed a legitimate scientific journal.
* Get in touch with your institution's librarians. Universities often have discount deals with some publishers, are members of groups that waive the fees, etc. Make sure you're not covered that way.
* Stop submitting to journals with publication charges if you don't have grant backing. Submitted, or even accepted papers that aren't in press (and it sounds like will never see the light of day) don't do you much good. Those papers are currently just rotting there - no journal is good enough for you to let your work languish without publishing it.
---
Tags: publications, research-process, journals, presentation
--- |
thread-566 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/566 | What role do professors on a graduate student's PhD committee serve? | 2012-03-05T04:44:22.330 | # Question
Title: What role do professors on a graduate student's PhD committee serve?
Do they discuss the graduate student in meetings with each other? Or do they have any obligations to interact with the graduate student in other ways?
# Answer
> 14 votes
I think the variations here are national rather than by discipline.
In the U.S., the thesis committee's primary role is that of a review panel when all is going well, and as a neutral arbiter between student and advisor when it isn't. Again, there is no formal obligation on the part of the committee—except when convened by the student or advisor, but this typically occurs on a more frequent basis (every one to two years or so). As individuals, however, committee members may be consulted with on various topics (job placement and career strategies, suggestions for future research directions, and so on); however, this is voluntary and, again, not very frequent—probably one or two times per year.
In Germany, by comparison, the primary obligation occurs at the time of the thesis defense, when they serve as evaluators. Outside of this, you might never meet with the professors on your committee, other than your primary advisor.
# Answer
> 8 votes
To complement aeismail's answer, I would add that in France, there is a committee that evaluates every year or so the progress of your PhD (but it's rather high-level, they are just looking for problems, like someone who would have stopped working), and this committee is chosen by the grad school.
The final PhD committee, who evaluates scientifically the PhD, is decided only at the final stage of the PhD, and it is proposed by the PhD advisor and then validated by the grad school.
# Answer
> 3 votes
To also complement the answers given, here's how it works at my institution:
Committee 1:
There is a small committee of faculty members, chosen by the student but with particular rules established by the department (Three total, choose one member from List A, two faculty members, two must be tenured professors in the dept. etc) who determine whether you are ready or not to transition from coursework to working on your dissertation proposal, and the dissertation itself. This is often, but not always, a subset of committee #2.
Committee #2:
The dissertation committee. This committee has several formal obligations toward the student:
* They meet with the student when they submit their dissertation proposal, to provide comments, criticism and ideas in order to strengthen the proposal, (theoretically) stop doomed projects from ever being started by the student, and identify any areas they believe the student may need additional coursework or expertise in order to complete their project. They also meet independently without the student during the same meeting to have a candid discussion of said student. This is usually about the project, but can range to cover mentorship concerns, thoughts on their job search, etc.
* The student is obligated to meet with each member of their committee every 6 months or so to keep them updated on their progress, and the committee as a whole meets at ~the midpoint of the dissertation project to make sure any problems are addressed before they have a chance to "go too far" and stall the defense itself.
* They then meet at the dissertation defense, evaluate the student, and make the determination as to whether or not they have successfully completed their program.
Certain members of the committee do have certain roles, beyond the usual advisor/chair role, but these are usually informal. For example, there is often a statistician on the committee, with the informal understanding that this is the person the student can turn to for questions re: statistical methods.
---
Tags: thesis-committee
--- |
thread-1256 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1256 | How do academic position job search committees evaluate potential for intellectual leadership? | 2012-04-23T23:16:26.540 | # Question
Title: How do academic position job search committees evaluate potential for intellectual leadership?
From what JeffE says over at Priority of application materials for admission decision
> The list is not that different for postdoc hiring (not "admission"), at least in my field (computer science). The big differences are (1) grades do not matter at all and (2) the focus changes from "potential for research" to potential for intellectual leadership backed by actual published research.
So I'm curious - how do committees assess potential for intellectual leadership? And how do graduate students demonstrate it?
# Answer
> 18 votes
As a postdoc applicant, you should be starting to develop a distinctive, compelling research agenda and vision. As a grad student, it's usually enough to work on problems someone gives you, and you can go to your advisor for help as needed. If you never move beyond this, it's not a great outcome, but you'll eventually get your Ph.D.; you just won't be on track for further research success. To be a successful postdoc, you need to develop the ability to work more independently. However, intellectual leadership is more than just independence. It's not enough just to write papers. Instead, these papers should fit together and be aimed towards larger goals, in a way you can articulate coherently. If someone asks you what sort of research you do, you should be able to explain what you are aiming for, how your work differs from other people's, and why your approach is worthwhile and even important.
This takes time and comes only with experience - more will be expected of tenure-track job applicants, or people being considered for tenure or a full professorship. But a postdoc applicant needs to demonstrate a start, by writing a research statement that sounds exciting, and ideally by publishing several papers that build on each other to accomplish something larger than any one of them. It's even better if other researchers have already started to take up your ideas and apply or extend them, although that's more common in fast-moving fields with short publication cycles.
What you don't want is to come across just like your advisor, but with less experience and perhaps less talent. You can succeed that way if you do fantastic work, but it's not a wise approach for most students: it's just not good advertising to say "I'm basically a less good version of my advisor." Even while you are still in graduate school, you should be aiming to differentiate yourself a little from your advisor (with your advisor's help - after all, they shouldn't be trying to produce a clone). Find some important aspect of the subject that interests you more than your advisor, learn some useful background they don't know well, or find a collaborator who doesn't work with them.
As for how committees judge this, you've got to make a convincing case in your application. Your research statement should sound like a future leader, not a student (don't be arrogant, but you shouldn't sound like you are implementing someone else's vision - you need to demonstrate clearly that you understand how everything fits together and are adding your own ideas). You need to back your research statement up with publications worthy of it, as well as some concrete ideas for future work. Your letters of recommendation should convey the impact you are already having on the field.
Of course this is the best case scenario, and not every application will achieve this, but if you want to get a prestigious postdoc position and go on to a tenure-track job at a research university, then this is what you should be aiming for. You may feel like a fraud even trying to do this, since you know perfectly well that you still have much more to learn, but you should ignore these feelings. Everyone recognizes that postdoc applicants are still developing their research abilities, but it's important to be ambitious and show what you are capable of. (In fact, no matter how far you progress in your career, you'll never reach the point of being able to say "OK, I've reached my full potential and know everything I need to," but you can't let that stop you.)
---
Tags: postdocs
--- |
thread-748 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/748 | Tools to assist with upper-division grading? | 2012-03-15T16:43:47.313 | # Question
Title: Tools to assist with upper-division grading?
Are there any commercial or free products that assist professors with grading students? I've seen many K-12 solutions, but these are generally without robust curve options. I've seen a lot of professors that have created their own Excel spreadsheets, but I'd like to offer something a little more standardized.
Easy Grade Pro and Gradekeeper are time-tested K-12 tools, but lack extensive curve-based grading options, like weighting, adjustments for curve compliance (ability to bump grades up but only if you're still within the curve), midterm grades only counting if they help the student, and the ability to switch to P/NP if the student is in a program that isn't included on a curve.
Some of these may be very specific to my institution, but I'm looking for a starting point at least.
# Answer
It seems like Gradekeeper remains the go-to program. So if you want to do something more sophisticated you probably want to think about working up some macros in Excel. For example, this post has some good example macros. There were three extensive discussions of gradekeeping software on Profhacker that you might want to skim. One on gradekeeping programs in general, one on a neat iPad app called GradeBook Pro and one that focused on a few cloud based apps for grade keeping. None of these seem to really do what you want, and with any of these you probably want to talk to someone at your institution about any policies they might have, particularly for something like a cloud app or an iPhone app regarding where student grades are kept and FERPA.
> 4 votes
---
Tags: teaching, grades
--- |
thread-1270 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1270 | How important is mathematics in engineering research? | 2012-04-25T04:52:57.760 | # Question
Title: How important is mathematics in engineering research?
In EE/EC/CS departments, there are certain fields that are theory-based (like the algo or complexity groups), ones that lean towards systems implementation (OS, programming languages, etc) and others have a component of both (like networking).
In such a field like networking, there are professors who work on hard-core math modelling (example) and people who work on implementation and protocol design (example). From what I glean from my own paper-reading experience, the natures of these papers are as different as chalk and cheese: the math papers seem to look for ways to cast the problem in a mathematical framework and try to derive their results from such a set-up, while the implementation-oriented papers conceive of some algorithm and a protocol (based solely on logical argument rather than any rigorous mathematical premise) and present the results of their software simulations.
While on paper people argue there is no divide between theory and practice, at least to me the approach towards research differs widely between faculty members in the same field and department. Now to my questions:
* How important is math emphasis in an applied field like networking? Industry work is almost always simulation-based from whatever I have seen. After all, networks are there to be implemented and deployed, so why bother about probabilistic modelling?
* When there are two modes of research in a particular field, will the PhD student's approach play a role in faculty recruitment?
* Is there a widespread notion of one being superior to another? I know of professors and students who widely emphasise math and pooh-pooh "S-BAA: simulation based on arbitrary algorithm" type of papers.
# Answer
> 12 votes
* **How important is math emphasis in an applied field like networking?**
Networking is an enormous field, which runs the full spectrum from pure mathematics to actual real-world deployment, with many shades of applied mathematics, algorithm development, modeling, simulation, and experimentation in between. There are far more than "two modes of research" in networking, as you put it. Mathematical emphasis is fundamental at the mathematical end of the field, useless at the deployment end, and somewhere in between in between.
To put it differently, it depends on what you mean by "networking".
* **Why should an engineering department award a degree to a thesis where the problem has an engineering cause, but everything is simply applied math?**
There is no contradiction here. I'd estimate that somewhere between a third and half of our engineering faculty at my university can legitimately call themselves applied mathematicians. There was even a small but serious proposal a few years ago to move our mathematics department into our college of engineering.
* **Will the PhD student's approach play a role in faculty recruitment?**
Of course! Hiring patterns at my own university (in both CS and ECE) suggest that the networking PhDs most likely to be hired as faculty comfortably bridge the so-called gap between theory and application, speaking to both camps in their native languages, and applying techniques from both camps to Actually Make Things Work. (Sylvain's answer is consistent with this observation.)
* **Is there a widespread notion of one being superior to another?**
Of course. Networking people are people. As in any other wide-ranging field, many experimentalists think all theoretical work is pointless symbol-pushing, and many theoreticians think that all experimental work is mindless hacking. They're both wrong. **Some** theoretical work is pointless symbol-pushing, and **some** experimental work is mindless hacking, which is exactly as it should be. Neither viewpoint is "better"; they're just different.
Not chalk and cheese, but chocolate and ginger.
# Answer
> 8 votes
> How important is math emphasis in an applied field like networking? Industry work is almost always simulation-based from whatever I have seen. After all, networks are there to be implemented and deployed, so why bother about probabilistic modelling and research? In other words, why should an engineering department award a degree to a thesis where the problem has an engineering cause, but everything is simply applied math?
In these fields, math is a tool, as coding or lab experiment. Even if you have a full mathematical analysis of a protocol, you have to conduct experiments, because real life is not one of our - too simple - models. Why bother on probabilistic modelling? because we have to find ideas for designing algorithms, hoping that the performance in the real world will be somehow related to those in the formal model.
> When there are two modes of research in a particular field, will the PhD student's approach play a role in faculty recruitment?
Yes it almost always will. You apply in a team, probably the team is inclined in some of the ways, and want either to make the team even stronger wrt an approach or, to the contrary, to open itself to other ways of thinking. I also remember my own recruitment, where the fact that I am in the middle (maths + experiments) was a big plus for me- since people assumed that I will be able to speak to a lot of people in the lab, from theory to practical people (and that's what happened).
> Is there a widespread notion of one being superior to another? I know of professors and students who widely emphasise math and pooh-pooh "S-BAA: simulation-based on arbitrary algorithm" type of papers.
At the end, only one thing is important: making things that work. You will always find people that think that the theoretical approach (resp. the experimental approach) is superior to the experimental approach (resp. the theoretical approach). Both are wrong, what we want is usable (in real conditions) algorithms with guarantees (controlled error, correctness, etc.), how we achieve this goal is interesting for us, but not the main point of our research (***recall that the question is about engineering research***).
---
Tags: phd, professorship, engineering
--- |
thread-943 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/943 | How to take advantage of scientific international association membership for career? | 2012-03-29T14:52:37.317 | # Question
Title: How to take advantage of scientific international association membership for career?
In the last decades, many international scientific associations have been created. Organizations such as AAAS, IEEE, ACM, involve thousands of scientists and professors that have similar scientific backgrounds and objectives.
However, besides technical and resource taks (such as providing documentation, articles, books, and organizing conferences) their aim is to push scientists closer, and let them connect with each other and network.
Concerning this last point, I've always wondered: yes, but how?
I'm member of several scientific societies, and I think I should take more advantage of my membership to connect with other scientists. But, anyway, except for conferences where we meet in person, how could I use my membership to get more connections?
How would you do? What's your experience? Are you member of some scientific associations? How do you take advantage of your membership in professional connections?
Many thanks!
# Answer
> 9 votes
The best way to take advantage of memberships in professional societies—beyond attending conferences—is helping to *organize* them. This will get you in touch with the other people in your field who are at an early-career phase. (Older faculty typically don't need to, or are higher up on the food chain.) Organizing sessions is also a good way to learn your specialty better, and to keep abreast of who's working on what.
In the long run, it can also bolster your career by providing you with "synergistic" (or "service") activities that show you to be a good member of the research community, which is important for getting job offers and promotions.
# Answer
> 9 votes
In my experience, the *only* role that membership in professional societies plays in connecting researchers is **slightly lower registration fees for conferences**. That's it. Conferences and workshops in my field are organized almost entirely by volunteers form the research community. Some are affiliated with professional societies (specifically, ACM, SIAM, and IEEE), but some aren't, and the success of a conference or workshop in bringing colleagues together appears to be independent of any sponsoring organization. But since I'm an ACM member, my registration fees for ACM conferences are *slightly* lower, so I'm *slightly* more likely to go.
Other that that, I got nothin'.
# Answer
> 4 votes
I will say though that early in your academic career (and you shouldn't really get involved in such activities BEFORE you have a PhD), you have to seriously weigh doing such organizational work against the corresponding amount of time spent working at your research. It's good to maybe do one or two things, but I wouldn't recommend spending a lot of time on it.
# Answer
> 2 votes
In addition to all that was mentioned before, as a **student member** of some of these associations *(experience with the ACM)*, you may apply for some travel funding... that will enable you to attend a (or some) conference(s) - in case your university/project doen't give you enough money to do that (I personally know about several cases)- , and then you have the opportunity to keep in touch with your peers. It should be good, to a certain extent, for your carrer. Maybe in a simple conference you can meet the guy you've referenced for a couple of time (that doesn't answer your emails... lol), and talk to him about your research projects/ideas, receive some (good) feedback, and so on...
---
Tags: networking
--- |
thread-1285 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1285 | At what point in the writing process should one contact an academic book publisher? | 2012-04-26T03:02:56.130 | # Question
Title: At what point in the writing process should one contact an academic book publisher?
Is it better to contact a publisher early in the writing process so that the editor can be involved in shaping the project, or is it better to submit a full academic book manuscript? In my case, this would be for a first academic book. If this is something that is dependent on particular academic fields my field is digital humanities.
# Answer
Book writing is a very thankless task—it takes a long time, and the profits probably don't make up for the cost of the time it takes you to write the book, unless you happen to write a textbook that becomes the default for a field. On the other hand, in some disciplines (particularly in the humanities), a published book is practically a requirement for tenure, so you'll want to make sure that you do things right.
So my advice would depend upon where you are in the process. If you haven't already started writing, I'd shop around a prospective outline of the book plus an introductory chapter or two *before* you get too much further. Then you'll have a sense of what the publishers would be interested in. If you've gotten a lot written, then you just need to start shopping the full idea around.
> 5 votes
# Answer
I don't know what is better, but I think it depends on where you want to publish. I can only talk about my limited experience, hoping it will be helpful.
I've published a book with the MIT Press, and when my coauthors and I decided to contact them, the book was far from finished, but we had enough content for them to have an idea of what to expect -- which was one of their requirements. We then had to answer questions to help them decide whether or not our project would be worth their time and investment and to tell them when we would be done with the final (preprint) version of our manuscript.
They haven't been involved at all in shaping the project as you say, although they did a wonderful job of proofreading the final text. Which was a relief, given that none of us are native English speakers. But I have the feeling that publishers typically limit themselves to that job.
> 4 votes
---
Tags: publications, writing, books
--- |
thread-1284 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1284 | When should conferences precirculate papers? | 2012-04-26T02:57:52.487 | # Question
Title: When should conferences precirculate papers?
I have been to a few conferences that worked based on precirculated papers. That is, everyone submits their papers in advance and the assumption is that conference goers who come to a given talk have read the paper in advance. In principle this seems ideal, we can use that face-to-face time to discuss work instead of just listening to people read their papers (this people reading their paper at a conference thing happens all the time in the humanities). In what circumstances should conferences precirculate papers? Is it something that is best for small conferences, or are there good examples of large conferences that work this way too?
# Answer
I've seen some workshops in the CS field (more specifically in a subfield of Software Engineering, e.g. VaMoS - see workshop format -, in which there is a kind of "precirculation of papers", before the event take place. The workshop format includes a kind of "discussion session", in which, before attending the event, one paper is sent to an attendee other than the paper's (set of) author(s), so that he/she is in charge of reading the paper and preparing some discussion slides. During the event, after the paper's presentation, the discussant will provide attendance with his/her point of view on the paper, thus promoting the actual "discussion session".
Indeed, it is a small-scale precirculation of papers, in a sense that a paper is sent previously to only a few people (usually an author of another paper). However IMHO such a format provides event's participants with an interactive environment (in the worst case, at least you, as a paper author, will be sure that at least one another peer has read you paper... lol).
Quoting the mentioned workshop website:
> Each session will be organized such that discussions among presenters of papers, discussants and other participants are stimulated. Typically, after a paper is presented, it is immediately discussed by pre-assigned discussants, after which a free discussion involving all participants follows. Each session is closed by a general discussion of all papers presented in the session.
To be very honest, I guess it's not feasible to do such a thing in big conferences, due to time constraints, but for small (and focused) events, like workshops, I guess this idea is very welcome.
As I said before, there are some other workshops that follow this same format: FOSD and PLEASE.
> 3 votes
# Answer
I can't see this happening in any sort of large-scale conference. This would involve too much work and logistical planning on the part of everyone involved to be successful. It's hard enough to get abstracts for many conferences—let alone finished papers far enough in advance that people have time to read them!
In addition, this last point is another major obstacle: people don't have a lot of time to read all the papers that we're supposed to, let alone a bunch for a particular conference. The main reason why I would undertake that much work was if it were for a relatively specialized workshop in my personal field of endeavor.
> 4 votes
---
Tags: conference, publications
--- |
thread-1297 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1297 | How to show interest in a candidate when no positions are available? | 2012-04-28T08:30:40.067 | # Question
Title: How to show interest in a candidate when no positions are available?
I occasionally receive "cold-call" applications from graduate or postdoctoral candidates interested in working in my research group. Most of the time, they are of no interest—it's just a "form letter"-type application. However, once in a while, I get an application from someone who I would consider giving an interview to—if I actually had an open position.
What I want to do is to let people know that I *am* interested in such candidates, even though I don't have an open job for them. Is there a way to express this interest, and to encourage them to apply again when a new position becomes available. Is there a good way to do this—most of the time, such emails sound very trite, and that's exactly what I'm trying to avoid.
# Answer
> 12 votes
Being in the situation of looking for postdoctoral positions, I can at least give you my feelings of how I would understand that the person I contacted is interested, but cannot provide a position right now:
* First of all, replying is already a good sign of interest. There are many persons who don't even take the time to answer to an official application for an open position (apart from the standard acknowledgement email), and you have to consider that you don't get the job if you don't hear from them. So, if you take the time to answer, that shows that you have at least a bit of interest
* Then, if you provide a "personalized" answer, that shows that you took the time to read some of the applicant's papers, then it's clear that you are interested, and even if you can't provide a position, you might be interested in a collaboration.
* The ideal would be if you can invite the applicant to give a talk, even though it's clear that there is no job following It would be a good opportunity for the applicant to talk about his work, to get some practice, meet new people, and that can also give you the opportunity to talk about creating a project together.
Basically, when one contacts a professor even though there are no official open positions, there are no really high expectations. But knowing that the professor is interested, but has no funding, is great, because it also opens the possibility to apply for a position in one year or two, when some funding is available. In order to show your interest, you can consider it as offering a potential collaboration: you can't provide money, but you would be glad to work with the applicant.
# Answer
> 13 votes
**This answer is about faculty candidates, not graduate student or postdoc candidates. (I misunderstood the original question.)**
First, be honest with the candidate, both about your interest and about your ability to hire. Yes, we are very interested. No, we don't have any regular faculty slots this year. Yes, we would love to fly you out, have you give a talk, meet with some of our faculty and students, maybe have a chat with the dean, and see where things go from there. Make no promises you can't actually keep.
Second, a lack of open slots does *not* mean it is impossible to hire. Your college or campus may have finds set aside for "excellence" hires, or for cross-departmental research initiatives (like "clean water" or "computational science"), or for dual-career families. Some other overlapping department may be willing to give you half a slot for a joint appointment. Another faculty member in your department or college may have just unexpectedly retired, resigned, moved to administration, failed to get tenure, or died. Your dean may be impressed enough (or encouraged enough by other senior faculty) to give you an extra slot just for that person *next* year.
Creating a slot takes a lot of legwork and a lot of political capital—you may burn a future slot even if the candidate doesn't come. So they'd better *really* be special, and you'd better know that they'll come if a position is actually offered.
Yes, I have seen this work.
---
Tags: job-search
--- |
thread-1303 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1303 | How should one turn down academic job applicants? | 2012-04-29T01:38:47.213 | # Question
Title: How should one turn down academic job applicants?
What's a tactful, respectful way to notify job applicants that you won't be hiring them? I see a lot of angry online discussion of this issue. Nobody seems to like the common "if you don't hear back, you're not hired" approach, but it's easy to go wrong in other ways (too short, too long, too condescending, too cheerful, too early in the hiring season so it seems insulting, too late so it's no longer useful, etc.). Of course, part of the problem is that being rejected is intrinsically painful, so nobody's ever going to enjoy a rejection letter. The question is how to provide useful and timely information while avoiding adding unnecessary pain.
# Answer
> 18 votes
Just from a perspective of one who has been rejected a lot of times (although from schools and research programmer, then as an undergraduate), fast and informative feedback is the most important.
For me there is little difference between hearing *"the competition was very high"* and *"get out"*. Saying that *"there was only one place"* when if fact you don't want to hire someone is very short sighted. It may make the decision smoother, but in a long run it will create false impressions and hopes; and, in fact, such approach makes it impossible to say that actually you want to hire someone, but you run out of positions (see How to show interest in a candidate when no positions are available?).
Moreover:
* waiting long is bad both psychologically and for practical reasons (i.e. other plans); I don't see a reason for not rejecting as soon as you are sure,
* it is important to distinguish if you don't want someone now or at all,
* any feedback is of great value;
otherwise one gets no idea what was wrong, if it makes sense to apply again and how to improve; I would love to hear *"there were 5 places but only 1 funding for someone with your status; I had expected someone with stronger skills in X and Y (but your Z is more than fine)"*.
# Answer
> 6 votes
In addition to Piotr's answer, I would add that it also depends on the profile of the applicant. For instance, if the applicant does not have a CV that matches exactly the ad, then there is nothing wrong to answer with a succinct "Sorry, your profile is not what we are looking for": the applicant took a chance, to see if a different profile could be of interest, sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, and there is no shame in "failing" in this case.
However, if the profile matches, but is too weak, then it could be helpful to point out if the applicant is good, but there was a better one (in which case it might be worth to keep in touch in case the stronger applicant decline the offer, or leaves for any reason after a few months), or if the applicant is just not good enough (for instance, not enough publications, not enough publication in top conf/journals, not enough external collaborations, not enough teaching experience, not enough grant applications, etc). I guess it's worth doing so at least for short-listed applicants, who took the time to come for an interview, and maybe a public talk, and that can help them understanding what points they need to focus on in the future, especially for the youngest applicants.
That being said, I also know that some recruiter can be reluctant to give detail as to why they didn't recruit an applicant because they are afraid that it could provide means to the applicant to official contest the recruiting process, and maybe sue the university. In this case, I would suggest to say this kind of things by telephone, i.e. without leaving a written trace.
---
Tags: job, job-search, rejection
--- |
thread-1308 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1308 | Ph.D. adviser or Ph.D. advisor? | 2012-04-29T18:01:26.190 | # Question
Title: Ph.D. adviser or Ph.D. advisor?
I think I have seen it spelled both ways.
Is one spelling more common or formal than the other ? (e.g. in the U.S.)
# Answer
> 33 votes
According to the New Oxford American Dictionary (that I have by default on my Mac :)):
> The spellings adviser and advisor are both correct. Adviser is more common, but advisor is also widely used, especially in North America. Adviser may be seen as less formal, while advisor often suggests an official position.
Since it's an official position, I'd rather go for **Ph.D. advisor**
# Answer
> 15 votes
I grew up learning the spelling as "advisor," which goes along with "supervisor." I've never seen "superviser," either, and "adviser" just looks strange to me.
This may actually be a *field-dependent* issue: in academia, I've always seen "advisor" as the preferred spelling (and a number of schools agree with that assessment). However, outside of academic contexts, "adviser" seems to be preferred, both in the UK and the US, as shown here.
# Answer
> 2 votes
In my high school, my teacher said it is British English Vs American English.
---
Tags: advisor
--- |
thread-1305 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1305 | Which factors in PostDoc opportunities choice? | 2012-04-29T11:52:03.427 | # Question
Title: Which factors in PostDoc opportunities choice?
Many of you probably have already lived these career turning point: your PhD program is going to end, and you have to choose an university research group to apply for a postdoc position.
**Which factors do you consider as more important in this choice?**
Take research group X at university Y. Which factors you consider to decide if it's worth to write to them for a postdoc opportunity?
* Research group project's affinity with your PhD research work?
* Research group's excellence, and international ranking of its team leader researchers?
* Research group members' human affinity with your personality (if perceptible)?
* Research group project's scientific novelty and genius?
* University excellence, and its international ranking?
* Distance from your hometown? Proximity to your hometown?
* Salary?
* Going abroad?
* The university city/country way of life?
* Other elements?
Please tell which of these (and other) elements you consider the most important (or by giving a percentage to each, if you want).
Many thanks! :-)
# Answer
Actually, I think the frame of this question isn't quite right. I would argue that these are criteria that I would use if I were choosing between multiple postdoc *offers*, but these are not necessarily appropriate when deciding where to *apply*.
What I would do is decide what my "deal-breakers" are: that is, what are the criteria that would prevent me from accepting an offer, regardless of how good it is? For instance, if you need to take care of an ill family member that lives in a specific location, then you're probably not going to want to consider international programs. Similarly, if you're determined to go into industry, you're not going to be inclined to take a purely theoretical postdoc project.
However, once you've decided upon those deal-breakers, if you then see a project for which those criteria do not apply, then you should go ahead and submit an application. You don't have much to lose by doing so.
Once you have the offers, the challenge is tougher. All of the criteria you've listed are valid, and it's hard to say which of those might be the most important—it all depends on your own personal circumstances. One hopes that research concerns are the most important of all, but as I've mentioned above, there are valid reasons why that might not be the case. The only thing that I would make sure of is that whatever option you decide for in the end, it helps you in moving on with your career beyond your postdoc. There's nothing worse than getting stuck in "PD purgatory," where you can't really stay as a postdoc any longer, but are having problems moving to a permanent position afterward.
> 11 votes
# Answer
aeismail's answer points out two very important points: the deal-breakers and the PD purgatory. Basically, your choices of postdoc should reflect somehow a strategy to get a permanent position at some point. Hence, you need first to understand what kind of position you eventually want (for instance a teaching position or a "pure" researcher position, academic or industry, which country you want to be), and then understand which aspects of your profile you want to strengthen.
For instance, if you already have strong publications and you want to work only research, you might be more interested in going abroad and strengthen your network and your ability to work in international projects. On the other hand, if you lack some strong publications, then you might be more interested in finding a place where you could get such publications, for instance in a team with which you already have some collaborations and ongoing projects.
If you want to teach, then you need to look for places where you can be involved in teaching, which also means that you need to speak the local language (or to go somewhere where the teaching language is English).
If you eventually want to get a permanent position in a country where internal recruitment is basically the norm (from what I've seen, Italy seems to qualify for this) then you need to take into account the fact that you will need to go as a postdoc in this country eventually.
So, I think you first need to assess your current profile, and to understand what are your expectations for your permanent position, in order to see what could be best for your postdoc.
> 6 votes
---
Tags: phd, job-search, postdocs, career-path, graduate-admissions
--- |
thread-1331 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1331 | Can game theory explain grade inflation? | 2011-10-12T18:58:34.073 | # Question
Title: Can game theory explain grade inflation?
According to wikipedia, grade inflation is the tendency of academic grades for work of comparable quality to increase over time. That article also includes plenty of evidence for the phenomenon and lists some potential causes. Has this issue been studied using game theory? What game-theoretic models of the educational grading process exist that could shed some light on the forces behind this phenomenon?
# Answer
One paper that looks relevant is "A Signaling Theory of Grade Inflation" by Chan, Hao, and Suen (2007). From their abstract, it seems like this is what you're looking for.
> When employers cannot tell whether a school truly has many good students or just gives easy grades, a school has incentives to inflate grades to help its mediocre students, despite concerns about preserving the value of good grades for its good students. We construct a signaling model where grades are inflated in equilibrium. The inability to commit to an honest grading policy reduces the efficiency of job assignment and hurts a school. Grade inflation by one school makes it easier for another school to do likewise, thus providing a channel to make grade exaggeration contagious.
Also check out "Comparative cheap talk" by Chakrabortya and Harbaugh (2005). From the introduction:
> Are such statements more credible than claims such as “they both look great” or “every student is excellent”? How much information can comparative statements convey? When does it make sense to withhold comparative information? And, are comparative statements still credible when the speaker is not impartial, e.g. when a professor has a favorite student, or a salesperson receives a larger commission on a particular product?
In particular, section 4.2 discusses "Recommendation games". They consider situations where an expert with private information can rank alternatives for a decision maker. Here is their description:
> In recommendation games we find that the expert prefers ex ante to reveal a partial ranking rather than the complete ranking. For instance, if there are three students being recommended by a professor and the middle student is unlikely to receive a job based on the complete ranking, an alternative is to put the top two students in a group and not differentiate between them. As the number of issues increases, such groupings can be used more and more effectively to maximize the expert’s payoffs. The gains from partial rankings may explain why highly ranked schools often obscure the relative quality of their graduates, either by grade inflation as in Ivy League undergraduate programs, or by withholding grades from employers as in some elite M.B.A. programs
One of the conclusion they reach is that grade inflation "should be more severe when average student quality is increasing" so "grades should be more inflated in elite schools". Look into their section 4.2 for a detailed analysis.
> 27 votes
# Answer
As a college professor, I can tell you that student evaluations are a major cause of grade inflation. College administrations use student evaluations of professors as a major determinant in promotions, assigning classes, tenure, any form of recognition.
From the professor's perspective, if you start to get too many bad evaluations, your career is in jeopardy. So, why not go with the flow? Call a C an A- and everyone is happy. Of course, the integrity of the educational system is destroyed in the process.
From the standpoint of the university administration, who wants the hassle of dealing with student complaints? The way to get ahead is to grow your program and generate income. This is especially true of MBA programs that are generally funded not by students, but by their employers. One way to compete with other MBA programs is to make the grading easy, but universities also make the degree programs shorter and the experience more entertaining .
> 14 votes
# Answer
Schools want their students to get more than "their share" of jobs. One way to do this is through grade inflation, that may convince employers that the one school's students are "smarter" than those of other schools with "lower" grades.
Of course, when the other schools catch on, they will raise THEIR grades too, cancelling out the first school's advantage, but causing grade inflation.
It's like watching a performance at a standing room only event. Any ONE person can get a better view of it by standing on tiptoes. But if ALL of them do it, this just cancels out. That's what game theory would predict.
> 12 votes
---
Tags: grades
--- |
thread-1327 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1327 | Advantages and Disadvantages of doing PhD from a new university? | 2012-04-30T14:45:40.273 | # Question
Title: Advantages and Disadvantages of doing PhD from a new university?
I have an offer to do a PhD in Computer Science from a fairly new university. The research topic is good but I can't really decide what are positives and negatives of it.
# Answer
> 7 votes
Well, the first thing to think about is what sort of new university this is. If it's UC Merced, then you might reasonably guess that it will eventually be as well known as the typical UC campus, and of course that's not the only new university intended to be very prestigious and successful (e.g., IIT Indore). On the other hand, most new universities just don't come with this sort of commitment and backing. If you don't have a powerful reason to think the university will be unusually successful, then you should assume it's headed for a not particularly distinguished future. Furthermore, the initial years may involve growing pains that would not be present in a better established university, although these issues are not likely to be a big deal.
Now, this isn't a reason not to study there. Most universities are by necessity not particularly distinguished, but that won't stop you from getting a decent education. However, the key thing is to avoid getting caught up in a feeling of "Wow, a new university! What a great opportunity to start from scratch and do everything right! I'm sure we'll avoid all the mistakes that have held other schools back." Helping to start something new really is exciting, and it can be a wonderful experience. However, all new projects start with high hopes, while history shows that most never fully meet these expectations.
So the real question is how much these high hopes matter to you. If the new university turned out to be a solid, respectable school but not highly ranked or especially successful, would you regret having gone there? If not, then there's no problem. (I'm assuming it's definitely a respectable option, and not for example an online diploma mill.) If so, then you should think carefully and investigate whether their plans really look feasible. For example, by looking at what sort of faculty have they managed to recruit so far.
---
Tags: phd
--- |
thread-1325 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1325 | Abbreviations in journal papers | 2012-04-30T14:29:22.070 | # Question
Title: Abbreviations in journal papers
Do I expand abbreviations at their first use **per section or per paper**?
This is an IEEE publication, but I haven't come across any specific instructions.
# Answer
> 17 votes
I would do it per paper, unless the paper is extremely long and some abbreviations are defined (and used) in the start, but not used again until 20 or 30 pages later.
It's okay to remind a reader what the abbreviations mean, but avoid annoying the reader by being overly and unnecessarily repetitive.
# Answer
> 9 votes
The standard is once per "document," whether that's a report, or a book, or a journal article. However, longer documents will typically come with lists of abbreviations and symbols; many journals also do this. Even then, it's still better to define it once in the text first:
> standard widget units (SWUs)
before using it again later.
---
Tags: publications, journals, writing, ieee
--- |
thread-1329 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1329 | What are factors leading to rising tuition costs over time? | 2012-04-30T20:08:01.723 | # Question
Title: What are factors leading to rising tuition costs over time?
Is there any published work that quantifies the roles of different factors on rising tuition in the U.S. over the past half-century?
I've heard a number of explanations bandied about, such as:
* increases in admin overhead
* IT infrastructure costs
* Baumol's cost disease
* more expensive facilities
* reductions in state funding over time (public institutions)
What I'm looking for is some quantitative analysis that tries to estimate *how much* each of these different factors contributes to the average increases in tuition over time.
# Answer
The Delta Cost Project, a nonprofit organization in Washington DC, issues reports each year with information about college spending. The highlights of the 2011 report, which I recommend browsing through, states that:
> For the majority of institutions, increases in tuition do not translate into increases in spending. In fact, at most public institutions, tuition increases attempt to compensate for lost revenues from state and local budget reductions, but actual tuition increases are less than half of the actual reduction in state and local appropriations.
Later in the report, other sources of tuition increases are listed, including increases in benefit spending for employees (primarily public institutions). Salary fluctuations are not significant factors; in fact, spending on salaries has gone down slightly over the past few years.
For those interested, I strongly recommend checking out the highlights listed above, as well as the full report, for more details.
> 9 votes
---
Tags: education, tuition
--- |
thread-1340 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1340 | How to tell what is 'widely accepted' or 'consensus' | 2012-05-01T13:07:45.240 | # Question
Title: How to tell what is 'widely accepted' or 'consensus'
How can I find out what theories are 'widely accepted' in the scientific world at the moment? When I read about a theory, or read a paper, how can I tell what 'the scientific world' thinks of these?
---
### Background:
When hearing about development or history of science, the phrase 'widely accepted' is quite popular. One of the common stories seems to be of some discovery which nobody wanted to believe when published, but a decade or a few later the scientific world came to accept it and it turned into consensus. Prime examples in history would be the heliocentric world view or the theory of evolution.
More recently, I have read 'The Selfish Gene' by Richard Dawkins. He takes every chance to provide evidence that the theory of group selection is unnecessary to explain evolution. The book was published in 1976, when group selection was apparently quite popular. In annotations of the current edition, he gives comments about how the scientific world has now more accepted that group selection is wrong. I asked a question about one of his claims which I did not fully understand (irrelevant here) on Biology.SE and - unexpectedly - promptly got answers by people claiming that group selection was presently very widely accepted.
# Answer
> 14 votes
Firstly, the "official" ways that researchers state their opinion is by stating it in either a publication or in a presentation at a conference. It is from here that we can gain any idea of what *any* researcher thinks about a given topic.<sup>1</sup>
That being said, the only way to know whether something is "widely accepted" is to be familiar with most of the current (academic) literature on a given topic. Only by really having read the publications of most of the preeminent researchers in a given field can you really get a sense of what the consensus is on that topic. This, of course, requires a lot of time and expertise (and, if you don't have access to a university library with journal subscriptions, money). It took me years as a graduate student to learn what was the consensus about certain topics *within my own field*.
Because of this, anyone can state anything and most people won't know the difference. The easiest way to really determine if it's true is to ask two or three recognized researchers if they agree with the statement of interest. You can do this via email, but they likely won't get back to you. You can ask grad students in their lab and the answer will be that much less reliable, but still close to the source. Beyond that, you'll just have to find experts you can trust and rely on them.
---
<sup>1</sup> Obviously, researchers are people like anyone else, and will discuss their pet theories with friends and colleagues over email and in person; it's very hard to quantify these, and you only rarely see this sort of discourse being formally recognized. Occasionally a publication will cite "unpublished discourse", but that's a rare occasion.
# Answer
> 7 votes
Structured review papers can be a very good route into establishing what's the most-widely accepted state of current research.
In health care, the Cochrane Reviews are a good example.
Some subjects have journals dedicated to such structured reviews, such as Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
Occasionally, a subject is so important that international organisations are set up to establish the state of the art in a current subject: the International Panel on Climate Change is one such example, and this produces a whole-field review every few years. At time of posting this, one (AR5) is being compiled at the moment, for publication in 2013-4. The previous one (AR4) was published in 2007.
---
Tags: science, peer-review, reputation
--- |
thread-1345 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1345 | For publications, what do I do when my first name is abbreviated? | 2012-05-01T17:13:51.543 | # Question
Title: For publications, what do I do when my first name is abbreviated?
I'm Muslim, I use Md. as for Muhammad. So when submiting to journals, should I stick to the 2nd & 3rd names? I'm currently facing problems in submitting to arxiv.org which asks for only first and last names.
# Answer
> 12 votes
This shouldn't really be a problem these days in most places, because the entry fields on most web-based entry forms are smart enough to recognize and accept spaces. Thus, even when the site asks for a first name only, you can put in "Md. \[Middle Name\]" as your first name.
As Dave suggests in the comment, unless you have a really uncommon last name—one that doesn't show up in ISI or arXiv.org searches at all right now, you're better off having parts of three names show up. It's also helpful to keep your professional name fixed throughout your career. (In other words, if you want to go by Md. \[Middle\] \[Last\], use that same form whenever possible.)
# Answer
> 10 votes
My advice is to use at least 3 names (including your surname) so that you will be uniquely identifiable. It probably doesn't matter if you do not use your first name unabbreviated. I know a few researchers whose names are of the form: C. Harry Kay. I also know of researchers who go by a single name (Robby, Arvind). So just fill in whatever names you want , abbreviated or not, into the first names field.
Make sure you use the same configuration of names for your entire career, so that all your papers can be linked to you (I made this mistake).
---
Tags: publications, personal-name
--- |
thread-1360 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1360 | Do PhD programs care about the personalities of applicants? | 2012-05-02T03:33:23.337 | # Question
Title: Do PhD programs care about the personalities of applicants?
Can a very extroverted person, for example, be more favored than a very quiet person? Or is this not ethical? Can someone who is psychopathic be barred from admission?
# Answer
Yes, decisions based at least partially on personality do occur. It's not clear to me what the legal technicalities are - for example, depending on your country there may be laws regarding things like discrimination against the mentally ill - but in practice an admissions committee can do whatever it likes, and nobody will be able to prove there was any illegal discrimination.
The way it typically works is that having a particularly pleasant or agreeable personality won't help you, but having an unpleasant personality may hurt you. If you seem likely to be difficult to get along with, rude, disruptive, uncooperative, or otherwise problematic, then that will generally be held against you. (This may be judged based on your personal statement, letters of recommendation, etc.) It won't necessarily doom your chances: some committee members just won't care, and others may be willing to excuse bad behavior if you are sufficiently talented. However, on average it will hurt your chances, sometimes substantially.
> 24 votes
# Answer
Personalities *can* count, because nobody wants to be an environment with lots of boorish colleagues. It's just not very fun.
However, in most cases—at least in the US—admissions are done without interviews. Therefore, the only way the personality of the candidate comes through is through what's written in the application. Either the personal statement or the letters of reference might reveal some details about the personality of the applicant. Usually, though, this is negative; I don't put much stock in letters of reference saying "so-and-so has a pleasant personality," since that is almost a *de rigeur* statement. (Something exceptional that goes into considerable detail, however, is different.)
When you have an interview, however, it's hard to hide your personality for very long. It can make a difference—but generally only if you're a candidate "on the bubble," or if your personality is so polarizing that nobody wants to bother with you, regardless of how nice you are. On the converse, though, I don't think a super-nice personality is enough to get someone on the bubble *in*.
> 12 votes
---
Tags: graduate-admissions, application, ethics
--- |
thread-1357 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1357 | What are good practices for sharing protocols online | 2012-05-02T01:20:00.563 | # Question
Title: What are good practices for sharing protocols online
We're beginning a fairly large effort to share the vast number of protocols accumulated in our lab and pushing them all to the cloud. Naturally, you don't want the knowledge of older graduate students lost when they graduate.
We have had experience with putting all of this information into OpenWetWare but there is a small but non-trivial learning curve with the wiki-format. Another possibility would be to create living documents with google docs and organize the links in a wiki format. Finally, there is always the dropbox method of having a bunch of files in folders. I was curious about good methods to create a repository of protocols.
# Answer
Thanks to Stack Exchange, I've recently started to become familiar with Markdown and in particular its variants, including MultiMarkdown and Pandoc. These might be the ideal alternative, as they're very easy to master—after all, it's what powers sites like this one!—and yet powerful enough that it can handle most of your needs.
Individual users can write their protocols in a simple, easy-to-read text format, and then output that to HTML, PDF, Word files, or whatever. Then all you need is a master page to catalog everything, and a web site manager who's skilled enough with a command prompt to handle the conversions using one of those tools. The format's flexible enough to handle hyperlinks as well as graphics with a minimum of fuss.
The other advantage of having a text-based system is that it makes version control very easy as well.
> 1 votes
---
Tags: productivity, collaboration, lab-management
--- |
thread-1375 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1375 | Number of potential PhD advisors at a school | 2012-05-03T01:58:07.490 | # Question
Title: Number of potential PhD advisors at a school
Past advice suggests that potential PhD students should be wary of attending schools with only one professor in their subfield. If you have problems with your advisor and want to switch, having that option would be invaluable.
But what if your subfield is not represented that well in the vast majority of departments? Almost all schools I'm considering applying for only have one professor in my intended research area. I'm a MS student at the moment and I'm sure what general subfield I'd like to do my PhD research in.
Should I just accept that this is how things are and try to check whether a professor and I would be good matches before accepting? Or should this make the few schools with more than one professor in this subfield more attractive? To be clear, every school I will apply to will have top researchers in this subfield. The comparison is more between a school with one top researcher and one newer researcher and another school with one top researcher and no one else in the subfield. The majority of schools are in the latter group.
I'm tempted to think that hiring committees avoid hiring additional faculty in my subfield if they already have one professor doing research in the area. They have their token professor and that's enough for them. Never mind that the professor's personality, perspective, and research methods matter!
# Answer
> 10 votes
As the author of the original answer, I suppose some further clarification is appropriate. The issues are:
1. Are you willing to work on a topic outside of your intended subfield?
2. Does your program assign students directly to a research supervisor at the time of admission?
If the answer to *both* questions is "no," then you have a potential problem on your hands, and then you should be very cautious. However, if you are willing to move outside your intended subfield if there are no positions available, or if you're guaranteed entry to the desired research group at the time, it's not nearly as serious a situation.
That said, if you only want to stay in your subfield, and it's only represented by one faculty at most institutions, then you'll need to do due diligence and figure out who will be the best fit for you, both in terms of research but in terms of "fit." A significant concern would then be: "Whose advising and supervision style best meshes with my own preferences?"
# Answer
> 10 votes
It sounds like this subarea might be somewhat marginalized in the larger area the department represents, and this is consistent across universities. Why is that ? is the subarea not particularly popular, or interesting, or does it lack the ability to get funding ? In all these case, you do have to ask yourself whether the risk of getting into such an area is worth it.
But on the more direct question of whether you should favor the few schools that have more than one professor, the right question is: what are you planning to do after a Ph.D ? And in what way can this professor (or professors) help with that goal ? If you want to go into academia (say), are these professors the dominant players in the area ? and so on.
# Answer
> 2 votes
Yes, having other professors in your subfield is a benefit. You and your advisor might have a falling out, or some freak tragedy could befall your advisor, or your advisor might leave for a job elsewhere and not get you an adequate (or any) offer to bring you.
But that doesn't make it an absolute necessity, since there are plenty of other really important things to consider. You should consider it a plus at the institutions that have two, but only you can evaluate how big a plus.
You should also think about ways to mitigate the problem at other places. For instance, there might be people in related areas, even if not your exact subfield, who are close enough to potentially supervise you, especially if they're switching in half-way through your PhD. Or there might be other faculty in the area near-by, at other schools in easy reach, who might at least be able to help out if something happens.
---
Tags: phd, graduate-school, graduate-admissions, professorship
--- |
thread-1404 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1404 | What excellent university DSP programs exist and what makes them excellent? | 2012-05-02T17:17:15.463 | # Question
Title: What excellent university DSP programs exist and what makes them excellent?
In the same vein as this question, but making sure to abide by Good Subjective/Bad Subjective, what DSP programs are out there that are excellent and why?
Please give concrete examples or at least a cursory explanation for what makes them good/thorough, and stand out from other programs at different universities.
# Answer
Firstly, lets assume you're talking about graduate programs. X being such a specialized program would only be available at that level of study.
In a nutshell:
1. Large list of cross listed (undegrad/grad) or only grad courses in all areas of study. You still need to have courses that can advance your overall knowledge of engineering.
2. Large variety of courses in your area of study. (If your studying DSP, its not enough to just take a DSP class, you may find it relevant to study data compression, machine learning, Free-space laser communications.) This also means you wouldn't have to complete a large number of independent study programs.
3. Large Number of Faculty in your research area. If you are interested in studying music signal processing, you would want to do research with a professor who has experience in that field. If there are 10 professors, you could be more selective about who to work with or who will be the best fit for your research area.
As for schools with decent program: **Binghamton University**, while it is not well known outside of New York, its master's programs is well structured, large number of faculty in EE at least 3-4 DSP professors, 10-20 graduate level courses offered a semester and large number of those are DSP related.
> 6 votes
---
Tags: education
--- |
thread-1413 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1413 | What are the essential points that should be covered in a dissertation abstract? | 2012-05-05T00:03:51.077 | # Question
Title: What are the essential points that should be covered in a dissertation abstract?
I need to prepare a 2-page abstract of my dissertation as part of a funding application. **What are the essential points that such an abstract should cover?**
This opportunity (and my PhD) is in the social sciences, and I know the points regarding *tailoring* the abstract to the opportunity advertised. But still what is the sort of information that the recruiter would scan my abstract for? For instance, I have seen Profs run their finger down a 2 page list of publications in an application; only occasionally pausing at some journal names. What are the fingers of *my* evaluators going to pause at?
# Answer
Any abstract should cover 4 elements: **context**, **problem**, **solution**, and **validation**, in this order. The main thing you want to highlight is the **contributions** of your dissertation. The context and problem descriptions are essential to try to make your contributions understandable, and to convince the reader that what you have done is important. Describing the validation is important so that you convince the reader that what you have done is correct/valid.
> 5 votes
---
Tags: phd, thesis, application, funding, evaluation-criteria
--- |
thread-503 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/503 | How to choose the most worthwhile research papers to define my thesis? | 2012-03-01T23:13:23.423 | # Question
Title: How to choose the most worthwhile research papers to define my thesis?
I'm a first year PhD student. I'm just reading background papers trying to find a topic for my thesis: my subject is turning around tree different elements (XML (as a tool), complex data, and the cloud computing (as an environment)). So I find that is a large subject with many materials that treat this subject, whether each element individually, or two elements at most at a time, but not all three together.
My question is
> How should I choose the most worthy materials so that I could find a good topic which uses these three elements together?
Any information, insights, or propositions are welcome. Thank you.
# Answer
> 2 votes
Find out what the most current problems in these fields are. This can be done by reading papers in the most recent proceedings of the conferences and journals dedicated to these topics.
Regarding these three topics:
* XML is, as you say, a tool. XML in itself is not particularly novel and a lot of research involving XML is of the form "Something interesting and known *in XML*." I find such papers unexciting and reject them if they pass my way.
* Cloud computing is a hot topic and there will be lots of people working on it. This means that it is easy to find papers and easy to find a venue for publications. On the other hand, there is a lot of competition.
* Complex data is and will always be interesting. But what do you plan to do with it? Are you planning to use the cloud to process massive amounts of complex data? That is certainly a hot topic these days, with things like Google's Map-Reduce framework and other comparable things (Hadoop, Cassandra, ...). A lot of big companies have interest in such settings, so it might be challenging to find something new to do, but you will likely have people interested in the work you do.
In short, I think you only really need to consider the complex data and cloud computing combination. This will make your search a little easier. Then find the top conferences in the area and read the proceedings from the last few years.
In addition, it is crucial that you build on top of what other people have done, rather than starting from scratch. Ideally, start with something developed by people in your own lab (whether it be a system or a theory).
# Answer
> 8 votes
I can answer this from the perspective of someone who did it poorly in retrospect, but from a different field (engineering). You will want to make sure that any papers you begin with are:
1. **Accepted findings in the field**. I made the mistake of basing much of my thesis work on a paper which was used a one-off paradigm, and was not replicated by anyone other than myself. This resulted in my needing to spend much more time validating my results than I otherwise would have needed to, because there was no other validation in the literature.
2. **Simplicity over novelty**. You're a graduate student, at the beginning of your career. You'll have tons of time to do awesome things as your career progresses. Unless you're working for Dr. Awesome BigName Researcher whose lab is known for doing cutting-edge work on X, be conservative... choose the less exciting but more likely to work research over the more exciting but very complex and/or more likely to fail.
Note that this post is completely irrelevant to anyone whose advisor effectively tells them what their thesis project is, as your criterion will be (1) the papers your advisor hands you. You have my sympathies :)
# Answer
> 3 votes
I think the answer to your question depends on the aims you want to pursue with your thesis.
* **Start a career in academia.** In this case I agree with eykanal. Use something that enables you to build a solid foundation.
* **Start a career in industry.** Look at the particular industry/company you're interested in and decide what's going to be most important to them and hence most important in facilitating you getting a job there.
* **Neither of the above.** If you don't really know what you want to do after you've finished your PhD, I'd say go for the thing that interests you most, even if the results you're basing your research on is novel and you're not sure if it's the right direction to go in. That's why it's called research after all :)
In any case you should make sure that you're comfortable doing the research. The best papers are no good for you if there's no scope for you to extend the work or you can't build on it for other reasons.
In your particular situtation I would probably focus on papers that bring the different subjects you've mentioned together, as this gives you the option of shifting the focus of your PhD slightly in one direction later.
# Answer
> 1 votes
One point not covered by the other answers is Review articles which summarize the state of a particular research field.
As the OP is at an early stage of the process, these are especially useful for gving an overview of the most important work, and are usually written by an authority on the topic. They can be invaluable in preparing a reading list, as the references are the ones that are considered central to the development of the field, and will often be articles that you'll be expected to know.
Even when looking for inter-disciplinary stuff it is usually useful to begin with review articles from all the sub-fields that touch upon the research topic. The Annual Reviews series of journals are a good generic place to start, though you should focus on the leading journals of your field. The number of citations that can be checked on google scholar are also useful in establishing the important research concerns of your field to know *before* you start working on something brilliant that nobody will care about. For instance, there might be excellent reasons why nobody has done work usng your chosen approach, so getting the most respected/ cited papers will help you identify useful research topics, and also the ones to avoid.
---
Tags: phd, thesis, reading
--- |
thread-1439 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1439 | Beginners' guide to publications in mathematics | 2012-05-06T13:07:08.050 | # Question
Title: Beginners' guide to publications in mathematics
I solved an interesting problem in probability, and I think it's worth publishing as an interesting application. However, I am not a mathematician and don't know anything about existing journals or conferences where my problem may fit.
Is there a comprehensive guide with all the important journals and conferences in math, with an explanation of what kind of papers they may publish?
# Answer
> 5 votes
You mention that you are not a mathematician and that you feel that your solution to a math problem is worth publishing. If you are an undergraduate, you might want to consider journals targeted at authors who are undergraduates (search the internet for "undergraduate math journal").
If you are not an undergraduate (or even if you are), I recommend you look at the three journals published by the Mathematics Association of America:
* Mathematics Magazine "offers lively, readable, and appealing exposition on a wide range of mathematical topics." (Read more about it here.)
* The College Mathematics Journal "is designed to enhance classroom learning and stimulate thinking regarding undergraduate mathematics. It publishes articles, short Classroom Capsules, problems, solutions, media reviews and other pieces. All are aimed at the college mathematics curriculum with emphasis on topics taught in the first two years." (Read more about it here.)
* The American Mathematical Monthly "publishes articles, notes, and other features about mathematics and the profession. Its readers span a broad spectrum of mathematical interests and abilities. Authors are invited to submit articles and notes that bring interesting mathematical ideas to a wide audience of Monthly readers."
---
Tags: publications, mathematics
--- |
thread-1354 | https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1354 | Do many academic institutions let students deposit their publications in the institutional repository? | 2012-05-01T23:13:30.540 | # Question
Title: Do many academic institutions let students deposit their publications in the institutional repository?
I'm a doctoral student and I've published several academic papers. My institution maintains a digital institutional repository, but it doesn't look like I can put copies of my work in it. When I finish my dissertation, a copy of that would go in the IR. It seems strange that the institution doesn't seem to have practices in place to take in other published work of students. Are there other academic institutions that allow this? If so, it would be great to have links to their policies.
# Answer
> 7 votes
Most university institutional repositories will allow students to submit their work, as the aim of an institutional repository is, generally, to capture the scholarly, research and creative output of a university. This would include work being created by faculty, of course, but also staff and students.
What differs between universities is the emphasis they place on different creators. At a large research university, increasing citation counts of faculty members will be a key consideration that may make the acquisition of faculty works a higher priority than student works. Liberal arts colleges will, based on their institutional missions as teaching centres, will be able to focus on undergraduate research on a level that many research universities would be unable to do.
I have recently become the Digital Repository Coordinator at a research university, and one of the challenges I face is trying to balance acquiring faculty and staff work vs. student work. Many of the faculty I have talked to, however, are excited by the potential of using the institutional repository as a way to showcase their students' work.
As a doctoral student, especially, I would assume that you would be able to submit work to your university's institutional repository. Looking at your profile, I believe that your university's repository does allow students to submit work (See http://digilib.gmu.edu/dspace/handle/1920/2883, for example). If it's not clear how to do so, contact your university's repository coordinator to make it happen! They'd more than likely be thrilled a student (1) knows what an institutional repository is, and (2) is interested in depositing their work.
# Answer
> 2 votes
I guess it is not correct for an institution to host the students' works, but Theses, Dissertations, and Technical Reports, in its internal digital library (usually open to externals). The reason is simple, most papers are published under copyright terms. This way, one is not allowed to host this "copyrighted" content, without the publisher permission. I see many departments, research groups, and so on, making public available the list of publications, with a link to the original source.
# Answer
> 2 votes
I don't know how common it is, but certainly some institutions allow student papers. For example, Harvard's repository "provides open access to peer reviewed scholarly articles authored or co-authored by faculty, staff, and students of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences" (http://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/2). I can't think of any good reason to exclude students, so I'm puzzled by why a university would do that.
# Answer
> 2 votes
Have you tried asking your supervisor to deposit the papers? Certainly in the old days there was usually some kind of review process for technical reports which might still be applicable to solely-authored-by-students papers, but I should think that if it is actually published in a journal and/or a member of faculty will vouch for it then the repository should accept it.
---
Tags: publications, graduate-school, repository
--- |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.