text:
How to contact a prospective supervisor for undergraduate research at another university?
There are many helpful posts explaining how a hopeful graduate student should contact a potential supervisor (example 1, example 2). However, I cannot find any advice about how an undergraduate should contact a supervisor regarding undergraduate research experience. As an undergraduate, I do not know what to include in my email because I do not have any distinct experience (or much knowledge) in the professor's field.
For hopeful graduate students, the common advice seems to be:

introduce yourself/your previous work
explain why you are interested in his/her work, papers, etc.
emphasize what differentiates you from other candidates, besides grades/scores

The reason I am interested in this particular professor is just because their research sounds fascinating and exciting. I am taking a class related to their field and I enjoy it. I have looked at some of their publications but I find it difficult to understand the details; I do not have the background knowledge. I am just interested in working in their lab so that I can learn more about the field.
For context, I do not go to the university where they are a faculty member. I have undergrad research experience at my own university. I also have research experience at this professor's university (but for a different faculty member in the same department). I have good grades, but no publications.
Since I have a general interest in her research, but not much background knowledge or experience, what details should I include in my email?

My impression is that it's pretty unusual for professors to bring in undergraduate students from different universities to work in their labs, except in special cases like REUs.  Do you have some special reason to think this professor is likely to be looking for outside students?

I am aware that this professor has recently changed universities and is looking for graduate students. Also, there is a government funded program that can help fund these kind of undergraduate exchanges (this is why I have previously worked at this university).

Looking for graduate students is a very different thing than looking for undergraduates.

Yes, you are right. I am not sure whether this professor has any interest in hiring undergraduates, especially from another school. I only know that I am interested in her work. And, from the lab website, that she has had undergraduates in her group in previous years. I just would like to know the best way to ask, even if the answer will inevitably be 'no'.

The NSF has a program called Research Experiences for Undergraduates  (REU).  See http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5517&from=fund

Some details to include

Attach a copy of your CV and your unofficial transcripts.
Briefly describe your past undergraduate research experience.
Briefly mention the coursework you have taken/are taking that is highly relevant to the work he is doing.
Briefly explain what excites you about the work in this lab.
Mention your future plans (for after graduation). For example, if you are planning to do a PhD, I would be much more interested in mentoring you as an undergraduate research student, because if you are a strong student I can try and recruit you into my PhD program. This is especially true if I am a new professor looking for graduate students!

From the professor's point of view, mentoring a short-term undergraduate student is a relatively low-risk and low-commitment endeavor (compared to taking on a graduate student.) On the other hand, it does require significant investment of time that may never really pay off (the student will probably move on before they become really "useful" to the professor.) Some professors do it largely because their department wants to provide undergraduate research experiences to their own students. In this case, they probably won't be interested in outside students. Some professors do it because they enjoy it (I do!) or because it looks good on grant proposals (it does!), and will be more open to undergraduates from outside their institution. It's certainly worth a shot.

And make sure to include what you wrote here: " their research sounds fascinating and exciting. I am taking a class related to their field and I enjoy it. I have looked at some of their publications but I find it difficult to understand the details; I do not have the background knowledge. I am just interested in working in their lab so that I can learn more about the field."


text:
How to publish a Paper?
I noticed that scientists are one of the most hermetic societies around. Does anybody know how can some "nobody" safely publish an interesting idea, at least, interesting for that someone?
I think that there are plenty of people that have regular jobs and didn't make it through to the scientist/researcher career to be able to present a paper or the like.
Edit: Your question has been identified as a possible duplicate of another question. I think it differs in that I'm not asking how to make a paper and what kind of ideas are suitable. I'm asking how to publish it after I wrote it hopefully accomplishing a paper's requirements.

Check out this http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/48585/can-i-write-a-paper-out-of-a-simple-idea.

Also this: How to write a white paper for a non-academic?

The society is hermetic (I don't agree with that, but let's run with it for the moment) not because of the people involved, but because an article has very specific formats and requirements (as explained in the two links previously commented). Exaggerating a bit, it is like surgery, you have to know what you are doing if you want it to be successful. Even then, it is common to have papers rejected. An article is way more than idea in the head and pen and paper in your hands...

Thanks Fábio, I'll try to circumvent those limitations. Still, for the sake of argue, my brother in law is a professional researcher and even him is still waiting to receive paper on the subject I want to write, that only researchers can ask for... from a journal magazine site.

Why do you say "safely"?  What danger are you worried about?

Good question. I might be over acting it, but I have heard at my university of lack of intellectual ethic. And it concerns me a bit. So, what happens if someone says "hey, I think prime numbers have a predictable sequence! because of this and that.." then someone else make a paper?

Finally took the time for it and decided to publish in mirror.xyz https://mirror.xyz/0x62514E8C74B1B188dFCD76D2171c96EF1845Ba02 didn’t format it as a paper though.

It seems to me that you have a common misconception about the nature of scientific publications.  You talk about somebody wanting to "present a paper" and "an interesting idea," but you do not mention what this is intended to accomplish.  This sounds to me like you're thinking about the publication as an end in and of itself, or as a way of making scientists listen to your ideas.  Neither of these is the case.
Scientific publications are, ultimately, about communication.  They are part of a long, slow dialogue within a community, and peer-review is a filtering process by which a sub-community attempts to determine "Is this piece of work substantial enough to consider taking seriously?"
If you just want to get your ideas out there, you don't need peer reviewed publication.  You can disseminate ideas through many different types of media, and if your writing is well-presented and interesting enough to others, you can draw attention and affect the scientific world without any need for peer review or even credibility (more's the pity).
If, on the other hand, you want to make scientists listen to your ideas, peer reviewed publication won't do that either.  Most scientific publications are barely read and never cited.  To have an impact on scientists, you need to figure out how to speak their language and how to participate in the community and its conversation in a way that relates to what other scientists are thinking about.
Honestly, this is really hard.  It's not because science is closed and wants to keep outsiders away: some sub-communities certainly hold such attitudes, but usually there are other related communities that are quite open and welcoming of newcomers.  Mostly, though, it's hard because you have to prove that, out of all the vast number of ideas floating by every day, your ideas are the ones that are worth the time and energy to consider carefully.  Doing that requires gathering strong and objective evidence, presenting that evidence in a clear and compelling manner, and placing it in the context of the larger dialogue in the community with which are you attempting to communicate.  All of those are difficult, and if a paper fails on any of them, it is likely to be rejected and/or ignored, because the people reading it won't understand why it's worth paying attention to.
Now, what does exacerbate the difficulty of getting involved in science is the difficulty of getting at some sections of the literature.  High-cost subscription-only journals can make it impossible for outsiders to access key parts of the ongoing conversation, thus making it much more difficult for them to participate.  Some parts of the scientific community have taken good steps towards addressing that (e.g., physics and math), while others are generally quite terrible.  If you're dealing with one of the latter, then many scientists will still gladly share pre-print copies of their articles, but it does make things much harder.

Thanks a lot @jakebeal ! My intention is to elaborate on a mathematical concept and publish it, because I feel compelled to share. I can't predict or create expectations on the impact. And I know almost nothing on the subject of publishing. To be peer reviewed would be nice. The hard part is to be sure that it's novel. As you said, state of the art requires invitation or expensive-Subscriptions. I'm still waiting to receive a related pre-print paper. It's con Math, I want to write about prime numbers, but don't know where to, and even if its novel.

I suggest using Google Scholar to search for prior work on prime numbers, of which there is a vast amount.  Also, if you want to claim they have a predictable sequence, you're going to need to provide pretty strong evidence, since a lot of prior work has been done on their predictability.

And supose I end up writing it. Where and how do I post it?

Unfortunately, even scientists can fall prey to the "publication as an end in and of itself" idea.

@juanmf You can send it to a journal for peer review.  You might also post it to arXiv and circulate it amongst others working in the field.  In order to not be written off as a crank, however, you'll need to be familiar with the work of those others and able to cogently explain how yours relates.

Thanks jakebeal. Despite of your elaborated and enlightening response. I think this comment afdressed the specific question :)

As my old and wise supervisor used to say: "You don't know unless you try it".
So, go ahead, find a conference that is related to your idea, and then submit a paper. If the idea is worthy they will publish it. Every conference committee will be happy to see new ideas and contributions in their field.

Note that the majority of fields does not use conferences as publication venue.

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
In what ways can a PHD student who asks me to do some of her work give me due credit for my work?
A PHD (in Computational Biology) student asked me to do some programming for a software application she is developing as a part of her work for her PHD. To be more clear, she is not asking for any help in the design part, but rather in the implementation.
The PHD student I am talking about was my teacher in my undergrad. She taught me a software related course in my undergrad, and was generally a very nice teacher. She taught well, and she was polite, cooperative and kind.
She called me yesterday and told me that she is doing her PHD. The mobile application she wants to develop is only a small part of her work. She asked me to help her with it. There are two kinds of help that she mentioned:

She wants me to guide her on how to go about learning mobile application development. I am fine with that.
She said that she is very busy and if her schedule gets tighter, she will like me to complete the application. The application has not been started yet, and she told me about already being very busy, which tells me that she wants me to write a considerable amount of code for the application.

From my web search, I found out that doing this is permissible, if the work of the external person is acknowledged.
So, if she does want to acknowledge and give me due credit if I do some work (that is if I actually write some code for her application), in what ways can she do that?

She should mention your contribution in the acknowledgments section of her thesis and the related article(s) she might publish.
Additionally, she could provide monetary compensation for your time. Or, as per Dan Neely's suggestion, she could arrange that you receive academic credits or that your work counts as one of the requirements for getting a degree. This is only applicable in a subset of situations where you are pursuing a degree and where the involved institutions are willing to do so.
In response to comments arguing that you should get co-authorship, or that you could bargain authorship instead of a salary, I'm copying the authorship guidelines of the ICMJE:

The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
Final approval of the version to be published; AND
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the
  work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or
  integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.
All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged.

For the amount of work this seems to entail, "could provide monetary compensation" is almost "should provide monetary compensation".

@Davidmh agreed. But the question is only asking how. Besides, that depends on many criteria that are economical and not related to academic ethics..

+1, because this answers the question as asked. Might be worth noting that authorship is based on... whether or not an individual was an author. Authorship is independent of financial compensation (at least in theory).

If the OP is still an undergrad, academic credit might be possible as an alternate form of non-monetary compensation.   This would be dependent on the nature of the work and university policy; so may not be available.

@DanNeely good point, I hadn't thought of that. That could also fill the requirements for a mandatory internship in a given program.

Sharing authorship on related publications has already been said so I will just mention one very important thing that I'm surprised no one mention.
Copyright of the code.
This is not really her giving credit to you, this will be your right from the very start.  Just be clear from the very start on the license and put your name on it.  If you choose the right license, you will retain copyright of it and derivative works making sure that the application or library remains free forever (or more selfish requests such as money for the use of the application, authorship or citations in any paper that makes use of it under a signed MTA, or anything else).  I will refrain from advising on choosing a license since that's a big topic, I am biased for GPL, and the subject is probably off topic here.
However, do note that if you are paid to do this job, you may be required to relinquish copyright.

The important questions to ask:

Will you get paid for your work?
Will you be a co-author on the publications that will use your code?

Note that the answer to (b) is independent of the answer to (a) and vice-versa. Ideally, the answer to both of those questions should be YES. If she has not any money to offer (which is possible), then (b) should be 100% YES and she should provide an estimate of how much time this task will take. Once, she has given you a rough estimate (probably multiply it with 1.20 to 1.50) and see if adding a publication to your CV is worth your time without getting any money.
TL, DR; You should be a co-author on the (at least initial) publication that uses your code and you should negotiate for some monetary compensation. Do that, BEFORE actually committing to anything or starting to work on the project.

I disagree. Usually implementing a piece of software does not warrant co-authorship. And I also find the idea that authorship is an alternative form of payment problematic.

@CapeCode I agree with your "usually", but want to point out that there are certainly cases where it does warrant co-authorship. An obvious example is if the paper is about the implementation, which is not extremely uncommon.

@CapeCode I have a paper to write but I am too busy to write the code. Would you like to write the code for me? Note that, I do not have any money to give you and it will probably take about 2-6 months of your time. I will be forever grateful but you will not be a co-author. Would you please do it?

I personally don't work for free, co-authorship wouldn't buy my time either. But all of that is irrelevant to the fact that if I did, I would not deserve co-authorship.

@CapeCode: usually in which field? If I build an experiment, all the people who contributes significantly to the experiment deserve authorship, and if the piece of software is required for the apparatus to work, that's a significant contribution.

@CapeCode, novel analysis code may also form a significant part of experimental design, even if the code isn't the purpose of the paper.

@ChrisH possibly. OP says it's implementation and not development.

I'm a bit confused by this answer, since it suggests that monetary compensation and co-authorship should be totally independent, but then goes on to say that obtaining one should affect the other. Also, I  totally agree with @CapeCode - implementing software usually isn't grounds for co-authorship.

@Matt. Collaboration => Both sides have to win something. If someone deserves to be co-author, then he should listed as one, regardless if he is paid for his work, i.e., payment  and co-authorship are independent. If the OP is not paid to do this work, then the only benefit (collaboration) for him, is to get co-authorship. Otherwise, why should he waste his time?

You're speculating on OP's motivations. Maybe she/he is perfectly ok to hack a mobile app for her/his former mentor for all times sake. Authorship acknowledges valid contribution, it's not meant to be the carrot to justify unpaid technical work.

@Alexandros - But if the OP doesn't get paid, that doesn't mean he should necessarily get co-authorship. Perhaps all he should get is an acknowledgement in the dissertation and a warm feeling inside.

@CapeCode And slaves could work for free for their formal master, for old time's sake or a warm felling inside as Matt suggests.

OP is also free to decline any involvement, so I don't understand your analogy at all.

@CapeCode We agree. No money + no coauthorship => no involvement. Money + coauthorship => involvement, Money + no coauthorship => involvement if money is enough for OP. No Money + coauthorship => involvement if OP needs a publication. How can anyone disagree with such a suggestion?

No, we disagree. The retribution of OP's work is irrelevant to whether she/he deserves co-authorship or not. Don't mistake me, I think "If you're good at something, never do it for free" is sound advice from the Joker, I just feel strongly against offering authorship as a form of compensation.

@CapeCode, someone without the time to write the code says it's just implementation, Forgive me for thinking the OP might have some development to do!

@ChrisH possibly. If OP's involvement reaches the level described in my answer, then she/he should be co-author. But then we're far from the situation described in the question.

It depends on what you want out of it.  Yes, ideally you'd get paid, and that may be possible in the form of a paid summer internship if you're still an undergrad.
If you are considering further postgraduate study, a publication to your name is a good thing.  It's a really good thing if it's something you'd be happy to raise in an interview, and working on it may get you good contacts.

Are you proud to be asked, or do you see it as a chore?  Do you need to be credited for your work, is the experience of doing it not enough?  What happens if your work is not of sufficient quality, do you want her to acknowledge that?
I think the area you are in is a messy one.  If you can't do it for the sake of doing it then you should not do it.  The experience should be reason enuf to do the job, and if you can tie into a undergrad project then so much the better.

Do you need to be credited for your work That is irrelevant. OP's contribution should absolutely be acknowledged unless (s)he explicitly doesn't want to be named.

If you can't do it for the sake of doing it then you should not do it What an absurd statement! If OP values her/his time and wants to get paid, that is perfectly OK.

authors: فني تكييف هندي بالكويت

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


text:
What's the best way to share a Zotero collection (without creating a new "group" collection)
I've got a large Zotero library split into several large collections. I know that I'm able to share collections by creating a group in Zotero and then creating a collection within that group. Is it possible to share a pre-existing collection, though?
Alternatively, can I synchronize a collection in a group with a collection that is already in my local library? Sharing a collection within a group is great, but if that collection starts off as a copy of a collection I already have in my Zotero then I'm going to have to maintain two collections independently.

Might get a better answer on the Zotero forum!

Thanks, I've asked my questions here: https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/52185/whats-the-best-way-to-share-a-zotero-collection-without-creating-a-new-group-collection/ -- will add any answer back here!

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because this is about a specific application, not academia.

Where can I find the guidelines for what questions should and shouldn't be asked on this forum, please?

@Jim The help page has general guidelines, but would probably not help in this case: this falls into a grey area at the boundary of questions that should or shouldn't be asked here.  If you are looking for further clarification, you can ask a question on meta.

The following was posted in response to the OP's question on the Zotero forums:

adamsmith Sep 14th 2015
Easier sharing of parts of your library is planned, but currently, unfortunately, the answer to all of your questions is no. The only way to share a collection is to drag it into a group and it won't sync with the original collection.


text:
How to contact the Department Chair or Graduate Program Director?
I'm planning to apply to grad school for a Computer Science M.S. However I graduated with a 2.4 GPA, and I realize that I face an uphill climb to even get my application read (although my GPA was a 3.67 for the last 60 credit hours and I got a 169V / 170Q / 5.0 on the GRE). I figure that if I can make a good impression speaking face-to-face with the department chair and graduate program director it might help my chances.
Is it considered appropriate for a prospective applicant to request an appointment like that, especially with the department chair? If so, what would be the best way to contact them? Would sending a simple email asking to make an appointment suffice, or should I give a summary of my background or any other information?
If I do meet with them, what should I talk about or ask them?

First of all, the graduate program director is definitely the person to talk to.  There isn't much point in talking to the department chair; they don't necessarily have any direct involvement with the graduate program or admissions, beyond some nominal level of oversight.  (Note that in some departments, the MS and PhD programs may have different directors, so make sure you get the right person.)
I think it's fine to ask to talk to the graduate program director.  Graduate recruitment is typically part of their duties.
I would not necessarily expect that this conversation will directly improve your chances of admission.  Graduate admission decisions are usually made by a committee of the department's professors, and at best the graduate director is only one of the votes on that committee.  So no matter how good an impression you make on the director, the effect is limited.
Furthermore, the director will want to keep their decision based primarily on the objective information in your application file; it would be unfair if applicants who were able to visit the campus to meet them in person got a significant advantage over those who were unable to do so.
But it could be a subtle benefit.  They might also have suggestions about things to emphasize in your application.  And at a minimum, you can get more information about whether the program is likely to be right for you.
Email is usually the best way to get in touch.

Dear Professor Wu,
My name is Toby Ps.  I am a student at the University of Wossamotta, and I am interested in applying to enter your department's MS program.  I will be in your town between Octember 8-11, and I was wondering if I could meet with you or one of your colleagues to learn more about the program.
One question I have is about admission requirements.  My overall GPA is X.XX, but I think this understates my preparation for graduate work because [reasons].  Can you tell me anything about how this affects my eligibility for admission to your program?

The second paragraph gives the director the opportunity to say "Sorry, we have a minimum GPA requirement of Y.YY, and we don't make any exceptions."  If that's the case, it will save either of you wasting any more time.
Assuming that you are at least eligible to apply to the program, you can proceed to arrange the visit.  If the graduate director is not available during those times, he/she may try to set up a meeting with another professor in the department who is knowledgeable about the program.  You may also be offered the opportunity to tour the campus, sit in on classes, meet with current graduate students, etc; do as much of this as you can.
During your meeting, you can discuss the likely strength of your application.  The program director (or other professor) won't be able to make any commitment about whether or not you would be accepted (admission decisions are usually made by a committee), but they may be able to tell you something about the qualifications that their successful applicants usually have, and that may give you a sense of your chances.  They may also be able to give you their personal assessment of how strong your application would be; you can ask for this, but if they don't feel comfortable giving it, don't press them.


text:
How to intervene in a course that is failing to meet expectations?
All MA students in my graduate program (social sciences) are required to take a course titled 'Thought and Theory'. Ostensibly, the course should serve as an in-depth introduction for students to the contemporary debates and prevailing theories and schools of thought in our discipline. (This is particularly important as there are many students in the program who are new to the discipline, and because the discipline is very broad-reaching.) Students should, at the end of the course, be able to situate their thinking in the overarching disciplinary conversation.
For the first time, this course is being taught not by a social theorist, but by a professor who's specialization is more technical. Instead of assigning foundational texts or the significant thinkers in our field, the professor downloaded the past 20 years worth of publications in one of the field's journals, ran a textual analysis of it, and calculated the articles that had the highest 'centrality score'. We are reading only those articles, most of which have been highly technical, not theoretical, and which offer only a very narrow view of what is going on the discipline.
The students are extremely upset, and feel like we are losing out on an important educational experience. The professor has been unwilling to budge from his pedagogical position, despite many students expressing their exasperation and confusion. He told one student that she was wrong for feeling exasperated and confused.
My question is -- how should we as a current cohort of students in the department address this? The professor himself has been unreceptive to criticism (criticism which has been very polite and often at least trying to be constructive). Do we write a joint email to the department chair? I have close working relationships with other professors in the department, but feel uncomfortable complaining to them about one of their colleagues. What is the etiquette and best course of action here?

What is the difference between "theoretical" and "technical"?

@Drecate To me it sounds like the difference between Kant's "Critique of pure reason" and the OSHA Technical Manual.

which offer only a very narrow view of what is going on the discipline. As opposed to what you expect Instead of assigning foundational texts or (sic) the significant thinkers in our field ... you mean that narrow view? Are you paying to learn, or rebel with emails and become the proxy prof?

this course is being taught not by a social theorist, but by a professor who's specialization is more technical I have the very same question as @Drecate does. What's the difference between a social theorist and a more technical person? By technical do you mean natural (hard) science? Or something else?

Ultimately I think the lesson you should learn here is that there is no one universal consensus for any topic on what's important; or what's foundational; or what's fundamental; or what's significant; or what's relevant; or what's interesting; or what's right; or what's wrong.  Interestingly, the last two remain true even in the hard sciences and mathematics (where one can question the choice of axiomatic system, invoke incompleteness results, or have results so complex it takes many decades to evaluate their correctness, etc.).

I think his point is to try to broaden your horizons. For you it is easy to get a social theoretician's perspective on things, but now you have the opportunity to get a completely fresh view. Then, you would have to figure out what you should take home with you, and what doesn't work well.

@Drecate it is a geography department. The professor's work is predominantly in GIS. There are other professors in the department doing human geography, and who deploy social theory in their work. But the readings we've been assigned have been mostly about methods, and there are other required methods courses in our department.

@Davidmh I agree completely that I bring my own biases and expectations to the table here. I'm fairly-well versed in my own areas of interest, and I have only a very shallow depth of knowledge in other areas. I agree also that it's useful to broaden my horizons, and to recognize that my own areas of interest are not the entirety of the discipline. Many of the other students in this class do not have a background in the discipline, and are lost. Based on the readings, one would think that all of geography is just land use change and model optimization.

You might have a good case if this course is manifestly not meeting the department's stated requirements or failing to cover the prerequisites for further courses.  However, it's not clear from what you've written whether either of these is the case.  The methodology for selecting the readings sounds unusual, but not obviously unreasonable, and seeing this sort of cross section of the field could be a really valuable experience.  You complain that the readings are narrow and technical, rather than foundational or significant, and that might be true.  On the other hand, the professor presumably feels this is a better use of time than the way the course used to be taught.  The fact that the readings are less comfortable and harder to get a handle on could be seen as evidence that this version of the course is what the students need, even if it's not what they want.

The students are extremely upset, and feel like we are losing out on an important educational experience.

This seems to be the crux of the matter: you wish you could have taken the previous version of the course instead.  That's a perfectly legitimate desire, and it's worth making it clear to the department in some way (student evaluations, comments to faculty afterwards, etc.).  However, that is not the sort of complaint that will lead to any short-term action.  Faculty have considerable freedom in crafting courses, and departments are generally reluctant to intervene unless there are serious problems.  It's not enough if you just don't enjoy a course or feel that a different course would have been more useful.
So I'd recommend setting aside the issue of regret over not getting to take the previous version.  You can register your unhappiness about that later.  In the meantime, it's worth formally complaining only if you have objective evidence of something wrong with this course in its own right, and not just in comparison with what could have been.

"The methodology for selecting the readings sounds unusual, but not obviously unreasonable" - the description of how the readings were chosen sounds like bibliometrics run amok. I fully agree with the OP that this algorithm is an extremely peculiar choice for an introduction to contemporary debates in the discipline. +1 nevertheless, because your answer is unfortunately completely right.

I agree that it's bibliometrics run amok if the professor maintains that these papers are the most important ones because the algorithm says so. That would be a difficult position to defend. On the other hand, one could say "These papers are not necessarily the most important or influential, but their high degree of network centrality means they reflect the zeitgeist in this field.  By reading them instead of just the most famous papers, we will get a new perspective on what sort of work is being published and how the field is reacting to new ideas." Still eccentric, but possibly worth trying.

Those are all good points. My concern isn't just with the peculiarity of the algorithm/pedagogy, but that it seems to be broken. The professor has admitted that he doesn't look at what the next weeks' readings are, and so hasn't been able to provide context. At a certain point, if an entire cohort of MA students with diverse interests all agree that they cannot figure out how to extract meaning/value from the coursework, wouldn't you say something is broken with the course? If one student is floundering, then it may fall on that student, but if the feeling is unanimous?

@GabeFS It sounds like a poorly taught course, and complaining could be a good idea.  But I'd still focus the complaint on the deficiencies of this course, rather than comparison with the previous version.  (The actionable issue isn't how much worse it is than that course would have been, but rather whether it's a competently taught and professionally respectable course.  If it's not, then that's a problem that could get the department's attention, but keep in mind that there's a high bar for intervening in a course.)

Many universities have a 'representative' elected for each class and subject. Those representatives have access to teaching committees and appropriate academic staff outside of the specific class. If you have such a person, he or she could seek input from all the students, then talk to the professor and also talk to the broader departmental staff about what the course is expected to teach. It may be that the concern is unfounded, and the representative can allay the concerns, or it may be that the concern is warranted and the teaching committee or similar body can correct the problem.

I might approach someone on the department's curriculum committee to ask (with an open mind) what role(s) this course is intended to fill within the larger curriculum. There's some chance it may not be what you think!
If you do learn, however, that yes, the instance you're taking is out of whack and not accomplishing the goals it's supposed to, this would be a respectful way to open that discussion with someone who is in a reasonable position to pursue the matter further.

Frankly, I don't see how the course could be revamped for the fall semester.  So in principle, you could wait until course eval time comes around to let the department know what's going on.
You could request that the original version of the course be re-offered in the spring semester.
You could use the syllabus of the previous version of the course to do a study group version of the course.
You could make an appointment to talk with the appropriate department administrator, and offer to your classmates the opportunity to go with you.
See if you can find a big discrepancy between the course description in the catalog, and the focus given by this instructor.
Of the points you mentioned, "The professor has admitted that he doesn't look at what the next weeks' readings are, and so hasn't been able to provide context" would be the type of point to focus on in the meeting.

Try to find something worthwhile doing in this guy's version for the remaining what -- six weeks of class?


text:
How to gain global trust from researchers
I am investigating properties of some material. However it seems that all of the research is inconclusive and material modified the same way but by different teams have different properties.
Because research teams sometimes did only one or two types of measurement (which does not overlap with other teams' measurements)* , it is difficult to compare and say what may be the reason for different results.
It is known that the best practice is to never throw samples away.
So maybe it would be good to invite all the research teams to send me their samples and make all of the possible measurements to squeeze more data from them. It would not only give the mankind more knowledge, but also it would allow those team to have one more paper from the same, old samples.
However everyone I know tells me, that people will never agree for something like that, because noone trust other people.
So how to make people trust me, and create a huge, multinational study of said material, with a lot of authors and a lot of measurements (carried out in one facility to be sure of identical conditions)?
 * I mean that eg. teams 1 and 2 made the same type of material
but team 1 did measurements A and B, while team 2 made
measurement A and C.
Hard to compare, especially if measurement of A gives different results
for different team.

Step one: Make sure that people care about this material and that, therefore, researchers care about looking at it.

Do you mean researchers will never agree to send you their samples? If so, then you could go and visit those researchers and conduct the research in their lab.

Such 'round-robin' studies have been done in various areas. For the ones that I know of, the community got along well (in general) and they recognized the importance of doing the check of measurements across institutions. You might start with organizing a topical session on the material and measurements at a conference where most of the community attends.

Set it up as a win-win -- you get something out of the collaboration, and they get something out of the collaboration. // Make a website where you explain some technique(s) that others are interested in learning.  If you show that you share information, others will be more likely to share with you.


text:
How to learn the format of a scientific paper, to emulate it?
I'm a high school student, and I'm planning on doing a few simple chemistry experiments in my spare time (not as a part of any class). I thought it might be fun to write up a faux-paper on one or more of them. Unfortunately, I don't know anything about the format of real scientific papers - are there any guides I could read? How standardized is paper format?

Different fields tend to have their own standards regarding format of papers. So a good start is to Google something like "standard format of a [field name] paper". For example, for "standard format of a chemistry paper" I found:

Southwestern University: Guide for Writing in Chemistry
Oregon State University: Writing Guide for Chemistry
American Chemical Society: Preparing a Research Report

You can also read some research papers in your field - even if you don't understand the contents, you can pay attention to the format: what sections are included, what's in each section, etc.
Finally, you can look up some journals in your field and look for their "Instructions for authors". There, they describe the formatting rules specific to that journal, that authors follow when submitting a manuscript. They are likely to have paper templates you can use, either in MS Word or LaTeX format depending on the field and the journal. See e.g. the instructions for authors of the Journal of the American Chemical Society, and their template.

Thanks - this is exactly the kind of thing I was looking for!


text:
How can I get academic writing samples for PhD admissions after having been away from academia?
I am very interested in a particular PhD program that I feel is in line with my professional background.  Specifically,  I am thinking of doing a PhD in Communication Rhetoric and Digital Media.
However, I haven't been in academia for over 18-19 years. I was told by one of the program directors that I would need to have "academic" writing samples and if I didn't then it would be very difficult to compete for the program.
How and where could I write?

Usually you are required to write some kind of research proposal for your PhD application. If you can ace that, all is good.

I would suggest you start a blog and read and write daily.  That will get you into the swing of things and show a track record of diligence.
You didn't say your discipline.  But you can possible put together a review article.  There is something called systematic review these days.  When you are 90% there, approach the professors you want to work with and ask them if they want to help you finish it off for publication.  They will be very pleased!

Thank you! This is quite helpful.  I am thinking of doing a PhD in Communication Rhetoric and Digital Media. You are right though about having a blog.  I do own and manage a website in which I have had around 50 writers around the world that  contribute. I was told by one of the new alumni's that the site itself could be used as a "product" but I personally didn't write substantive articles on it. PS: what is "systemic review"?

For a program that specifically asks for an "academic writing sample" (as do e.g. most humanities PhDs), a typical blog will not provide such samples. A blog is usually a series of relatively short, informal pieces that do not include very deep analysis of a subject; an "academic writing sample" is a single piece that is long, formal, and demonstrates depth of analysis and insight. They are essentially "opposite" kinds of writing.

You could ease back in by taking an isolated class in your field that requires a fair amount of writing.  A strong letter of recommendation from the instructor would support your application.
If you want to save some money, you could formally audit the class rather than taking it for credit.  When you audit, you can still do the assignments, labs, exams, etc.

Would a class on something like Edx suffice? And if so, would it be an english class? Or a class which subject is closer to what the degree calls for?

I was going to say, a class whose subject is in the field you would like to study.  However, in the case that you live in the U.S. and are a non-native speaker of English, I would suggest instead that you take a couple of English classes at your local community college first.  That's where you'll get the biggest bang for your buck.


text:
Will my supervisor also mark my MA dissertation? How will this be fair?
I am wondering, because she is the only one in the department who is specialised in the area I worked in. But then also she worked with me, so she will recognise the things I've written - apart from that there is probably noone else who tackled exactly my topic.
How is fairness ensured here? It does not seem possible to mark this anonymously really?

Your question makes me wonder: In which grading processes is there a guarantee of anonymity? From exams in elementary and secondary school, over exams at the university, all the way to undergraduate and graduate thesis defenses, I cannot think of any - although things might be different in the UK compared to my place.

@O.R.Mapper at least in some UK universities, exams are graded anonymously, and even by three independent graders.

Why wouldn't it be fair?  What specifically are you concerned about?  If you can edit your question to explain what specifically your concern is, that would make this a better question -- one that would admit more focused, useful answers.  For instance, some might consider familiarity with your work to enable more accurate marking, not worse.  Is that what you're worried about, or something else?

On the topic of anonymous marking.  Dissertations/theses are rarely, if ever anonymised, because students and their topics are easily visible.
What you are asking is really a matter of Quality Assurance, which will depend on the assessment policy relating to Master's theses at your department/institution.
It is worth saying that the bias you mention (of a supervisor's familiarity with your work and writing influencing their assessment of it) is recognized.
In my experience, to mitigate bias one of two actions are taken:

The assessment is double-marked, once by the supervisor and once by a second marker.  Any difference in marks are then discussed and agreed.
The assessment would be marked by someone not related to your project at all, and it may also be double-marked by someone else.

For Master's theses, at least from what I have seen, the subject specialism and expertise of the assessor is less essential than it would be in doctoral study, so I would expect an assessor with good familiarity with the subject to be able to satisfactorily mark it.
Also, in the UK, all assessments are ratified by a Board of Examiners who have the power to alter marks at their judgement.  The External Examiner in this Board would also have the power to read your dissertation and agree/disagree with the mark awarded - they, and the rest of the Board, won't necessarily be experts in the subject to the degree that your supervisor is.

It's worth pointing out that the evaluation of MS/MA theses in the US is typically up to a committee of faculty headed by the advisor.  If the committee approves the thesis (typically by signing a form), then you get to graduate.  They don't typically assign a grade to the thesis.

Bachelor and master theses are never graded anonymously, at least not to my knowledge. Usually your grade is not only determined by the thesis you submit, but to some extent also by your engagement, initiative and the general quality of work you delivered.
Here at my university in Germany it is common practice that the supervisor (usually a PhD student) proposes a grade to the supervising professor who in turn has the final word.
To the last part of your questions: In a perfect world there is no need to ensure fairness, because you will get a grade according to your performance. In reality, there can be differences with your supervisor of professor. If you think your supervisor treats you unfairly, you should carefully approach your supervising professor. You should have evidence, because such accusations are kind of serious and can get people in trouble.
If you think your professor graded you unfairly.. well, this is difficult. To my knowledge, there is not much you can do about that. But I can only think of your professor letting you fail the thesis as the only situation where you want to complain. If your grade is just bad, maybe your professor has a different reasoning or opinion on what makes a good thesis, which is his/her right as supervisor. This can be avoided by clearing general issues beforehand.
Edit: Just as a remark: Everything I said applies to what I know from engineering and similar sciences. It can be totally different in e.g. social sciences, about which I don't know much.

"To my knowledge, there is not much you can do about that." - well, there usually needs to be an internal report ("Gutachten") about the student's thesis work, which is the foundation for the grade. For a start, the student can request to read/hear about that report and discuss it with the professor who was the official examiner. That way, concrete pros and cons written down by those involved in the grading process can be addressed, rather than a vague feeling of being graded unfairly.

@O.R.Mapper This is a good point. I didn't know about this, since I never heard of anyone who had to do this.

In my experience, it's usually the supervising PhD candidate who writes that report after the thesis has been submitted. The student who wrote the thesis usually doesn't learn about that unless they are interested enough to ask what is happening next. I am not sure whether the examiner professor will write a report of their own, or whether they just confirm what is stated in the supervisor's report.


text:
How can I challenge a grade based on false accusation of submitting non-original work?
I need some advice on what I can do, and how much hope is left on this case-
A couple of months back, I finished my Media GCSE and got a C. It's alright, I guess, but I hoped for a little higher. It turns out I got 2 points off a B. What dragged me down was my Horror Movie Trailer Coursework- I had to make a horror movie trailer.
I decided to do mine a bit differently- I made a basic engine in Unity and built a 3D Horror world around it. It was made out of assets made by me, including textures, code and I worked solo on it completely. It turned out great, and it wasn't the trailer itself that my teacher had a problem with. It was the fact that he didn't believe it was mine, and I got under half marks because of this.
The trailer was owned completely by me- I owned the textures, code, I did the editing- everything. But because it was made in Unity and the graphics were pretty well, my teacher wasn't buying that it was mine. There was quite a time frame before me submitting my work and getting the results back. I didn't think this problem would arise, so I deleted my work, and the project is gone due to a change in laptop. Now, I have no evidence of it.
I believe that the coursework was marked unfairly, but with no evidence of the coursework, and as I've already received the C, I'm not sure what I can do about it, but I really badly want that B.
Can I not bring it up with the school? Could I write a complaint letter or something? I just don't know what I can do- I'm a bit lost. I hope you can help me, and sorry if this is the wrong place. I was just disappointed in getting a C when I should have a B.

You didn't keep any of your original work? Backups? What if in the future you want to do something similar?

Most institutions have some sort of procedure for appealing charges of academic dishonesty.  You'll have to investigate what those procedures are at your specific institution.

I don't believe this to be an actual duplicate of the other question.  The answer here is that the asker is out of luck, because he kept no evidence.  My ex-wife had a similar situation years ago where I helped her edit a term paper and the prof refused to believe it was hers.  It was.  She had kept her hand-written rough drafts, some with my editing comments, that showed the evolution of the paper.  She won the case.  Deservedly so.  Having no history, no Git version control repository, of his source code, etc., this asker has NO case.  Accept the C and learn to use a version control system.


text:
Are there intellectual property concerns if I submit "under review" papers as part of my application?
In my statement of purpose I talked about the papers that I worked on and two of those papers are currently under review.
Is it acceptable to submit such papers as part of my application? And are there any concerns on the intellectual property of the work (since it is yet to be accepted)?

So long as it's documented that it's your work and thus your intellectual property, you shouldn't risk any theft of such so long as you haven't signed anything waiving your rights. [Note i'm not a lawyer]

Your turn is formally acceptable, since attaching manuscripts to the application is not a publication. I would put the unaccepted manuscripts on the onine preprint archive and give a reference speaking about rights.

Is it acceptable to submit such papers as part of my application?
Yes, you inform people about your work in progress. I do suggest to add the submission date for the two papers, and if a first review has been performed, its date too.
And are there any concerns on the intellectual property of the work (since it is yet to be accepted)
I would say yes, if you plan to patent some of the ideas, but it might be too late if you have submitted it already.
And yes in general too. I have seen at a conference C2003 two posters side-by-side, on very similar topics, by researchers from country A, and country B. As I new the researcher from country B, s/he told me that s/he submitted to C2002, which took place in country A. His/her paper was rejected, and s/he suspected his/her idea was used by country A reviewers. No proof though. To maintain your legacy, you can put the paper on a free paper archive, like arxiv. Depending on the precisions you give in your applications, this risk is more or less likely. Do not believe in unknown people honesty.

Thank you for your answer @Laurent. What about an ongoing research which is not even drafted but will be submitted somewhere in next few months? Should we include it?

That is well-knownn stuff: If I write "Paper in preparation", everybody  in the  field knows it is only a very vague idea :). I  would put that under a chapter "Active research", on purpose, to foster questions from the interviewer. Because, of course, you know Richard Hamming’s three questions for new hires at Bell Labs: 1- What are you working on? 2- What’s the most important open problem in your area? 3- Why aren’t they the same?

Thank you @Laurent! I will go for an Active Research section :)

Good luck with your applications then!

This is probably journal and field dependent.
On the legal side, things are relatively easy: if you had to sign a copyright agreement to submit (uncommon, but an existing practice) then read it and see what kind of communication is forbidden. Usually, you would only ensure beforehand some transfer of intellectual property after acceptance, but I cannot pretend to know every journal's agreement. In particular, I suspect that fashion magazines such as Nature and Science may ask for no disclosure to ensure better buzz if a special press release is planned.
You can also reread the instruction to author, see if there is anything about your situation. Even if you did not sign anything at the point of submission, there usually is an implied agreement in the act of submission, but most usually only ensuring you do not submit to another venue at the same time.
Joining a manuscript to a non-pbulic application would certainly not qualify as a submission or publication in any way (but in certain field, if the application is public or may be made public, you should probably apply the same rules applicable to deposit of manuscript in a web page).
Last, joining unpublished work to an application may be frown upon by some in your field. I have met this attitude once, in French didactic of math, but it is completely acceptable in math (and as far as I know in physics and computer science) to join manuscript along an application. In fact, we are numerous to put all our manuscripts on our web page and on the arXiv, and then simply provide links or references in the application. To know where your field stands, you should ask a senior academic in the field, or at the very least precise your field and hope someone knowledgeable shows up here with official guidelines.


text:
Graduate student titles on funded research proposal
I am currently a graduate student at a large research institution in the United States. As part of a research assistantship I have made significant contributions to an NSF funded research project. The PI and a Senior Person on the project (who just accepted an assistant professor position) are preparing a follow-up grant application where they will both be PI's. They have invited me to participate. As a graduate student is it possible to be a Senior Person on this new project? What does the role entail and what qualifications are necessary?

TL;DR: your name can be on the proposal as "other personnel" but not as "senior personnel".
From the NSF Grant Proposal Guide, Definitions of Categories of Personnel:

A. SENIOR PERSONNEL

(co) PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR/PROJECT DIRECTOR (PI/PD) means the individual(s) designated by the proposer, and approved by NSF, who will be responsible for the scientific or technical direction of the project. NSF does not infer any distinction in scientific stature among multiple PIs, whether referred to as PI or co-PI. If more than one, the first one listed will serve as the contact PI, with whom all communications between NSF program officials and the project relating to the scientific, technical, and budgetary aspects of the project should take place. The PI and any identified co-PIs, however, will be jointly responsible for submission of the requisite project reports. The term "Principal Investigator" generally is used in research projects, while the term "Project Director" generally is used in centers, large facilities, and other projects. For purposes of this Guide, PI/co-PI is interchangeable with PD/co-PD.
Faculty Associate (faculty member) -- an individual other than the Principal Investigator(s) considered by the performing institution to be a member of its faculty or who holds an appointment as a faculty member at another institution, and who will participate in the project being supported.

B. OTHER PERSONNEL

Postdoctoral (Scholar, Fellow, or Other Postdoctoral Position) -- An individual who has received a doctoral degree (or equivalent) and is engaged in a temporary and defined period of mentored advanced training to enhance the professional skills and research independence needed to pursue his or her chosen career path. Postdoctoral scholars not identified under Senior Personnel above should be listed as Other Personnel.
Other Professional -- a person who may or may not hold a doctoral degree or its equivalent, who is considered a professional and is not reported as a Principal Investigator, faculty associate, postdoctoral scholar or student. Examples of persons included in this category are doctoral associates not reported under B1, professional technicians, physicians, veterinarians, system experts, computer programmers and design engineers.
Graduate Student (research assistant) -- a part-time or full-time student working on the project in a research capacity who holds at least a bachelor’s degree and is enrolled in a degree program leading to an advanced degree.
Undergraduate Student -- a student who is enrolled in a degree program (part-time or full-time) leading to a bachelor’s or associate’s degree.
& 6.   These categories include persons working on the project in a non-research capacity, such as secretaries, clerk-typists, draftsmen, animal caretakers, electricians and custodial personnel regardless of whether they hold a degree or are involved in degree work.


text:
Statement of Purpose, is it conventional to add a small title to each section?
The statement of purpose is for graduate school application. However, from several online samples, I see that the author added "small title" on top of each section. I personally like doing this because I assume the committee won't have enough time to read through 2 pages (1000 words) SoP. I am asking whether this is a conventional pratice?
This is the sample I was talking about.

There's no convention but I've done it.  It helps to break up walls of text and it's nice for readers to skip sections that don't interest them.

I haven't seen it often in the many, many application essays I've read, so I'd hesitate to call it "conventional practice," but I'm certainly not opposed to it. As you say, it can help make the essay more scannable, such that readers garner a quick but useful impression of who you are and what you chose to highlight about yourself. It may also help you organize your thoughts as you write.
Two pages honestly isn't much to read -- almost anyone who's reading applications to graduate school reads far more than that on a regular basis! -- but at least some of us will be impressed by the courtesy of your design, and others by its professionalism.
On balance, then, I'd say that if it makes sense to you to do this, go right ahead.


text:
How to get reference from lab I worked with, when lab head seems unlikely to help and I was advised not to ask postdoc
I'm looking for PhD but I'm having issues with my referees. I did a placement year and for my second referee I was advised to use one from my placement. I worked only with 1 Post-Doc there but I was told by my uni tutor that I cannot get a reference from him as I need from somebody with a stable/fixed position, here is her reply I asked about that:
"You are normally expected to get the person who officially supervised your research work to write your reference. This must be a person who has a permanent position at the place you worked i.e. the lab leader (so never the post-doc, Ph.D. student or a technician i.e. anyone who is a colleague and not in official charge)"
I was quite surprised, I was planning to simply just use a reference from my Post-Doc. Now that leaves me with my placement lab leader. Well, the thing is she is very strict, moody and hard to please and we pretty much never really talked apart from maybe 1 or 2 short chats. She was away on conferences when I gave a lab presentation and when I had a short seminar. It's a shame, I wanted to show her that I really worked hard in her lab. Anyway, when I left I wanted to personally say thank you and ask if she would be willing to write a reference for me. Again, she was away on a conference so I ended up sending her an email. She never replied. I got too busy with uni and family issues and a month has passed. Now I really want to submit my PhD applications so I sent her another email and now I'm dreading what if she won't reply again? Maybe that was her answer? A 'no'?
Additionally, I got close to another lab leader who said she would be willing to write a reference for me. She also happens to be a very close friend with my Post-Doc supervisor. I wonder if that would acceptable? I didn't work in her lab but she holds a fixed position.
Please help me. On my CV I will mention my placement with my Post-Doc and the lab I worked in, wouldn't that be weird to not provide a reference from my placement lab?
I wonder how much this could affect my application?

One option is to ask the postdoc and professor if the postdoc can write a strong first draft that the professor would be willing to sign (and ideally edit). Most admission committees will probably know that the letter was written by the post-doc, but the fact that it is signed by the professor (in addition to the postdoc) means that the head professor agrees with the assessment.
This letter will likely be stronger than if only one of the two wrote it because (1) The postdoc will be able to provide detailed examples that the professor doesn't know about (2) The professor's name recognition, through the signature, adds credibility (3) the professor will typically have more experience writing these things and hence he or she may improve the letter by carefully recrafting a few of the post-doc's sentences. Note that (3) and (1) work synergistically. Without the examples provided by the postdoc the professor's experience in letter writing is likely to be less helpful because their letter will sound too generic.
Additionally, this option will also provide the post-doc good feedback for future letter writing (assuming the professor shares her/his edits with the postdoc). So it is really a win-win situation for everyone.

In my experience, this is a common solution to a common situation. The reality is that many undergrads do most of their research with primarily graduate students and post-docs, with relatively little interaction with the PI or professor. Established labs/groups will usually be familiar with this and accommodate these concerns.

It is more important to submit a strong letter than to submit a letter written by someone who precisely fits a particular niche.
Basically, when you choose a reference, you want someone who knows your work well and who will write with enthusiasm about you.

Ah, but at the same time, that strong letter looks MUCH better from a person in a more prominent or relevant position. However, I would agree that a GREAT letter from a post-doc is hands down more valuable to you than a letter from a well-respected prof that knows nothing about you.

@theforestecologist - Very true.  However, it wouldn't be constructive for the OP to sit and sigh over what would be ideal but is not possible.  He just needs to focus on putting together as strong an application as possible, given his particular circumstances.

agreed! Your response just neglects the importance of the prominence/relevance issue a little too much. In the end, optimizing the best quality of letter from the most prominent/relevant writer is key, but unfortunately which quality outweighs the other (when parity between the two is minimal) is totally dependent on the situation and position being applied for.

@theforestecologist - Indeed, my answer was tailored to the specifics of the OP's situation.  //  By all means, weigh in with an answer if you have a slightly different approach that you think would make a worthwhile contribution.


text:
How should I write or abbreviate my Indian name in academic papers?
I am Sulthan from India. In India, we use the first letter of our father's first name as our initial. So in my school records my name is "A.Sulthan". On official documents, such as PAN, licence, voter ID, and Aadhar Card, I use my name alone as "Sulthan" and my father's name is written as "Ayyup Kan". For my passport, my father's name is used as my last name. So my name is written as "Sulthan Ayyup Kan".
Now I am a researcher and author. I write papers with the name "A.Sulthan" when submitting it for publication and peer review. I am confused about how I should write my first name and last name. For example, for my last name, should I use the initial "A." or ".A"? Also, I would appreciate some suggestions on using names in publication.

This isn't on-topic on ELU. Apart from how the state wants to record your name (on passport, driving licence etc), how you write your name is entirely down to you. Because it deals with papers, it does appear to be on-topic on Academia.SE, where there are already questions dealing with mononyms and unusual patronymic forms. This question may be a duplicate.

Ultimately, consistency between papers is more important than whether it matches any of your other documents. Just pick a way you like to write it and make sure you always keep it the same in future papers.
Points to keep in mind for picking your "researcher name":

For better or for worse, anglo-saxon norms are dominant in English research publications. The closer your name looks to "Firstname [I.] Lastname", the less confusion (and hence people citing differently/wrongly) will happen. ".A", in particular, is very unusual and will likely be mistaken for a typo and "corrected" into "A." frequently.
A unique name makes your papers more easy to find. If there are already 5 people publishing under the name "Sulthan Kan", maybe pick "Sulthan Ayyup Kan" instead.

Indeed, and yes "for better of for worse", if you choose anything different than anglo-saxon shaped names or initials, it will be changed by editors and, more importantly, your peers when they cite you. I use a lot of Latin American sources who have academic names that are structured like: "Jorge C. Fernandez M." so "First name, Middle initial, Father's surname, Initial of mother's surname. This causes constant back and forth with publishers and my students always get them wrong.

This is not to say you should conform to English language name domination...far from it. Rather weigh your priorities. If you don't really care and just want people to be able to peg your research to you, Go with a unique but "English name shaped" version of your options. If you do care, take a stand and demand your preferred name! Just do so knowingly.

@GrotesqueSI Or worse, by your citation tool (for example, BibTeX and similar tools expect a certain format for names that is based mainly on Western naming style).


text:
Supervisor partially putting themselves as first author even though I've done most of the work and written most of the paper
I've completed a project in computational physics. 100% of the code and running of the code completed by me and the introduction, theory and code description in the paper written by me. Results section written by supervisor with some feedback from me.
When we put the latex together I was listed as first author on the paper, since, as my supervisor stated, I did 95% of the work. However, when the paper was submitted my supervisor listed themselves as first and corresponding author in the online submission fields (I was still first in the author list of the submitted paper - ie. in the actual latex document).
When I pointed this out to the supervisor they denied it, so I logged in to the journal account and sent a screen grab showing the status, They said that they must have made a mistake and would correct later when resubmitting (flagged for some missing documents).
Later on I got an email from my supervisor stating that they had submitted the documents but 'forgotten' to correct the author status but not to worry because I'm listed first in the submitted latex paper.
I'm not sure what to think here. Perhaps my supervisor is correct and it will make no difference (since I'm listed first in the latex paper) and is just winding me up. Either that or not I feel that I need to push back here, somehow without damaging the relationship.
Addition: I think perhaps the author list inputted in the online fields may be used for citations but the paper itself will have me as first author. So perhaps my supervisor wants their name to be that cited?

How seriously do you think they are actually trying to rip you off? Can you not change authors yourself?

No, only the corresponding author can change. I was happy for them to be corresponding author but I expected myself to be first. I'm not sure if they are trying to rip me off or not.

Sounds to me like an application of Hanlon's razor.  You'll likely have to sign a consent form before the paper can be published, and you can insist that it be fixed before that point.  Your last paragraph about citations doesn't really make sense, that isn't the way things work.

I suspect a polite email to the editor forwarding your supervisor's comment and just saying "my advisor forgot to swap us" would be the easiest way to save face.

I think ASAP, since it states: "Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been accepted. " I'm assuming that it's accepted before signing a consent form.

@JibbityJobby You haven't said that it's been accepted. Has it?

"I was still first in the author list of the submitted paper - ie. in the actual latex document" I think this is the list that matters.

The first answer to this question suggests that this might be incompetence rather than malevolence. A second (and to me more likely) possibility is that it's neither malevolence nor incompetence, but simply bureaucracy.
Your description is confusing and it seems possible that you misunderstand what's happened here.  With many journal submissions, there's a series of boxes where you enter authors' names and information. These boxes are not necessarily related to author order! You can enter names in any order you want and it's completely irrelevant to the actual published author order.  Often the first box is for the corresponding author, who is not necessarily the first author.
From your description, it sounds like this has happened. If so, probably the reason your advisor is so casual about this is that it's completely trivial; it has no bearing on your concern. The author order is the order in the manuscript and you're worrying about something that's not an issue.
It's also possible that the advisor thinks this has happened but the order is relevant, but from the way you've described it that doesn't seem to be the case.
A bigger issue, to me, seems to be your relationship with your advisor. Even though your advisor promised you first authorship, reiterated the promise, and assured you that the issue would be corrected, you've leaped to the conclusion that they are trying to "steal" your authorship. If you mistrust your advisor to this extent, is this a healthy situation? Has the advisor done anything to justify this immediate and very harsh reaction, or is this a case of paranoia? It seems to me that the answer, either way, is likely to have a much bigger effect on your career than an apparent minor misunderstanding.

I wasn't really leaping to that definitive conclusion, just want to keep myself right and correct mistakes that were made. I have been burned in the past when I let things like this slip and have now adopted the approach that mistakes like this should be addressed earlier rather than later, even if awkwardness involved. This is perhaps my personality here and I don't think there are any other concerns with the relationship. No, the supervisor hasn't done anything else to specifically make me distrust them.

This is closest to how things turned out and I think I was being paranoid.

I would apply Hanlon's Razor here: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
This sort of mistake is easy to make when filling out journal forms: there is a lot of information to keep straight.  In particular, the UI is not always designed so as to make it clear how author order will be interpreted (some forms might always want the corresponding author entered first, even if they will not be the first author).  So it's not too hard to believe that someone could innocently mess it up twice.
It would also be an ineffective way for your supervisor to try to "steal" first authorship.  For most journals, if the paper is accepted, every author will eventually be asked to sign a consent form agreeing to publication, and in particular, agreeing to the author ordering.  You'd eventually find out and make a fuss.
But it would be fine to ask your supervisor to contact the editor and request the change, "just so that we don't forget later," or, as Azor Ahai suggests, to do it yourself.  After all, your supervisor has agreed, in writing, that you are meant to be the first author.

Addition: I think perhaps the author list inputted in the online fields may be used for citations but the paper itself will have me as first author. So perhaps my supervisor wants their name to be that cited?

No, it doesn't work like that.  The journal is going to want one and only one author ordering, to be used both on the paper itself and for all metadata and citations.  They should always match.  If there is a discrepancy between the manuscript and the online fields, the journal will insist that the authors resolve it before publication.

Thank you Hanlon's Razor perhaps makes sense but it would have been nice for the supervisor to state that they will sort out the double mistake ASAP. Also, it states in the journal guide: ""Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been accepted.", so I don't think it's a good idea to sit this one out until perhaps too late.

@JibbityJobby: I agree it would have been nice for him to just do it, but in the big scheme of things, it's really a minor bureaucratic issue, which I think may seem more significant to you because you haven't been through the process so many times.  And I would view "corresponding author screwed up the form" as an exceptional circumstance, especially since the discrepancy between form and manuscript will make it clear that something is not right.

@JibbityJobby: That clause is mean to dissuade people from offering "gift authorship" or renegotiating ordering after the fact.  If there was already clear agreement among the authors and it was simply miscommunicated to the journal, the journal has an ethical duty to make it right.

Honestly, if your prof just messed up because they were busy (likely) they will appreciate you fixing it over you making them do it.

OK, my supervisor likes to keep a tight rein. I sent a polite email to them stating that I'll contact the editors tomorrow. If I hear no objections I'll go ahead and let them know. Yes, I'm inexperienced here and your advice has relaxed me. Thanks.

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


text:
Criticism on 1st Year PhD report
In my institution I am required to pass a first year assessment for my PhD, which I have done so successfully and without any remedial action required.
However, the examiners report is quite critical. For example, it states that my talk was overly-technical for the audience and that my report assumed knowledge from the reader of many field specific terms. It also stated that I focused too much on my own theoretical interests and the report did not have a wide enough scope. It also listed several improvements that could be made to the report, although these were minor imo.
Some areas were good, for example my viva performance was quite satisfactory and apparently I'm a highly motivated and creative student. However, the amount of space given to criticism was proportionally much higher.
Should I be worried about this?

I think that the criticisms which you describe are within the scope of constructive criticism. While you should not ignore them, they are not in themselves indicating any kind of "failure".
Depending on your discipline, and on the particular supervisor(s), feedback on progress reports of this nature can vary greatly. Some supervisors only write comments if they have serious concerns; others, who are basically satisfied, may still wish to give detailed suggestions for improvement. So it is difficult for strangers on this site to offer conclusive advice; you should probably approach your supervisor or some kind of departmental "Postgraduate Tutor" if you are worried about this report.

Nice answer (+!1). I might also suggest that OP ask other, more senior students about the critiques and come to some determination as to whether this is the "norm" in the department or not.


text:
Should I mention an achievement without a proof on my CV?
Several years ago I participated in a conference as a speaker, and my speech was so good it got a third place award for the best speaker.
For many years it was stated on the organizer's website, and I've placed the link to it on my linkedin profile and often used on my CV.
But today I clicked on the link I always used and it was dead. They don't archive conference websites from 8 years ago. So now I have no proof of anything.
Should I continue mentioning that award on my CV (I have a nice story about that), or does the "dead website" sounds like a conman's excuse too much?

Any chance the site was archives by the Wayback Machine?

I'm not sure of the actual value of a 3rd place best speaker award from 8 years ago. In those 8 years there should be plenty of other stuff to put on a CV.

If you can talk about it, explain what it was about and how it is relevant, then even without a "proof" you should be good. Interviewers can totally ask you "okay, can you tell me a bit about this talk?" - However, as @JonCuster said, it may not be relevant sincee 8 years is a long time.

If you still have the link, you can search for it here: https://archive.org/web/. If the page was cached by the website, it will be displayed with a blue circle on the calendar. Click the blue circle and you'll get a link to the cached page.

Was it an important presentation? (Main track/single track) Or more in a side workshop?

Like many other things in life, academia also works on the honor system. Many things that show up on CVs are not verifiable (being a reviewer for this or that journal, a panelist for NSF, having received an offer for a faculty position somewhere that was declined for some reason or other) because this information is not publicly available and never was. As a consequence, I see no reason why you shouldn't list that award.
Of course, the fact that information is not public should not be used as an invitation to lie: Most everything that isn't public can still be investigated as long as you know the right people. In other words, people who lie eventually learn that they will be found out. But the converse is true too: If something is truthful, you should proudly list it on your CV -- if anyone should ever ask you about it, you can always point to people who actually know.

I would maybe slightly  rephrase this. It's not that the facts are not verifiable, they are not verifiable with minimal effort such as a simple web search. I feel the honor system works so well because the facts are often verifiable in a relatively straightforward way once one puts in enough effort to contact a third party. Of course, we rarely do so, but I suspect just the threat keeps the vast majority honest.

Does one really list declined faculty offers on one's CV? Why, and in which section would one put this?

@Psychonaut The Germans tend to do it.

@Psychonaut In Germany offers declined have actual academic currency. Because of the different model of German academia, they act as esteem indicator.


text:
Is it plagiarism (or bad practice) to cite reviews instead of source material directly?
My first source of information when preparing a manuscript are reviews. If up-to-date and comprehensive, I feel I can create most of my introduction by rephrasing and citing them. Nevertheless, reviews are based on citing other papers and, with the deluge of literature published these days, finding the source material for a single claim sometimes becomes a never-ending and time consuming play with a Matryoshka doll.
For example, in this review by Misteli (2007), the following claim is made and supported citing three papers.

The recent development of methods to probe the physical association of
  genome regions in a unbiased and genome-wide scale should lead to
  rapid progress in our still-rudimentary understanding of the
  functional significance of chromatin loops (Simonis et al., 2006;
  Wurtele and Chartrand, 2006;Zhao et al., 2006).

I consider relevant to a point in my article that there are new roads being opened to study “the functional significance of chromatin loops”, To do so, I have three options:

Rephrase the sentence and cite Misteli, 2007, acknowledging that I extracted the citation from the review and depriving the authors of the source material of a citation;
Rephrase the sentence and cite Simonis et al., 2006; Wurtele and Chartrand, 2006;Zhao et al., 2006  without reading the three source papers, which is kind of deceiving but at least acknowledges the authors of the research and not the author of the review; or
Read the original articles, rephrase and cite Simonis et al., 2006; Wurtele and Chartrand, 2006;Zhao et al., 2006, which is the most “honest” option but incredibly time consuming.

Sometimes, if I decide to do 3, I may find myself spending a lot of time reading, only to write something that was already said in the review.
Which option you would abide for? Am I somehow plagiarising the reviewers or primary authors if using any of my strategies? In terms of ethics and good scientific conduct, which is the best option? How deep and when should I look for source material?
I am not asking about which version of an article to cite, like here. I assume that versions cited in reviews are the most up to date. I am asking when it is correct to cite the review or the primary source found in such review.
Note: My strategy up to this days is a mix of 1 and 3: search and cite the source material only if the paper is relevant for the core of my article and cite the review when filling the generals.

You could also consider wording along the lines of "...of the functional significance of chromatin loops (see Misteli 2007 and references therein)"

@TheBigH Yes, that is a good option that sometimes I resource to. But it is not something I can do for every point I want to bring about. My question is more general.

I usually avoid using (and citing) reviews, unless it's a new subject I need to get some understanding. I prefer making sure that the original references say what I want to use in my paper, plus they actually did the work. I only cite reviews when I "use" the conclusion or the opinion of the authors of the review.

The question in your title (is it plagiarism to cite reviews?) is very different from the question in the body (is it plagiarism to write your introduction by paraphrasing reviews?).

A very similar question has been aswered here: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47492/referencing-the-reference/47494#47494

Yes and No.
A review is not (or at least should not be) just a list of papers in the field, it is a research paper in its own right. A review should provide some form of new structure or idea that come from reviewing the scientific output the field in question. Thus a review can be useful when either pointing at the results emerging from the review or when you wish to provide an example of where a throrough description of a field is provided. So citing a review should primaruily be for general purposes.
If you need to cite a specific detail provided by one or several references in the review you should turn to the cited articles and check them. There is, first of all, no guarantee that the citations are correct and citing something that is not correct propagates errors in publications. In addition, the cited work may not be all the relevant work supporting a point from your perspective so your sources may become biased. After all your point for writing is most likely not the same as for the one writing the review.
A review therefore has a function on its own for providing overview and synthesis which can be cited but if you need to cite details you must go to the original work and also not limit yourself to the reference list of the review.
EDIT: Just to answer the question in full: plagiarism is only if you copy the text with out quotes. If you copy the references you are not necessarily plagiarizing but you will then give the false impression that you have actually read, in part of fully, the articles concerned and that is in the realm of unethical behaviour. In the best case, it is unwise for the resons given above.

The answer is somewhat field-specific. A mathematician's perspective here.
When citing a result which is uncontroversial and undisputed and unique, you can generally assume that the citation is accurate, and cite the contents of the reference as stated in the review article. So, for instance, if you are reading "Review of geometry by A. Euclid who cites the statement In a right angled triangle, the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides." which he attributes to A theorem about triangles by J. Pythagoras, then you can go ahead and paraphrase the above formulation and cite Pythagoras (not mentioning Euclid).
There is a thin line between results which are "classical" and those which are "modern". If it so happened that Pythagoras proved his theorem long ago that it is taught in graduate-level courses (but you still want to cite it because it is not universally known) then it is OK to give the more up-to-date reference by Euclid. Probably best avoided if Pythagoras is still alive and kicking (and would be glad to get another citation). Very advisable if the original is difficult to get your hands on, and/or written in a foreign language.
In both cases, you should (of course!) look up the original reference and see if Euclid is not making stuff up. If you don't do this, you are putting your reputation in the hands of whoever wrote the survey, so you should ask yourself how much do you trust him. If we are talking about a well-established result, and Euclid is well known to be a serious mathematician, then more likely then not everything will be fine. In all other cases - exercise caution.
Whichever way you go, it is often also a good idea to mention that the reader who wishes to learn more about the topic might want to look up Euclid's survey paper.

It seems to me that you owe a debt to all four sets of authors. How about
"The recent development of methods to probe the physical association of genome regions in a unbiased and genome-wide scale should lead to rapid progress in our still-rudimentary understanding of the functional significance of chromatin loops (Misteli, 2007 based on Simonis et al., 2006; Wurtele and Chartrand, 2006;Zhao et al., 2006)."

As long as you cite the sources which are responsible for you holding the belief that you have, you aren't engaging in plagiarism.
Science suffers from a replication crisis because original claims get a lot of citations while work like reviews that aggregate results from multiple sources and replications of a study get less citations.
However in many fields citing reviews instead of original discoveries goes against the norms and reviewers might not like it.

It might be field related, but I always had the feeling that reviews in biological sciences get more citations than the original works. That's why everyone, journals and people, are always interested in writing a review (even if they are not really good at it).

It all boils down to practicality. How central is that fact to your paper, and how controversial may it be?
If it is very important, and not a well known or established fact, you better make sure it is right, and it is worth spending some time on it. If it is a side detail, don't get lost and move on, and in the few cases you may trust a wrong review, the damage won't be extensive.
The ultimate goal of a paper is to convince your reader of your research, do what it is needed to convince them of your goal.
It is also a good idea to get a feeling of the knowledge of the authors on the specific field. You can usually trust that they know their field, but be a bit more sceptical of reviews of the type [X] for [people not in X], in my experience, they may get a few side details wrong, or not be fully up to date.

Something not covered in the other answers is that plagiarism is the re-use of ideas/work (not necessarily quotes!) without attribution. This means, therefore, that it depends on what exactly you are citing, and where no attribution is given the assumption in the you are claiming it as your own work.
For instance, if it's a conclusion or summary that the review has added that you include as part of your paper/argument, then cite the review. If it's the content of the other papers that you include, cite the individual papers.

For my perspective as a computer science researcher.
You mention 3 cases in your question:

you can depend on the review and follow the author's opinion. In this case, you will not get the whole picture.
That is plagiarism.
You can check the 3 source abstract and read the relative papers to your study then rephrase based on your opinion.


text:
Maximum allowed time for PhD (Doktor) in Germany
I am a physics PhD student in Germany. During my PhD I got two children, and as a mother, I had to give major part of my time to my children. I started in April 2012, and I will finish in spring 2018. Is this too long time to get a postdoc position afterwards?

The question at the end of your post is a different one than the title suggests.The maximum time allowed, if there is one, will be specified by your Promotionsordnung. The influence of this on your ability to land a postdoc position is situational. Meaning, it depends on the views of the people you apply with, if they are willing to see your reasons or not and the competitiveness of postdoc positions in your field. Amongst other factors.

One friend did his PhD over 10 years...

The question needs clarification as to what aspect you mean. Legally? If you have a agreement with your professor (Betreuungsvereinbarung), you can theroetically hand in your dissertation at any point after your contract ended. Beware, your research might be outdated then. At my university, there is also no limit on the time you can be employed. You work as a regular researcher (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter) and can do your PhD, but you do not have to. Therefore, employment and doing your PhD are two different aspects that should be clarified in the question.

Voted "unclear what you're asking" since the question's title and content don't match. Please clarify.

Plus, there seem to be at least three possible interpretations: In addition to those already mentioned, I want to add mine: "will people think I'm not capable of doing good research if I need 6 years to finish my PhD?"

@Ian At my university, there is also no limit on the time you can be employed. BIG EYES. Where??

@ThorstenS. Sorry, my explanation was unclear: As long as you have (limited) contracts coming, you can work under them without doing the PhD. I know people who took 6 years and more because they got new contracts and apparently don‘t want to finish.

@Ian You know that for a moment you rose a glint of hope for academic acquaintances/friends who desperately hope to escape the part-time pit of despair?

@ThorstenS.: Do you mean part-time or fixed-term?

The typical times for a PhD in Germany vary mostly between three and six years, depending on the specific field you're in.
Legally, the university is allowed to give you fixed-term contracts for a total maximum of six years while you're working towards your PhD. However, there are extensions of this limit for childcare, so you would be well below this limit.
For a postdoc position, I don't think the time taken for your PhD would be a major factor in evaluating your application.

One should add: 1. Most universities have no formal limit for the length of a PhD (10 years plus happens occasionally). 2. Standard funding cannot be applied more than 6 years, but funding from external sources can be applied longer.

@J.FabianMeier not only external sources I presume, but also other positions of employ at the university? For example being employed as lab & teaching assistant in various courses on different faculties does not seem to be all that uncommon.

@mathreadler No in fact any fixed-term position, even at any university / research institution in Germany is counted towards this. After the limit is reached, only funding from external sources remains possible. Check the "Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz" for details...

In Germany you can be employed by the University, i.e., your salary comes from the federal government, up to six years. If you have external funding such as, scholarships or projects, by external companies there is no limit.
Moreover, for each child the contract can be extended one year.

Actually the limit is increased by 2 years per child.

I was a resarcher fellow in Fraunhofer institute in Erlangen for a few years (7). I was surprised by the time take by PhD Candidate to defend a thesis.
I think that the average is 6-7 years. In comparison to French system it's really long, 3-3.5 years here.
To get a post-doc position, I think age of candidate is not a problem. For me only the quality of the guy (or girl) is important!

" I think age of candidate is not a problem." - quite!  I have a friend who is writing up at the moment.  She is hoping to get a post-doc position, and she  is in her late 50's.  Her difficulty is not "age", it is that her speciality is EU law, and she is English :-(

@MartinBonner I'd rather say there will be so much unorganized mess, your friend will have a great, well-paid time to help cleaning it up.

Fraunhofer institutes are not "normal" in that respect because researchers have much more side activities than at other places.

Thanks to everybody taking time to answer my question. I am sorry for putting a wrong title to my question. It is nice to here that I could have a six years contract. My contract ended after 4 years and 9 months, after that I am working on my thesis without a contract.