text:
Can a managing editor replace the editor on a paper or remove them from the editorial board?
Let's assume that a journal editor has been allocated a submission, started reviewing it himself, but stopped responding to the managing editor (= you) despite a long time since the authors had sent the submission (a little less than 3 years). The submission is longer than each of the papers accepted during the last 5 years, but historically, even longer papers were accepted. The authors were aware of the length issue, but they were concerned. The editor's Web page got updated (say, new teaching contents appears), so, he/she is  presumably still alive, but simply unresponsive.
Let's further assume that you've waited long enough (say, 1 month), tried to give them editor a call, but got no response at all.
Is it the managing editor's (= your) responsibility to replace the editor for the paper? And is it your task to get him/her off the editorial board?  What is the typical in the field of computer science?

I did flag it for reopening, right after I made my comment above.

Journals have different models: Some appoint editors to terms of fixed length (say, 3 years per term, renewable at the end of the term), some others appoint them for indefinite periods. That will then also influence in what ways an editor can be removed.
In the former case, the more common case will simply be to not assign any papers to that person any more, then wait out the end of their term and just not reappoint them. In the latter case, one has to make difficult decisions that have the possibility to antagonize colleagues one has often known for many years and with whom one may in fact be friendly. It's definitely awkward to kick such a person off the board, or even to suggest that they resign voluntarily. I've had to do that and it's not fun. But there are situations where it's warranted because the person in question just can't seem to get their act together and turn papers around in a timely manner.
The easier case is definitely to take a paper from an editor and assign it to another. That's because it's not a public act: Very few people will know that it ever happened, and most of the time it's something that remains between the editor-in-chief and the editor in question. Both will know that it was necessary, but you're doing it in a way that it will never become public.
Both of these situations fall under the responsibility of the editor-in-chief. It's one of the responsibilities most people in this situation probably like the least about the job: Making technical decisions is easy, dealing with unpleasant situations that involve people you've known for a long time is hard. At the same time, it's clearly bad for the journal to let these situations linger, and so they need to be addressed sooner or later. Running away from it sounds easy but is, in the long run, also not going to endear you to the community around a journal.

involve people you for a long time is hard you accidentally a word

@AzorAhai -- thanks, I've corrected it. I mean "involve people you've known for a long time". I appreciate the pun of omitting a word in your comment :-)

Yes, a managing editor (which I'm using as a term synonymous to "editor-in-chief" etc - basically members of the editorial board with more responsibility) can replace the editor assigned to a paper or remove them from the editorial board.
Perhaps the more pertinent question is: if the managing editor doesn't do it, who will?

The editor is not going to remove himself/herself from the editorial board - after all they're already inactive.
The publisher is not likely to do anything without approval from the editorial board. In special circumstances they can, but doing so is a nuclear option that will leave a lot of bad feelings among the remaining editors and is therefore usually avoided.
Obviously the authors and the peer reviewers can't do anything about it.

Therefore the managing editor must do it. Nobody else will.

There are sometimes other roles around: editorial assistant, associate managing editor (= associate editor-in-chief), advisory board, its chairperson.


text:
What citation style allows the author to reference sources with superscript numbers?
What citation style allows the author to reference sources with superscript numbers?
I'm at the very edge of my page limit. I'm allowed to use any citation style. I need something concise that can point to the relevant works I've listed on the works-cited page.
Anyone have any suggestions?

I often have found myself wondering this.
Not for avoiding page count, but because I find it more natural than referring to the authors.
I currently am using IEEE which does the number in square braces not superscript. Which by happy coincidence is the preferred style for the faculty i am studying in.

I am presuming this is a coursework assignment. If you're that tight for space, are you sure you haven't written too much? Be careful that your finished piece doesn't "feel" cramped.
The Nature journal uses superscript numbers for in-text citations1 and then references them in the bibliography like so:

Hynek, B. M. Implications for hydrologic processes on Mars from extensive bedrock outcrops throughout Terra Meridiani. Nature 431, 156–159 (2004).

Yeah, IMO, the question is too big for the page limit. I don't think it feels cramped yet. I hope I'm right. Thanks for the tip. I'll use that.

If you are using LaTeX, you can refer to the following links for superscript citations:

Superscript citations without brackets
Using a superscript reference number

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
How much professional assistance can I receive on an undergraduate capstone design project without cheating?
I'm taking the undergraduate capstone design course in electrical engineering at a university in the U.S. and I've been receiving some programming help from a friend who is not, nor ever has been, a student at the school. I understand that a certain amount of professional assistance is acceptable, however, there was a significant programming snag that I encountered that I would not have been able to solve on my own without this person's help. I have not asked my professor directly about this yet (there's still time, though!) since I've been afraid of self-incriminating and that I may be asked to remove the code which would put me back to my major snag that I can't solve. At this late point in the course, this solution is essential as removing it would likely force our group to alter direction/scope. This is a design project and not a programming project (I'm currently using plenty of acceptable open-source code from GitHub) and I feel my group has legitimately created original design work. Obviously, I have no problems at all citing any sources I used for the project as my goal is to avoid cheating.
My question is this:
Can I use code that was created specifically for my capstone design project by a knowledgeable person (with my assistance) without cheating if I cite the source? Would it make it more acceptable if this person posted this same code to GitHub as well since other GitHub resources have already been deemed acceptable?

You have to ask your professor, no way around it.  Suppose that people here say "yes, it's fine" but it turns out that your professor disagrees.  Guess whose opinion prevails?  "The Internet said it was okay" will not be a defense when you're charged with cheating.

@NateEldredge, that sounds like a pretty definitive answer. Why not make it a formal one?

But how great would it be to one day say out loud to a professor, "The internet said it was okay!" You're right though and I have already set up a meeting with my prof. I suppose my question is more circumstantial than I realized and a broader inquiry on authorship and citation is probably not possible. Thank you everyone for your feedback!

I have not asked my professor directly about this yet (there's still time, though!) since I've been afraid of self-incriminating and that I may be asked to remove the code which would put me back to my major snag that I can't solve.

There is not a lot of guidance that we can give you on this question as outsiders.  Your professor is the one who has set the assignment, and he/she is the proper person to determine what level of assistance is allowed while meeting the learning/assessment goals of the assignment.  In cases like these, where you have doubt over the allowable scope for assistance, you need to speak to your professor for guidance.  Since you have already received assistance, this conversation will involve disclosure of previous assistance, so you should be open to the possibility that you may have to discard some of that work.
The other issue here is the importance of learning how things work.  If you have been provided with code by an outside professional that solves some problem in your assignment, then you need to take the time to understand how and why that code solves the problem.  You say that if you are asked to remove the code then that will put you back to a point where you can't solve the problem.  This suggests to me that you don't actually understand what that code is doing, and so it is not appropriate for you to use it in your assignment.  The best approach here would be to take the time to learn the reasoning behind the code that was used, and why it works to solve your problem.  Once you understand this, it should not be a major problem if you had to remove that code and write your own replacement code in a different form.

I completely see where you are coming from in the first paragraph and can't argue it. However, I suppose I wanted my question to address a broader inquiry on intent. I.e. where do the boundaries generally lie in the world of open-source programming when it comes to coauthorship (unacceptable for this project), referencing, and acknowledging (both acceptable for this project)? Obviously, that isn't how I worded the question so I'm accepting this answer as sufficient to my stated question.

@melonhouse: With respect to the broader issue, I would say that there is a definite line between finding and using existing open-source resources that assist in an assignment (which would sometimes be allowed) versus having an expert program new resources specifically for the purpose of advancing the assignment.  I think the latter would generally be regarded as usurping the learning goals of the assignment, and would therefore probably not be allowed.  The former may be allowed in many cases (with proper attribution, referencing, etc.) so long as the use of those resources is not excluded.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Co-Author from Industry collabrator
I have one question: if i did some contribution to experiment setup design /software /process model development but it I did substantial contribution to other criteria  (Drafting -Logistics- Industry support financiallyand technically , reviewing and modifying paper....)  which raise the paper to be accepted by the journal and also follow up and provide advice as from industry to direct the research , do i still not be qualified as a co-author at least the last one? then what my credit in this work, just an acknowledgment ?

Perhaps the ICMJE's guidelines on authorship can be of use? http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html

You have made a scientific contribution, which (generally) merits co-authorship (unless it was a particularly small contribution).

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Does the license for arXiv uploads apply to TeX source or the PDF?
I am wondering to which of the content that I publish on arXiv the license I chose during publication applies.
Let's assume that I uploaded just a single TeX-source file and filled out the form with metadata (Title, Tags, Keywords, Abstract).
Then, I have different licenses to choose from, see https://arxiv.org/help/license
At the moment of writing, there are

CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution
CC BY-SA: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
CC BY-NC-SA: Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike
CC BY-NC-ND: Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives
arXiv.org perpetual, non-exclusive license
CC Zero

After publication, arXiv compiles a PDF and makes it available on the articles page for download. The preprint's arXiv page then features links to the PDF, Postscript, "Other formats" (including the TeX-source), and a link to the license:
Like this

or this

To which files/artifacts does the chosen license apply?
Only the TeX-source?
What license then applies to the PDF-file? In the case of a TeX-source published under, e.g., a CC-BY license, does the PDF give the proper attribution?

a. Attribution.

If You Share the Licensed Material (including in modified form), You must:
A. retain the following if it is supplied by the Licensor with the Licensed Material:
i. identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution, in any reasonable
manner requested by the Licensor (including by pseudonym if
designated);
ii. a copyright notice;
iii. a notice that refers to this Public License;
iv. a notice that refers to the disclaimer of warranties;
v. a URI or hyperlink to the Licensed Material to the extent reasonably practicable;
B. indicate if You modified the Licensed Material and retain an indication of any previous modifications; and
C. indicate the Licensed Material is licensed under this Public License, and include the text of, or the URI or hyperlink to, this
Public License.

Assuming that I did not only upload TeX-source but also some images, I would assume that all my "uploads" are subject to the chosen license.
Only the PDF-file?
Which license then applies to the TeX-Source? Under which terms could I, e.g., copy parts of the published TeX-source code (e.g. tikz-code graphics) and remix/republish it in one of my own works?
TeX-Source and PDF-file?

"Funny" thing: if you click on the support page https://arxiv.org/help/license/contact#contacting-arxiv ... there is a 404 error .

I always assumed the same license applied to both.  AFAIK arXiv has no way to specify separate licenses for source and PDF, neither for the author nor for the reader.  I also can't think of any reason why anyone should want to release them under different licenses, nor any reason why arXiv should support them in doing so.

This is not to be taken as legal advice regarding your specific situation. For specific advice regarding your legal risk, please consult your lawyer or representation.
The license applies to the whole of the content uploaded to arXiv, as explained in the Submission terms and agreement.
The "arXiv license" is the minimal rights required by arXiv to distribute your work, and it applies to the whole of the source package. It does not grant subsequent rights to others (which things like the various CC licenses may). Individual files within the package may have differing licenses (e.g. some tex packages may contain a compatible MIT license, which is different than the arXiv license). If your work is licensed under a specific license that is not available in the list of licenses from arXiv, you can select the arXiv license and then specify the license within the full text of the article (e.g. a Open Access license that is not one of the CC licenses).

Almost all common licenses, including CC licenses are about content, not format. Even the ND versions have this in the description:

Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format

Note "any medium or format".
There must be some, perhaps for video, that allow distribution but not alteration (think video streaming), but that wouldn't be typical for a license to academic work.
And note that the arXiv license is a license from the copyright holder to arXiv itself so that the work can't be withdrawn. It is not a license to others.


text:
Is there a deadline for journal submission?
I wonder if there is a deadline for submission to a journal? So far, I only know that submission to conferences has a deadline, but I'm not sure about journals.
I've looked at several journals of Elsevier, IEEE, and Springer, and I cannot find any information about the deadlines. I did some search on Google and understand the process as follows:

One journal may publish multiple issues per year. If at the moment I submit a paper to a journal and miss the deadline of the current issues (which I do not know of), my paper will be reviewed for the next one.
Although there is no "fixed" deadline, but if I submit a paper and it is to be revised, I will then have some amount of time to finish the revision - so that's some sort of deadline, but it's relative to each paper.

Another question is that, as a Ph.D. student in machine learning/artificial intelligence, should I focus more on conferences or journals? It's been 6 months since I started my Ph.D. and I haven't published anything. In France, a Ph.D. lasts for only 3 years and my doctorate school demands at least 4 papers published from a "successful" Ph.D. student. Should I start worrying now?
Thank you very much!

Conference vs journal publishing differs by field. What is your field?

Precisely I work on predictive maintenance using machine learning/artificial intelligence. So I guess my field is engineering and applied machine learning.

Generally speaking journals have multiple issues on some schedule from weekly to annually. A paper can be submitted at any time. The review process will then proceed and the paper may be revised on recommendation of reviewers. When the paper it ready for publication, an editor (managing editor) will schedule it for some future issue.
So, there is no real deadline for normal journal submission. However, there is no guarantee that a paper submitted right now will be published soon. The review process takes time and there can be delays. But earlier submission (of a well written paper) is preferred. Submitting a sloppy paper early and hoping for early publication is probably a bad idea. The review will take longer and rejection is possible.
However, some journals publish special issues, perhaps on a topic or to honor some person. For those, there is a deadline, but it is made clear when the "call" for papers goes out.
For the question which is better - journals or conferences -, it depends on the field. In CS, for example, conferences are the preferred venue for new work. In other fields conferences are much less important. Your advisor will know which is best for you and also whether you should have any concerns about your progress.

Nice answer. One small thing to add and support your answer: With online early access (or similar titles), journals now publish articles shortly after acceptance before the scheduled issue comes out. This effect of this is to remove the wait for the next issue to come out.

I will start from the bottom; No you should not worry. Without knowing your field, a PhD topic needs several months to get well defined (even though, things can change after) after reviewing state-of-the-art. So, I think you cannot say anything about your status and it is logical that you don't have any submission. For the other questions:

I've looked at several journals of Elsevier, IEEE, and Springer, and I cannot find any information about the deadlines.

No regular issues don't have deadlines. Special issues, yes! However, special issues are well specified in terms of topics.

One journal may publish multiple issues per year.

When we submit a paper to a journal, we don't know how long it will take until the final decision (from weeks to years). Also, we cannot decide to which issue it will appear.

I will then have some amount of time to finish the revision - so that's some sort of deadline, but it's relative to each paper.

This deadline is only for you to revise the paper and send it back to the same reviewers. Otherwise, the editor cannot reach the reviewers or they forget about your paper.

should I focus more on conferences or journals?

Only your supervisor and/or the PhD committee at your faculty can answer this.


text:
Forgot to show tracked changes in revised conference paper. Is this a big issue?
Recently submitted to a Computer Science conference where after the rebuttal, they requested a revised pdf that shows the tracked changes when responding to the reviewers. Responded well to the reviewers, made the changes to my pdf, but forgot to highlight those changes in the pdf :(
I'm really nervous on this. Contacted them to ask if they would allow me to send a revised pdf with the tracked changes since I only got it in at the end of last week but haven't heard back yet. How big of an issue will this be? I'm sweating right now. Any thoughts would be very helpful!

The only people that can accurately answer this question are conference organizers and referees.  Any answers you get here will be less than useless, as they can be misleading.

Please do not vandalize your question. Leaving it in this state allows it to be edited and reopened. And sometimes people disagree with the close voters and will vote to reopen even without changes.

This might depend on their general evaluation of your paper and how likely acceptance was prior to this round of edits. It might also depend on both scheduling and on the number and quality of competing papers since time and space is limited at conferences. Likewise, deadlines can be pretty firm. For a journal it probably wouldn't matter.
You were correct to contact them immediately. If you have a channel to send the proper document then do so without waiting for an answer. It can only speed the process which might be necessary.

Impossible to guess. Too many variables.


text:
Journal I published is on the ESCI list, but can't find it in PubMed, is there a reason for that?
I recently authored a simple case report in a local journal. It is Q4 in Scimago and in the ESCI of Clarivate. But I can't find my paper in Pubmed. Is there a reason for that?

ESCI is not the same as PubMed. I don't think there's a reason to expect ESCI journals to be indexed by PubMed.

Here's a page that tells you what PubMed indexes:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/about/

MEDLINE MEDLINE is the largest component of PubMed and consists
primarily of citations from journals selected for MEDLINE; articles
indexed with MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) and curated with funding,
genetic, chemical and other metadata.
PubMed Central (PMC) Citations for PubMed Central (PMC) articles make
up the second largest component of PubMed.
PMC is a full text archive that includes articles from journals
reviewed and selected by NLM for archiving (current and historical),
as well as individual articles collected for archiving in compliance
with funder policies.
Bookshelf The final component of PubMed is citations for books and
some individual chapters available on Bookshelf.
Bookshelf is a full text archive of books, reports, databases, and
other documents related to biomedical, health, and life sciences.

Also more detail about what it takes for MEDLINE including criteria and how to apply at https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medline/medline_home.html
Scimago and Clarivate aren't listed as relevant in deciding what PubMed indexes. A "Q4" journal is not very well regarded and I'm not that surprised it isn't included. If you search PubMed for the journal title you'll probably find no articles are indexed, not just yours.

Thank you. While they are not relevant, I assumed they have similar guidelines for what they include in their archives. I know a Q4 journal is not well regarded, but it is nearly impossible to publish a case report without paying an exorbitant amount for a respected journal.

@BilalBahadırAkbulut I don't think their guidelines are very similar. That said there's still a lot of junk in PubMed.

True that. For some reason, I keep thinking PubMed is this archive that accepts everything (like Google Scholar), while WoS and Scopus vet their journals. I guess I was wrong on that account.

@ Bilal Bahadir Akbulut : One can publish a case report in well regarded subscription-based journals, depending on the specialty of course. You may have to modify your manuscript in some ways (e.g. to comply with special sections (e.g. see AJM)). There are some case report-specific journals that charge less than 1000$, and I am not talking about Hindawi / MDPI / etc ;)


text:
Do I need to let the editor know of my first peer-review?
As an incoming physics PhD student, I've recently been offered an opportunity to review a manuscript for a journal, it's a paper that builds upon a prior work I've co-authored.
While I'm familiar with its foundational aspects, I have not performed peer reviews before, and some of the paper's complex mathematical aspects are outside my current expertise. Recognizing this as a valuable learning experience in peer reviewing, I'm inclined to accept this invitation. However, I'm unsure if I should inform the journal editor that it's my first peer reviewing and seek guidance on evaluating the paper's suitability for publication.

Assure yourself that the publication is reputable and that you aren't being exploited. Some invitations to review are like that.

Please limit posts to a single question, and avoid making edits that would make the existing answers no longer responsive to the question asked. I suggest posting a new question about time limits and being given only a single or a few days to complete a review.

No, there is no need to inform the editor of this. However, since I imagine you do not have much experience with receiving and writing reports, you should discuss the matter with your advisor and also ask for their feedback (or feedback from some other trusted mentor) once you have written your report.
Depending on the field, the expectation may be that you should ask permission from the editor first before showing your report to anyone.* I don't know what the conventions are in physics.
The question you should ask yourself is whether you are willing to invest the time to check the paper in detail. You say that parts of the paper lie outside of your current expertise. This should be okay as long as you treat this as a learning opportunity and invest some time learning about the techniques used in the paper. Alternatively, if there is a small part of the paper that you could not check due to your lack of expertise, then you need to state this explicitly in your report ("results A and B are correct, but I was unable to verify result C, as it lies outside of my area of expertise"). If the part of the paper that you are unable to check for yourself is significant, you should probably decline to write a review (but discuss this with your advisor first).
Footnote*: In my opinion, minor transgressions of this principle done in good faith in the form of running a largely positive review by one's Ph.D. advisor to check that it is clearly and professionally written and has all the information that the editor needs are okay to do without having to bother the editor about it, but others may disagree.

@leonos I have edited the answer based on your comment.

@leonos I always get the sense that physics is less strict about these things than some other fields. If you look at the guidelines for referees for APS journals, under "Confidentiality" it says that the materials associated with the peer review process "must remain confidential when you consult with colleagues or invite them to write a joint report. We ask that you include the names and contact information of any colleagues who help in writing the report.". Note the lack of any mention of required pre-approval before consulting with colleagues.

@leonos Authors can request to exclude certain reviewers. I'm not sure how an editor would treat cases where a reviewer discloses consulting with someone who the editor agrees should be excluded.

@leonos If the author requests Dr. X to be excluded as a referee and the editor agrees to this but sends the manuscript to Dr. X's Ph.D. student, then although this fulfills the letter of the author's request, I would say the fault in that case lies squarely with the editor and not with the Ph.D. student if Dr. X gets wind of the manuscript.

The APS literally encourages senior scholars (i.e. faculty) refereeing papers to share the refereeing process with their more junior colleagues (post-docs and grad students). However, even for other journals where this is not technically allowed, it is very common in some fields to get feedback from colleagues about papers one is refereeing. A major reason for this in particle physics is that virtually all papers are posted on the arXiv as preprints, so even before publication, many people have had the opportunity to read papers; there is no system of confidentiality before formal publication.

Sometimes, physics colleagues will explicitly say, "I have received [such-and-such paper] to referee.  Do you have an opinion about it?"  Other times, they are a bit more circumspect, with a wink-and-nudge, "I was really wondering what you thought about [such-and-such preprint].  What was your impression of it?"  But everyone knows why they must be asking.

If there are parts you don't/can't review, make this delimited scope clear in your review
As noted in the other answer here, even if there are parts of the work that are outside your present expertise, you may be able to review them anyway by going through the material slowly and methodically and learning what you need to know for the review as you go.  If this is not possible, and there are aspects of a paper that are beyond your competency to review even with some additional study, you should state the delimited scope of your review accordingly.  This is something you can write directly in your review, which makes the scope of your review clear to both the author and the editor.  It is still okay to act as a reviewer for the paper so long as you are able to review a sufficient amount of the paper to be helpful to the editor.  What we want to avoid in these situations is cases where a part of the paper has not been properly reviewed but the editor is unaware of this because the reviewers fail to disclose limitations on scope.
Delimited reviews sometimes occur in papers that involve more than one disciplinary area, where reviewers from different fields scrutinise different aspects of the paper.  (I once reviewed the probability/statistical material in a physics paper; since I am not trained in physics I made it clear in my review that its scope was limited to review of the probability and statistics and that another reviewer would need to scrutinise the physics.)  This can occur even with experienced reviewers.  For a junior reviewer it would not be at all unreasonable if you delimit the scope of your review to avoid areas you feel incompetent to scrutinise, so long as you make it clear which parts you did not review.

You can also make this clear in a private note just to the editor, if the system allows this


text:
What is scholarship score in paper review?
I got paper reviews and I found there is an item scholarship,

Can anyone tell what is scholarship score mean in paper review?

Ask the editor, that seems to be a scale decided by that particular house or reviewer.

A lot of journals, conferences, publishers, universities, etc, provide guidelines on how to review a paper, and much of this is online. But without knowing who precisely the review is for it's hard to comment. The following guidelines identify scholarship with citing sources but it's hard to know if that applies in your case: https://staff.fnwi.uva.nl/u.endriss/teaching/comsoc/2011/how-to-write-a-review.txt

@SolarMike Thank you, I will check the FAQ.

@StuartF Thanks.

A guess but robably means good use of the pre-existing literature.

From the dictionary,

noun

learning; knowledge acquired by study; the academic attainments of a scholar.
a sum of money or other aid granted to a student, because of merit, need, etc., to
  pursue his or her studies.
the position or status of such a student.
a foundation to provide financial assistance to students.

This is the first meaning - it's a measure of how much knowledge your paper adds to the world.

How is that different from significance and originality?

I would understand it as "level of academic professionalism" - i.e. quality of literature review, development, solidity of analysis and similar, as compared to, say, "technical quality" which probably would refer to no errors in derivation, etc. I would see them as related, though.


text:
Transferring to another university due to discrimination/policies/healthcare availability?
I've read some threads on transferring to another university based on many factors, but mine are focused around my ability to live comfortably with workplace protections, opportunities, and medical care (among other things).
I'm fairly certain that if I laid out my concerns with my department, they would understand and be supportive (although I have no plans to do this as of yet). My question is essentially whether another university would be willing to accept my transfer for these reasons, especially this late in the game (year 2, recently finished qualifiers).
Would personal safety and access to resources be considered a respectable choice? I just don't want to shoot myself in the foot in terms of having a future, I suppose.
(Apologies if this has been posted before in some respect, also please let me know if this breaks any rules, this is my first question on this Stack!)

I'm pretty sure that in most places a transfer would be based entirely on you academic qualifications and record. While individuals may be sympathetic to your problems, most systems are too bureaucratic to include such factors in decision making. If you have a good record and have a promising future you can probably move.
In an interview, however, you could raise some issues, especially better health care opportunities, but I'd be a bit cautious about claiming a discriminatory environment unless there is already public discussion of some incidents. It isn't that such things are unlikely to exist, but that they are hard to judge and probably wouldn't overcome academic deficiencies if there are any. Just be cautious.
But you might explore your current situation with a trusted faculty member or with an office dedicated to student support before you make firm decisions.

That's what I'm thinking, some is institutional, but not all of it is (some of it boils down to location). And yeah, I wouldn't make a claim like that lightly. I believe I'm doing fairly well (publications, conference presentations, 4.0 GPA, etc.) so hopefully that would be acceptable. (Thanks for taking the time to comment! It means a lot!)


text:
Putting research papers online
I am doing research on a topic related to an authentication technique. For my own convenience (and for the others), I'm doing all my research and putting everything on a webpage which I'll host on my personal website. I am more organized when there's an anchor link which takes me from text to the bibliography and when everything is online.
It would be an added benefit and convenience if I can also put all the papers I refer to on the same website. Is it permissible to do so? For instance, I heard a professor even encourage putting the paper online (which was originally on arXiv. But then I actually paid for a paper from Springer, and I was wondering if I can use the same logic and just assume that it is legal to do so. My intention is only to aid myself and anyone else interested in my research to access the papers I referred to in my research.

Probably not legal, no. Too bad, indeed. Maybe in the distant future (after we're all underwater...)

Would this section of your site be password protected to only allow access to you and your collaborators?

@JeromyAnglim No, I can stop search engines from indexing it, but the page would be publically accessible.

It depends on the specific license the papers are under, but if you are talking about uploading the full text version of the article to your own website then most likely no it is not permissible to do this.
If they were your own papers, it is more likely that a journal allows you to do this, but still some will not and it is important to check the policies of the individual journals.
You could certainly put a bibliography on your own website though, and link to the journal articles from there, hosted at their original journals or preprints (DOI links would be a good way to do this).
As a practical matter, however, if you host these documents in some non-public place (like a private document or privately hosted password-protected site rather than a public web site), you are extremely unlikely to catch any grief. If they are public, however, you expose yourself.


text:
Is it unprofessional for a journal editor to be anonymous?
An editor of a journal asked me to review a paper but did not provide his/her name or institution, signing the e-mail as, essentially, "Editor of ...". The e-mail seems to be based upon a template. The sender's e-mail address is of the form AbbreviatedJournalName@PublisherName.com
The journal is reputable but not a top one. I cannot determine the editor's name from public online sources or private contacts.  My best guess is that the name of the author of the e-mail is very likely to belong to the list of the editors advertised on the web page of the journal.  I know nobody from this list personally through I've read and cited some of their papers.

How should the editor's decision to stay anonymous be qualified? For example, was it

(un)ethical,
(un)professional,
(contrary to the) commonly accepted practice?

What does this tell us about the editor or the journal?
I would like to know whom I am speaking to before taking any decision. What would be the most appropriate reaction from my side, if any?

In another circumstance, the editor of a different, top-notch journal to which I submitted is unknown to me. I corresponded only with the chief editor, and I know that the manuscript is under review, but that's it.

Is it

(un)profesional
(contrary to the) commonly accepted practice

for the chief editor not to reveal to an author which editor was assigned to the author's submission?
I would be happy to know who is the actual editor of my submission.  Is it possible (and how) to ask for that such that the question is likely to be answered?

Does it really matter which editor touched the work flow at some point? The most desirable circumstance is that the identity of the editor is totally irrelevant to the outcome. (Aside from a name to put at the top of an email to them).

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

@JonCuster Yes, it matters. People are more careful with their decisions when they are personally responsible for it and sign them with their name. As the internet proves, anonymity makes people worse.

@FedericoPoloni - Well, in the case of a journal, it is the journal itself that is responsible, with the journal's reputation on the line.  The editors work on behalf of the journal, and while they (individually) can help or harm the journal's reputation, their individual reputation is not really an issue. Perhaps it is just me, but I've never cared which editor handled any of my papers.

@FedericoPoloni being personally responsible and signing with their name are not really the same. Some technical editor at a journal that does not sign with their name might in fact feel a lot  personal responsibility, e.g., as  continued poor performance will result in termination of their employment.  Then some big-name mathematician doing editorial work might feel rather  little responsibility in their dealings, e.g., since their performance in that task is pretty inconsequential to them. And while many big-name mathematician do good editorial work, I'd say the latter is all but unheard of.

(Due to some rearrangement of comments, etc., I'm rewriting a comment as an answer... :)
First, yes, as noted by others, on many occasions such emails are software-generated... stimulated by an on-line submission, without other human intervention. So it's not that anyone is trying to avoid revealing their identity.
At the same time, nevertheless, I myself do not find machine-generated "invitations" adequately motivating in most circumstances to get me to do volunteer work. My viewpoint is that if no human being is willing to take the trouble to invest at least their identity and a few moments for a small email, then I needn't feel an obligation to invest my (identity, even as "anonymous" reviewer, and) time.
A feature that helped me move down this path was crappy automated interfaces... (won't name names)... which tried to coerce my referee reports into a format that misrepresented my comments... and on other occasions didn't like the browser I use, etc. In particular, when dealing with the interface was a lot more trouble than carefully reading the paper? And there was no one to email about it?
But this did start me thinking about the whole arrangement. Docile free refereeing for for-profit large corporate entities upon the command of software is not the way I want to go.

I think it's poor journal policy at best. This year especially, review requests (I think everybody scrambling so more refusals hence more requests) are through the roof, with authors angry about the 'needless' delay but editors not finding enough reviewers... The ones I know basically choose carefully, see they don't re-hit the same people in a reasonable window, and write a personal email e-ve-ry-sing-le-time. They still have poor returns but notably better...  This automated approach lets you tick masses of victims/reviewers from a list (with little thought); first flattered soon annoyed.

How should the editor's decision to stay anonymous be qualified? For
  example, was it
(un)ethical,
(un)professional,
(contrary to the) commonly accepted practice?
What does this tell us about the editor or the journal?

Or Option D: Likely the result of using editorial management software, with no particular agenda behind it.
There are many reasons why the template can be generic. For example, a purely practical one is that one editor might be handling your submission, but then hand it off to another editor if they think they've got more appropriate expertise, if they need to take leave, etc.
One's interaction with an editor isn't particularly a personal one. They are acting in their capacity as the editorial office of X Journal. And when it comes down to it, it's the Editor-in-Chief's decision that is the final one, regardless of who you worked with, so it's entirely reasonable for the journal to speak with their "voice".
So no, it's not particularly unprofessional, and it's definitely not unethical. For that matter, it's not even a departure from common practice - likely a good half of the journals I publish (field: Biomedicine) in don't necessarily disclose what editor is assigned to your paper.

@LeonMeier Though paul's answer may be read as being anonymous and asking to referee "as a favor" is an indicator of poor quality. A good journal doesn't need to regard reviewing for them as a favor.

@LeonMeier Yeah, that's not a favor as much as it is just boilerplate language.

The fact that editorial management software in common use works like this does not make it automatically ethical/professional.

@FedericoPoloni Professional standards are pretty much the functional definition of "professional". And any argument that it's unethical is past absurd.

@Fomite As you note, we define professional as "done in the way a competent professional would do it", and similarly ethical is defined using common consensus. But, editorial management software is not made by academics, nor at their requests. It is made by publishers, an external entity that interacts with us and tries to automate our work. And many researchers in the past have expressed strong disapproval for the behavior of academic publishers. Many people find the publishers' behavior unprofessional and unethical by academic standards.

For instance, in the case at hand, I have discussed in the past the fact that these e-mails are anonymous with an editor and an editor-in-chief of a journal, and their opinion was "yes, it's bad, but we can't get the publisher to change it".

@FedericoPoloni I'm pretty sure that almost none of the objections regarding the behavior of academic publishers has to do with editorial software - and a number of journals run by academics also use some form of editorial management software. Indeed, if anything, a journal incapable of sending an automated message on behalf of the editorial board is more likely to be unprofessional, in my mind, than one that can, if you want to talk purely about signaling.

@Fomite Can we at least agree that "this is how the journals do it" does not mean automatically "this is professional and ethical", which was the remark that started this discussion?

@LeonMeier I agree it's not an indicator that a journal is professional. I'm arguing that it's not an indicator that a journal isn't professional. Scams trying to ape the trappings of a profession is a pretty common thing.

Regarding 4 and 5 specifically: In my experience it is not common that one is informed about which editor is assigned. It may not even be the case that some editor is assigned (beyond the Editoe-in-Chief, the Managing Editior, the Editorial Office, etc).
If you want to know about this I think you could just ask, like: "Could  you please let me know which editor will handle my paper, so that I know who to contact in case I need to communicate some information related to my submission."
I think it would be slightly unusual to do this for the reasons given above but I doubt it would be a problem either.
On the general subject, generally, I consider referring as a service to the community, as a service to the journal, as a service to the editor in this order.
I thus do not consider the identity of the particular editor as overly relevant as long as the authenticity and the seriousness of the request is guaranteed by other means (as appears to be the case).
Yes, if I get asked by somebody I know it will change the dynamic of the situation slightly. Yet, if anything I would consider giving much importance to this as potentially ethically problematic not the converse.
Finally, many mathematicians write reviews for the Mathematical Reviews/MathSciNet an entity run by a professional society the American Mathematical Society. In my experience as a reviewer, it is exceedingly rare to be in contact with any particular individual. This is not exactly like refereeing for a journal, but close enough. I thus wanted to bring it up as it feels relevant to the question if this is common and considered as professional (by scientists and mathematicians more specifically).

authors: ศุภชัย ศรีสําอางค์

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
What to do for grad school applications when school attended for one semester won't send transcripts over unpaid loan?
I'm in the process of applying to an M.S. Counseling program.  While ordering transcripts, I've run into a problem.  10+ years ago, I started an MBA, but only attended the first semester.  However, my career dragged me out of state, so I withdrew after completing that one semester.  Since then, there's been a disagreement between me and that school over a related government loan.
Long story short - the school won't give me a transcript for that one semester of classes, UNLESS I come up with $6000 - immediately.  No payment program options at all.  I don't have $6000 just lying around - but I have to finish this grad school app right away.
So what are my options?  I guess I could try to explain that old situation to the Admissions Department about the loan dispute.  But I don't know where that would leave me.
What about the possibly dubious option of just leaving out any mention of that one semester of an MBA program on my application?  Yes, its a bit unethical, but I'm not sure I have other options.  My GPA that one semester was fine, so it wouldn't affect my overall GPA negatively.  Could/would this new school find out that I didn't report that missing semester of school because I couldn't get the transcript?  How is this sort of information shared amongst universities, if it is? I have a guess about which way to go, but what do you folks think?

What country? .

I'm confused, because in the US, universities have little to do with "disputing loans." They have a bill you didn't pay (it sounds like) and if you have a problem with the loan that's between you and the loaning agency.

Yes - it seems weird to me.  The loan was from the government, but when I withdrew from classes, that apparently violated some terms, SO the government "took the $$ back" from the University, so now I owe the university directly.  And they aren't being accommodating whatsoever.  It's not how I thought this worked.....

@AzorAhai-him- Believe the way it works is: 1) loan comes with a stipulation the coursework the government is subsidizing (via the loan) must be completed. Govt doesn't want to pay for no one to take a course. Student drops out, govt gets their money back. 2) School's policies are that all tuition is due past a certain point in the course, or partial refund. So now the student owes the school. It's important to know the financial aid consequences of dropping out. So, OP, is that what happened? You completed a first semester and started a second one, but dropped out some time in the middle?

@Bryan I don't know of loans that require you to finish the degree, but there's a lot I don't know. Either way, that's not a "loan dispute," it might be a "tuition dispute" if OP thinks they dropped before a deadline. I'm not trying to be pedantic, OP, I just don't know what you mean.

But, telling a new university you won't pay your old one $6,000 you owe them probably won't impress them...

OP, when you say there's no payment options, do you mean there's none offered, or you asked? I'm sure they'd rather work with you than send it to collections.

@AzorAhai-him- Not the degree, but rather the semester.

@BryanKrause Well, OP did say "after completing that one semester."

@AzorAhai-him- Yeah, hence the question at the end of my comment for OP to clarify.

Are you disputing you owing the university $6000, or is it that you acknowledge you owe them but you don't have the money to pay them? If the latter, you could borrow the $6k.

Thanks for the input!....

Yes, that other commenter was exactly right on how a gov education loan got "recalled" back thru the Univ.  And the U isn't offering ANYTHING in the way of payment plans,etc.  And YES - I completed one semester, then withdrew shortly after the start of the next one.

So here's where I'm at - I called the "new" school and sniffed around (anonymously) about the situation.  Just keeping this semester off my application doesn't seem like a wise choice.  So I called the Admissions Head and explained the situation.  He was quite accommodating.  He is going to look into the possibility of accepting an "unofficial" transcript, and to see what other options there might be, like delaying the deadline for getting that official transcript, which would at least buy me some time to come up with the $6k.  We shall see.  Thanks again for all the input!

"And the U isn't offering ANYTHING in the way of payment plans" Have you considered getting a personal loan from a bank, refinancing your house, or other ways to acquire loans outside the university?

I ran into a similar issue myself. I cant give you a very valid way around it besides paying up. I found out about mine and it was on the cusp of 10 years. After the 10 year point they just wrote the loss off and since then my transcript was able to be released without payment. I would contact the current school, let them know of the issue. They may be able to request a copy on your behalf or just get confirmation that you did attend. You may also be allowed to get a non-transcript copy of your grades and maybe the new school will allow that as well. The best bet is to ask your new school for guidance on this. They may even just tell you not to worry about any of it and pass it over unless you need the credits or something. Good luck!


text:
How to handle payment requests from a predatory journal?
I sent an article to the journal at a promotional price. The article has already been published. They asked for a surcharge for the review and I paid but according to them I was late and they want to press me the membership fee. From the searches I know that this is a so-called predatory magazine. They have been writing to me for three days for payment. What steps can they take towards me? What will they do with my publication?

Does this answer your question? How can I withdraw a publication from a predatory (fake) journal and resubmit to a legitimate journal?

Any resolution of this yet?

Please do not vandalise your post.

Do not vandalize or change the question to be entirely different from what was originally asked. If you have a new question, submit a new post. Someone already answered your question: if you change it entirely, their answer won't make sense anymore! This is not a fair treatment of their time and effort.

Do not pay them anything else.
You can try asking for a refund.  I would be surprised if it works.
What will they do?  They will keep trying to get money from you.  It's tough to predict if they will put your manuscript on their website.


text:
I just found out about a better methodology after already writing thesis - how should I prepare for my defense in 3 weeks?
I have written a thesis that seeks to analyze the ideological thinking of a newspaper through its editorials in a political situation during a certain period of time. I couldn’t count on my Thesis Advisor and I have written my thesis by myself.
My methodology is simple. In short, I made a compilation of information about the problem, then I selected 20 meaningful dates during the political climate in question, so I had a sample of 20 editorials: 1 per each meaningful date. Then, after checking out the editorials I found 8 units of analysis and made a Content Analysis to find the expressions used on the editorials.  That's how I found the newspaper’s judgments, attitudes and attributes about diverse events and characters (important people) related to the political situation. These represent the variables or categories that would demonstrate the newspaper’s ideological posture.
Nevertheless, after applying this methodology (contents analysis) in my thesis, I read about Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). This is the most appropriate method to analyze the ideological thinking of a newspaper. Even that, my Advisor approved my thesis and I must defend it in three weeks. I am afraid that in my defense someone asked me why I used Content Analysis instead of ACD, being my thesis a qualitative investigation. I do not know how to answer appropriately. I would like to read your opinions and recommendations, my friends.

This situation is one of many that demonstrate the key role of an academic advisor and why I would never suggest anyone attempt a research program as a novice without one.
The specific content of your research (i.e., the merits of content analysis vs. critical discourse analysis for your research question) is off-topic for Academia.SE, but at this point you should find an advisor in your field to ask for advice.
If you cannot reach your thesis advisor, then maybe someone else on your committee can step into that role. Your advisor has approved your work, so either they have not read it carefully (and have failed you miserably in their advising duties) or this problem is not as serious as you may think (i.e., your choice can be justified despite your oversight of another technique in the field).

The best approach is probably to be honest. If it is because you didn't know about CDA, then it might count against you, of course. However, it may be that the approach you took is sufficient to the research you did and maybe had some advantages. This isn't my field, so I don't know what those might be, but perhaps you do.
But you also, now, have an opportunity for future work to compare what you did with what CDA would imply instead.
But the most important thing is to be able to justify the approach that you did take. Presumably your thesis itself has justifications for approaches and tools.

Work on the CDA as much as you can in the coming few weeks and if it comes up during the viva, you will have a lot to talk about and impress them with.


text:
Can I Use Published Work for an MFA Writing Sample?
This could be a no brainer of a question, but I thought I'd throw it out there to be safe. I'm applying to an American MFA program in Creative Writing and want to submit some of my best work for writing samples. Would there be a problem if I submitted writing that was published? I've found conflicting thought in my personal research, and none pertaining to my field.

If it is your writing then most likely yes. You can always ask them to be clear. Seems to me (but I’m in STEM) that showing you are an already published writer would be great.

Ask the program. I agree that this sounds like a no-brainer, but we here can't tell you what the policy at the program is. (They might have qualms about any potential editing your writing may have gone through, for instance.)

Ask the program


text:
Should I Read a Draft of a Recommendation Letter?
A professor writing a letter of recommendation for me sent a draft to my email and asked for my input. For context, I'm applying to graduate humanities programs in the US and already officially waived my right to view submitted letters. Would it be ethical of me to read this draft and respond? I haven't been able to find any resources addressing this kind of situation.

Related. You have waived your right to ask to  see the letter but the professor hasn't waived their right to show it to you. https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/202781/top-3-in-reference-letter-when-applying-to-yale/202786#202786

Yes, it is fine to read and give input if asked. It would have been different if you had asked to see the draft rather than the professor asking for feedback. Not a problem. You are breaking no rules stated or implied.

Note that waiving your right to see a submitted letter is between you and the university. It is there so that other rules binding on the university, such as public records rules, can be accommodated. You just agree not to try to require them to show you a letter.

I strongly suggest that you do waive your right to see the letter as submitted because I believe admissions committees are likely to give more weight to letters they know are confidential.

Yes, it's ethical and I think this is very common. Problems I see with first drafts of letters: letter writer doesn't know the applicant well enough and the letter is short on concrete information; letter recounts everything in the CV but doesn't contain any personal observations, how the writer knows the applicant, etc.; incorrect facts; typos, grammar errors.
Sometimes (often?) professors ask applicants to write the letter from scratch. I don't recommend this because the style ends up being flat and all the letters sound the same. The writer's voice has to come through.


text:
What is publishable in Academia
I am a PhD candidate who is working on something new to me in a similar but different field as my educational background.
So I have received some guidance to start with what my supervisor knows well. After reading into the topic and coming to my own conclusion, I have realized that intuitively I am researching something that is obvious. In the sense that if I talk to my other colleagues and say the idea the result is obvious to them, I don't even need to explain anything.
So I feel like it should not be published as there is no contribution but rather proving something that is intuitively obvious. But my supervisor was taken aback when I raised this with her and I am not sure what to do. Because she seems to think it can be published otherwise she wouldn't be taken back, is my feeling.
I read on another post that because the supervisor is more senior and experienced, they would know better as to what is publishable and what is not. But I am starting to think that it is pointless to work on the topic and that it isn't worth doing because of how obvious it is.

What is your field?

What exactly is the question here? "What can be published" is far too general. Also from your description we can't possibly know whether what you're talking about is publishable or not. Your supervisor is the right person to ask but from what you write it isn't clear what she said. Have you asked here directly "do you think this can be published?" What was her answer? What your feeling is is not informative to us.

Keep in mind that things that are "intuitively obvious" and that "everyone knows" turn out to be false more often than one might think, precisely because no-one really bothers to apply any scrutiny to them.

Just ask.her. maybe if you don't want.to appear as stupid (which I understand), you might ask.her first whether your result is already in literature/stronger versions of the result are true/if it is really true etc..

@ChristianHennig, my question is, the thing that I am working on, I think is "intuitively obvious" so I don't see the point of publishing, but I think my supervisor disagrees with that thought.

@AdamPřenosil maybe so, the main reason is that I feel like it is so intuitive that there is no contribution in the text, when she asked me where the contribution is, I couldn't answer because I didn't think there was any after working on it because I realized things that I didn't know before as I learned more about the topic. Maybe that is a problem on my part. Maybe I will have to ask her that question, and see what her opinion is, because she didn't say if there was contribution or not after I gave her the draft.

You could also wait if the supervisor eventually says something about publishing. As I understand you, you don't care to publish it because it is too easy for you - so just wait, nothing bad can happen anyway.


text:
How much of a hassle are inter-library loans?
I've come across a few books which I'd like to read, which I'd only be able to access through inter-library loans - but these are purely for personal interest, not actual research.
How much of a "pain" is it for libraries to engage in ILLs? (The use of "may be able to" in the wording makes me think there's some level of negotiation involved?) - should I go for it any time I'm willing to pay the nominal fee, or save it for really special cases?
There's also the option of joining my university's library as alumni, if it's somehow easier for academic libraries.

Just ask the librarian, that is what they are there for.

@MaartenBuis especially relevant, because if the librarian is frustrated by this request you can understand that you do not have a librarian in front of you, but simply a book manager.

Such things are completely normal for almost all libraries. Even for my village/town library, but especially for university libraries.
Many university libraries have standing agreements with other (larger) libraries for less common books. It is a sort of magic superpower that librarians have.
Some might appreciate monetary contributions, of course.


text:
Why "in Proceedings of conference...", but not "in Journal of ...."
I'm wondering why a well-known citation style (bibtex's "plain" style) produces "In proceedings of 'conference name'" or "In 'conference name'", but drops "in" in case of journals. In my opinion, there is no difference between journals and conference proceedings from the viewpoint of typesetting citations to their parts. It's even strange that there is an entry @inproceedings, but not @injournal in bibtex. Any rationale behind the discrepancy between the presence of "in" in the one case and its absence in the other case?

You realize that your opinion  that there is no difference between journals and conference proceedings is likely field and time dependent.

You cite proceedings separately from articles contained within them, because proceedings have their own metadata which stands alone, while journal metadata is typically encompassed in the citation of articles.

@article - papers in journals: Chatrychan et al, "Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC", Physics Letters B 716(1) 30--61, 17 September 2012, ISSN 0370-2693.
@proceedings - the proceedings themselves: SIGGRAPH '84 Proceedings of the 11th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, July 23-27, 1984, Minneapolis, Minnesota, ISBN:0-89791-138-5
@inproceedings - papers in proceedings: Cook et al, "Distributed Ray Tracing", in SIGGRAPH '84

You don't tend to cite journals alone (you can just write Physics Letters B, you don't usually need to give a bibliography entry) or journal issues - you rarely want to refer to 'the 17 September 2012 issue of Physics Letters B' instead of a paper inside it.


text:
Grading unsuccessful team work in a seminar
I'm the supervisor of a seminar.
A team of two students is preparing a common presentation for the seminar. The team has to write a report (a preliminary version for double-blind reviewing by other teams and a final version read by me) and give two talks; the team has a lot of freedom on how and what they do. The topic, the seminar dates, the duration, and the deadlines for handing in the reports and the slides are fixed.
I put the two together a few months ago (they had not known each other before, so I had to do all the organization via e-mail). They already submitted the preliminary version of the report more-or-less in time. However, 5 days before handling in the final report and 12 days before the presentation, one of them complained about the poor performance of another one. I asked them to clearly state their contributions by a particular deadline; one did so, while the other did not answer by the deadline. I offered them to split and am waiting for the answer.
I do care that all the participants of the seminar and me learn something new from the students' presentations.
Moreover, I get evaluated by the seminar participants anonymously; the evaluation goes to the department. I do care about good evaluation results, too.
How should I deal with such an unpleasant situation?

This post might be relevant to you: Should I hide the fact that I did a group assignment completely by myself?
Regarding your question:
You put them together a few months ago, and still you only get a complaint a few days before the deadline. Now, there are two possible cases:

They don't have a finished report by the deadline. In this case, I would take the appropriate steps. They had months to discuss the topic with you, to get into another team, etc., if they only come to you five days before the end, they have to take the consequences.
They have a finished report, but one of them claims to have done most of the work. In this case, you already took good steps, I would continue along this path. If the student doesn't answer, assume he dropped the course and act accordingly.

Regarding your evaluation, you should know that it is common for students who get a bad grade (like it might be the case for the lazy student here) to give a bad evaluation. The people reading these evaluations should also be aware about this and as long as it is only a single one that stands out negatively, it shouldn't affect you too much. Be prepared to explain and justify the steps you have taken, e.g. offering the students to split.

Thank you! It is between cases 1 and 2 as of now. I adapted the question accordingly.

There already has been one early dropout from another team. So, if the second student drops out, I'm likely to get two negative gradings, in your opinion, right?

@LeonMeier It'll depend on why the other student dropped out. If he or she just had too much to do, dropping your seminar may have had the least impact on graduating. Or it might have been the hardest and taking the most amount of time. If a student feels that the workload is too much for the amount of credits--bad review.

@mkennedy unclear. There was insufficient feedback from the side of the student to me.

@LeonMeier There's no way you can predict what kind of feedback/review a student's going to give. Someone may do fine in class but hate your clothes to the point that they'll write a bad review or think the class was too easy or too hard or whatever.

@LeonMeier You should drive your actions by what seems fair, not by what looks good on your evaluation.


text:
Is "Assistant Professor Position (Tenure Track) for a female Researcher" illegal in Austria?
Not so long ago an Austrian institution posted a job ad titled "Assistant Professor Position (Tenure Track) for a female Researcher". The description says further

As part of a special measure towards increasing female employment in scientific positions and promoting young researchers, the Faculty of [censored department] at the [censored institution name] invites applications for an Assistant Professor position (tenure track) for women expected to begin on May 2, 2018.

My understanding is that it is unlawful to ask for a particular gender in a job ad unless the gender is strictly necessary to perform the job duties. For academic tasks, the gender of the researcher is irrelevant. Does the institution run into legal issues with this ad? Could someone legally generate profit from such an ad by suing the institution (or the goverment behind it) for discrimination? Have such attempts been already undertaken in academia? (Outside academia, we see successful lawsuits at least in Germany.)
An aside: Let us speak only about the legal and financial part of the particular situation rather than anything else. Let us not discuss whether the job ad and the institution should be condemned or praised or anything of the kind.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

In brief,  the job ad in question seems perfectly in line with an official document of the institution, the Career Advancement Plan for Women (see below). If there is any issue it would have to be with this plan, not just the particular job ad, which seems more unlikely.

According to Austrian law it can be legal to put measures into place with the intent of reducing existing inequalities, even when in isolation they would be discrimination. In that sense the understanding of the general principles expressed in the question is correct, except that there is an explicit exception to them if the intent is to reduce existing inequalities.
The most relevant law here is the Bundesgesetz über die Gleichbehandlung [something like 'Federal law for equal treatment'].
It mostly details the understanding recounted in the question, but it also has a paragraph that allows for exceptions of the form mentioned above.

Positive Maßnahmen
§ 8. Die in Gesetzen, in Verordnungen, in Instrumenten der kollektiven Rechtsgestaltung oder in generellen mehrere Arbeitnehmer/innen umfassende Verfügungen des/der Arbeitgebers/Arbeitgeberin getroffenen Maßnahmen zur Förderung der Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern, insbesondere durch Beseitigung tatsächlich bestehender Ungleichheiten im Sinne des Art. 7 Abs. 2 B-VG, gelten nicht als Diskriminierungen im Sinne dieses Gesetzes. Dies gilt auch für Maßnahmen zur Förderung der Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern in den in § 4 genannten Bereichen. Der Bund kann für besondere Aufwendungen, die Arbeitgeber/inne/n bei der Durchführung solcher Maßnahmen entstehen, Förderungen gewähren.

Somewhat improved Google Translate's translation:

Positive action
§ 8. The measures taken in laws, regulations, collective legal instruments or in general multi-employee dispositions of the employer to promote equality between women and men, in particular by eliminating existing inequalities within the meaning of Art Art. 7 para. 2 B-VG are not considered to be discrimination within the meaning of this Act. This also applies to measures to promote equality between women and men in the areas mentioned in § 4. The Federal Government may grant subsidies for special expenses that employers incur in carrying out such measures.

The title is "positive measures" and then it roughly says that measures whose intent it is to level existing inequalities are not consider as discrimination and federal government might even fund them.
Now, this does not simply authorize everybody to do whatever they think might be appropriate. But, it admits the general principle, and further laws and regulations can build on it.
Let me now jump from the general to the concrete.
The job ad in question seems to be in line, and likely even motivated, by an official document of the institution in question (or if it is not the institution in question than it is a comparable one). Thus, if something should not be legal it would be this plan. The above mentioned §8 should be applicable to this document.
This document, called Frauenförderungsplan [Career Advancement Plan for Women] contains among other things §6(3) (quoting the English version):

To increase the proportion of women among professors and among young scientists, special measures
shall be taken, for example establishing tenure-track positions and professorships for women.

That the institution has such a Career Advancement Plan for Women is motivated by, indeed prescribed by, the Austrian law that governs the organization of universities [Universitätsgesetz 2002 – UG], specifically §20b.
Also of relevance §41:

§ 41. Alle Organe der Universität haben darauf hinzuwirken, dass in allen universitären Arbeitsbereichen ein ausgewogenes Zahlenverhältnis zwischen den an der Universität tätigen Frauen und Männern erreicht wird. Die Erreichung dieses Ziels ist durch geeignete Maßnahmen, insbesondere durch die Erlassung und Umsetzung eines Frauenförderungsplans, anzustreben.

Saying roughly (my translation) "All parts of the university must work towards achieving equal numbers of women and man employed, for all types of employment. This goal shall be achieved by putting appropriate measures into place, in particular by adopting and implementing a career advancement plan for women.
The respective plans for this and other Austrian universities can also be found on a site of the Austrian government.
Maybe noteworthy, I did not find that explicit suggestions in some others which I looked at though; I did not look at all and not very carefully either.
Another relevant law would be the Bundes-Gleichbehandlungsgesetz – B-GlBG, especially §11. Specifically § 11b.(1) not only authorizes but prescribes the practice described in the answer of rexkogitans for areas in which women are underrepresented. (While universities, I think, are not directly in any case not completely covered by this law, since it is about employment by the Austrian state, which is not anymore the way people are employed at Austrian universities, except for some existing old contracts, explicit reference is made to this regulation in the above mention document as some king of inspiration.)
Further legal explications can be found in the Career Advancement Plan for Women quoted above.
To sum up, the job ad in question seems perfectly in line with an official document of the institution, the Career Advancement Plan for Women. If there is any issue it would have to be with this plan, not the particular job ad.
Yet this plan makes detailed reference to various laws and alike (roughly and clumsily recounted above); certainly people with legal expertise were involved in the creation of that document.
Now, in principle, it is still possible that there is some legal problem with this plan or opposing legal opinions of what is or is not legal, but if there is one it should be rather subtle.
Indeed, there are earlier precedence for this practice. In 2010 an Austrian newspaper reported about some assistant professor positions advertised for women only at another Austrian university. A representative of the university is quoted:

Das stelle auch keine unzulässige Diskriminierung dar, sagt Manfred Rathmoser, Sprecher der Uni Linz. So seien laut EU-Recht „spezifische Vergünstigungen für ein Geschlecht zulässig“, wenn diese zum Ausgleich von Benachteiligungen dienen. Und Frauen seien in der Wissenschaft unterrepräsentiert.

My rough translation:

This is no inadmissible discrimination, says Manfred Rathmoser, speaker of the University of Linz. For, according to EU law "specific advantages for one gender are admissible" if those serve to even out existing disadvantages. And women in research are underrepresented.

However it continues:

So einfach sei die Sache nicht, betont jedoch Bernd-Christian Funk, Experte für öffentliches Recht an der Uni Wien. Funk studierte für die „Presse“ die Stellenausschreibung genau. Sein Schluss: „Ich halte sie gelinde gesagt für rechtlich problematisch“, so Funk.

My translation:

The situation is not so simple, emphasizes Bernd-Christian Funk, expert for public law the the University of Vienna. Funk studied the job advertisement for "Presse" [the name of the newspaper]. His conclusion: "I consider them, put mildly, as legally problematic," said Funk.

It then continues to say that while things like preferential treatment in cases of equal qualification are alright this goes to far and is against European and Austrian legal norms. The advice to men that feel discriminated was to apply and to then go to court.
If you or somebody else wants to pursue this matter seriously it may be an option to contact him (Funk) and inquirer what he thinks about this now, and  the relevant paragraph of the "Frauenförderungsplan" of the TU Wien. It seems he is still active, though at a different institution, and his contact details are easy to find. You could also contact the relevant institution.
Conclusion: The job ad seems to be covered by official documents and policies of the university, which in some detail argue how they tie in with Austrian law. This notwithstanding there appear to be opposing legal opinions, too.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

The University of Melbourne recently advertised for three senior positions in mathematics intended for women. Their argument is that, by underrepresenting women on the faculty, they are not providing adequate support and representation for female students in mathematics (and by extension other STEM fields).
While this may not be an ideal way to achieve that goal, there is something to be said for the argument that women are definitely underrepresented in the ranks of faculty. The University of Melbourne's argument is that it's partly a systemic issue, and thus exceptional measures are needed to change this.
As an additional issue, in many EU countries, such hires are permitted under the auspices of increasing diversity in the academic ranks. For instance, the Excellence Initiative of the DFG has supported such hires at German universities. The Austrian university you're citing may have a similar view.
As far as legality is concerned, I doubt that there's a way to get significant profits on a discrimination claim. To be successful, you'd need to prove that you were more qualified than the job than the person actually hired. Given the long-term existence of the program (the initiative is over a decade old) and the lack of such rulings, there may not be grounds to sue or to profit from it. (And it's not a very worthwhile investment of time and resources.)

@aeismail Yes, I know. Many. But there are more female in the area. Back to the job ad, it is following what the dean says. One could also sue the government, and this happens from time to time. As for the "worthwhile investement", the successful chap in Germany received a 3-months salary. Would it be worth it? Don't know; if you are desperate, why not?

This post provides some insightful remarks but does not actually answer the question on legality in Austria.

@Nat I'm on the fence about this kind of issue, but I do think it’s worth reading this answer. What do you think of it?

This has become a somewhat common practice in Australia, I know of at least two other math departments that have done the same thing.  Everything I've heard from both candidate and hiring side is that it worked really well.

I have the impression that some people mix up Austria with Australia.

@NoahSnyder It's my impression that quotas--which is basically what a reserved position is--work very well when there is a large pool of well-qualified applicants who belong to the protected group.

@ElizabethHenning In some fields, you have over 300 applications per position, purely statistically including very well-qualified applicants from the protected group. So, if you would give preference to the protected group, then almost every position in the field will be sooner or later occupied by the representatives of the protected groups. White, European-origin, straight, fully healthy men without any disabilities would never get it.

@LeonMeier You're making my point. The goal isn't to fill every position with people from underrepresented groups, it's to fix underrepresentation. And quotas under some circumstances do a very good job of that.

@ElizabethHenning Let's say, just for example, Bangladeshi are underrepresented in some field, say, quantum physics, though there are more Bangadeshi in the world than, say, Russians. What I might hear is that you would be in favor of imposing a quota for Bangladeshi to fix this? That would be ridiculous. The same goes for women.
But anyway, all these points on quotas are off-topic for the original post. I apologize.

@LeonMeier: “Preference” applies to roughly equal candidates. It doesn’t mean you hire someone much less qualified just because he or she belongs to an underrepresented group. Also, nationalities are not normally considered in such policies.

@aeismail Take any other feature; nationality was only an example. Let us take sexual orientation (hetero vs. homo). About 5% of the world's population is believed to be homo. So, out of 300 applicants, we'd get, for example, roughly one third well-qualified ones, and therefore 5 homosexual well-qualified applicants. In the long run, we'd get a field full of homosexuals. It would seem ridiculous, and, therefore, quotas for homosexuals don't exist. But the same story carries over to women except that quotas do exist. I'm sorry, I'm off-topic again; I apologize.

@LeonMeier How would you get a field full of homosexuals if reserved positions are only created until the fraction of homosexual faculty is 5%? You can only get 5% homosexual faculty this way. (There is a different problem that satisfying a large number of overlapping constraints of this type may be impossible.)

@SashoNikolov The regulations governing quotas change more sluggishly than you think. And by the time you'll have enough homosexuals, do you really think they'd miss the chance to get even more into the field and be in favor of cancelling the quota regulations? Regardless of whether they get it or not, you should count on resistance. Again, I apologize for being off-topic.

@gerrit If you feel so, please vote to close the question as off-topic. Because legal questions are generally off-topic at StackExchange.

@gerrit. Right. Not an answer. quid gave the only one so far.

@LeonMeier now that you bring it up, in a truely globalised world, that might indeed make sense ;P That aside, unless something got deleted, Elizabeth didn't argue on the motivation or how to choose which groups need to be represented to what degree, she merely argued, that if your intention is to increase underrepresented groups, quotas do work. Whether this results in the "best" selection is a different matter and depends on your definition of "best".

As an Australian, I can practically guarantee that a more qualified male applicant would have an extremely strong case to have the appointment of a female overturned. According to Australian Discrimination Laws and particularly the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 and Fair Work Act 2009 which both prohibit Discrimination on the basis of sex ..., it is illegal to behave in this way.

The discussion here strayed away, but while we are at it, it is important to remind people that there is a lot of scholars, me included, who don't agree that we "would profit from hiring people of the underrepresented gender". Of course, some people would profit from this, and some others would not.

There's a Melbourne, Austria now?

@Dilworth Certainly, affirmative action makes a system more fair to the extent it counteracts existing discrimination. And society benefits from a fairer system. The question is a disagreement of fact on the existence of discrimination; also, a debate on what “fair” should mean (I’d want actual equal opportunities). Attacking the underlying discrimination and its factors directly would be less controversial, cause less pushback and maybe lead to better results; it’s just hard.

@Blaisorblade, we are then in disagreement on what is "fair", what are the goals of academia, and what are "the benefits of society". As I said above, this is not the subject of the OP, but it is important to remember that what he/she and others state as a given consensual postulate is in fact a mere opinion.

@Dilworth I said "some fields ...". Not "all fields  ...".

As a too-long remark to fit as "comment", and also as a repost (in an archaic sense) to the question and pursuant comments.
In my 40-year experience in academic mathematics in the U.S., it is clear to me that while, "of course", no official, explicit, institutionalized bias against women in math exists, operationally there is a huge bias.
As I've noted elsewhere, for me the original stunning case was my senior (and good-mathematician, otherwise) colleague's remark that a youngish woman "didn't look like a mathematician". At the time, I was too naive (and junior) to object, or do much about it. But it stunned me.
Since then, some of my colleagues, and some of the male grad students, have reacted to my dept's aggressive recruitment of women as "corruptive", and somehow caving-in to "low standards". WTF? True, it was "simpler" in the old days when there were no "distracting" influences in grad school (women?), and there was no two-body problem in jobs (because "wives" would "obviously" follow husbands around... to the ends of the earth).
This deconstruction can go on for a long time... In some sense, for what it's worth, I myself do apologize to the women who've been subjected to the denial-of-issue... idiocy.
(People can email me easily enough if further discussion is interesting...)

This post provides some insightful remarks but does not actually answer the question on legality in Austria.

For me the original stunning case was my senior (and good-mathematician, otherwise) colleague's remark that "the Senate is not a bathhouse".

A while back we had a similar question Is it lawful for a fellowship linked to a permanent faculty position at a British university in the STEM field to only be available to females? (to the extent Austria/UK and fellowship/assistant professor are similiar) that led me to ask this question on Law.SE.
In the UK, and I think the EU, positive action (or in US English Affirmative Action) can only be given to a member of a vulnerable group if the candidates are equally qualified. This had always seemed weird to me since we know that no two faculty candidates are ever equally qualified, but then I started working for the US government.
For the US government, at least civil service in the DoD, HR ranks candidates qualifications on a small discrete range (i.e., good, better, best). When we do a search, as far as HR is concerned, all the candidates with a best ranking are equally qualified. If there is a candidate within that group that qualifies for special consideration (e.g., veterans), they get the job, but if there are best qualified candidates, then a better qualified veteran candidate they do not get the job since best is better than better. From this perspective, a women only search might be legal since it will only progress if at least one candidate is best qualfified, which would allow positive discrimination to be applied.
Finally, I really see 3 possibilities. First, the university legal department looked at the ad and said it was okay. Second, the university marketing department look at the ad and said it was okay regardless of if it was legal. Third, no one looked at the ad.
My understanding of EU law is that if it is illegal by EU law, it is illegal in all EU member countries (i.e., a member country cannot make something legal that the EU says is illegal), but that member countries can make things illegal beyond what the EU says. Therefore, if these types of targeted searches are legal by EU law, there would need to be an Austria specific law over ruling the EU law.

It’s doubtful a hiring ad like that went out without the approval of HR, legal, and the provost’s/dean’s/equivalent’s office.

Very interesting and insightful. It's amazing how many people think that affirmative action means lowering standards.

@ElizabethHenning my answer is a mix of UK and US experience so it's exact relationship to affirmative action, as opposed to UK positive action, is not clear. Further, being told by HR who to hire since in their mind everyone is equally qualified, is a lot like lowering standards.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but they're not saying everyone is equally qualified, they're making three classifications within each of which applicants are comparable.

Not an answer for Austria. quid gave the only one so far.

@LeonMeier if it is illegal in the EU, then it is illegal in Austria. If it is legal in the EU, then it is legal in Austria unless Austria has a law that makes it illegal. Therefore, while I find the answer by quid to be better than mine, I don't see anything in it suggesting an overruling of EU law and hence an EU general answer is in some ways better.

"if it is illegal in the EU, then it is illegal in Austria. If it is legal in the EU, then it is legal in Austria unless Austria has a law that makes it illegal." That's how it should be in the ideal world, but that's not how it is. Moreover, you don't provide any direct references to the corresponding paragraphs of the EU legislation. You simply provide links to your other posts, which are mildly related. The whole US-related passage is unrelated to Austria.

@LeonMeier to the extent laws define what is illegal and not what is legal, and since EU law is supreme, I disagree.

"The EU law is supreme". That's what the Bruxelles says. For a counterexample, check the current situtation of Poland vs. EU. Moreover, the direct references are still missing...

A country can have something legal that's illegal in the EU, but there need to be a clause for that in the EU law, i.e. trimming a dog's tail (docking) for cosmetic reasons is illegal by EU law, but legal in france. though the EU law states that any country can opt out.

None of us here are experts in employment law, in Austrian law, or Austrian employment law.  And this is not an example where one can easily work things out without being an expert in Austrian law, because this is legal in some countries (like Australia) and illegal in other countries (like the US).  However, all major universities have lawyers who work for them who are experts in employment law.  So obviously at least one person who is much more of an expert on this than any of us thinks that it's legal or at least not clearly illegal.  If you want advice about your chances suing someone you're going to need to hire a lawyer.

Not an answer for Austria. quid gave the only one so far.

It is an answer for Austria, since the lawyers at this Austrian university are experts in Austrian law.  My answer wouldn’t apply to any other country!

Disclaiming that I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal/financial advice.
Perhaps defensible as an experiment
I suspect that this may be defensible in small-scale application.
I'd see two arguments for it:

From a civil angle, male job-seekers have had their pool of potential positions negligibly reduced, such that it'd be difficult to demonstrate material harm.

From a statutory angle, if it's an experiment to see what'd happen if an institution's staffed with more females, then they have a material need to consider only female applicants.

They also seem to argue that discrimination against females is on-going, such that they'd attempt to mitigate the argument that they're discriminating with the counter-position that they're actually correcting for discrimination.  This argument seems a bit flimsier, but it can help supplement their position based on the other arguments.
It's a neat experiment!
From a systems perspective, I strongly suspect that their perspective on gender issues is off-base and this won't actually do much to affect the nature of the gender-ratio in Computer Science.  However, they probably think that this is exactly what's needed.
The really cool part is that they're testing it.  So, sexist or not, it's fascinating to see what'll come of it, and surely the results should help inform future policy.
Where's the money?
I'd imagine that legal means would be unlikely to directly result in much cash.  However, this is a politically/socially sensitive topic that a lot of folks are interested in.
So, if there were some sort of legal battle or other big fuss, then book sales or similar popularization might yield some cash.  Depending on how it's done, this could be very helpful or destructive to society.  An insightful look at the situation could be on the helpful side while hate-mongering would be on the destructive end.

Thank you. What do you mean by a "small-scale application"? Do you mean a small-scale lawsuit?

@LeonMeier: it means that it can be defended if it’s applied to a small number of positions.

@Nat You are right. I guess, we are way too spoiled and cynical to care about the moral side (sexist & discriminatory).

Not an answer. quid gave the only one so far.

An answer about a legal issue should operate with legal terms, including references to legislation. You have none. Btw., IMHO,  "experiment" is not a legal concept.

@Nat That's how the legal world works: http://files.vogel.de/iww/iww/quellenmaterial/dokumente/141877.pdf I hope you see the difference in the argumentation methodology. Please don't take it personally, though.


text:
Does the duration of doctoral and postdoctoral phase *always* matter for a W1 position in Germany?
Junior professorships in Germany are claimed to have, essentially, restrictions in terms of the speed of progress: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juniorprofessur says

In principle the employment before the graduation and as postdoc altogether must (in some federal states: may) amount to not more than six, in the medicine not more than nine years, whereby the regulations differ among the federal states.

The above text (due to "in principle", whatever it might mean) is somewhat imprecise.
1) Which laws/regulations, if any, improse such a restriction in the 16 federal states? (@Roland pointed to http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landeshochschulgesetz, but I failed to find the corresponding passages, for Bavaria, Bremen, Hessen, NRW, and Saxony-Anhalt. Moreover, some passages in the corresponding laws say "bleiben außer Betracht". E.g., if for Hamburg we see "Behinderungsbedingte Überschreitungen dieser Zeiträume bleiben außer Betracht.", does it mean that impaired applicants get an extension?)
2) In practice, have there been any junior professorships without restrictions concerning the duration of the prior academic career?

@Roland Thank you! Exceptions in the legal sense? This would be new to me.

@LeonMeier I think exeption is for this new type of possition, called phd from industry. what is called in german?

There are two different regulations applying here:
On the federal level, it is mandated that barring exceptional circumstances, a researcher is not supposed to exceed 12 years in total on temporary German university positions. Since a typical duration for a junior professorship is 6 years, that would mean no more than 6 years of temporary employment at German universities before that. This rule does not apply to certain external funding sources inside Germany, and not at all to positions held outside of Germany. Thus, this imposes a rather tight deadline on people intending to have their whole career in Germany, but does not matter much for those who are doing part of their career elsewhere.
In addition, each state has their own law describing who exactly is eligible to become a junior professor. For example, in Hamburg one may not have more than 3 years of postdoc experience. Since there are 16 states, listing all laws is not feasible for me. Also, do not count on this information being listed explicitly in job adverts.

Thank you. Is "certain external funding sources" the same as "Drittmittel", not financed by the federal state?

I am not sure whether all Drittmittel-positions are excluded, but some definitely are.

Drittmittel refers to any funding awarded to the researcher or university that is not part of the normal federally and state provided resources. So DFG funding in Germany normally counts as Drittmittel.