text:
Reusing assignments for multiple courses
I'm in an online graduate program. I have two classes with the same professor. One is required and the other is from a small pool of elective classes. In other words, the odds of someone taking both classes is quite high. One of the assignments from each class is exactly the same. The assignments are not a trivial portion of the class grade. There is some room to create a different product the second time around, but mostly in the presentation and less so in the content, since the content that must be included has been dictated by the professor and involves giving our opinion about the exact same points in both cases. This feels very awkward. I don't want to self-plagiarize or reuse content, but it is almost impossible to not reuse at least some content and still complete the assignment, given the nature of the assignment.
A second assignment is also reused between the courses, however, that assignment can go in a slightly different direction, whereas the first reused assignment cannot. I can't help but feel, however, that this isn't really best practice, since, as I mentioned, both of these classes will be taken by many of the same students due to the program requirements and the final products will be very, very similar due to the required elements of the assignment.
I should add that students need to do a capstone project, in which we reflect on specific assignments from our coursework, at the end of our degree in order to graduate. We have a limited number of classes from which to draw this coursework. (It must be from our area of concentration, which is made up of only 5 classes, including these 2).
Additional information: It is also obvious to me that the course content was largely copied and pasted between the two courses, as well, since the textbook listed initially was the same for both classes. That has since been corrected.
Thus far, there are no lectures posted, only assigned readings.
Is this typical? I'm not sure whether I'm justified in feeling a little ripped off and disappointed.
I understand that professors are often overworked, underpaid, under-respected, etc., and I am sympathetic to these problems in higher education. But I'm also a paying student. (And just generally, since I'm complaining, anyway, I'm tired of not receiving feedback on my assignments beyond stuff along the lines of "Great paper!" I am not even sure many of my professors are reading my papers, based on the scant/generic feedback I've gotten. As an undergraduate, I remember actually getting in-line comments on papers, but I have only rarely gotten that degree of feedback as a graduate student. It is sad to work hard on an assignment and feel as though my professor hasn't even read it.)

Meta thought: If you are taking two classes such that the assignments could potentially be interchangeable, maybe you are taking classes that are too similar. Possibly these classes should not both be credit for a degree?

@BobaFit OP here. I tend to agree. I did raise concerns about this with someone in the department, actually, because on paper, the classes looked awfully similar, even before I signed up and saw that they are, indeed, very similar. But I was instructed to talk to the instructor directly and since I'm wrapping up the degree and couldn't change classes at this point, anyway, I decided it wasn't worth possibly making the instructor defensive or setting up a grudge. It's not a big enough program that I could have just taken these classes with another prof if I accidentally burned a bridge w/ them.

You say you are in an online graduate program. I might be getting behind the times a bit as online education has really advanced a lot lately, but my impression is that online programs are not the same quality as in-person programs. That doesn't mean you can't get a good education online, but a lot of education on- or off-line is really driven by you as a student, anyways. It's possible you're encountering one of the shortcuts that has been taken along the way to build the program you're in. If this course is representative of the differences with your undergraduate education, it might simply be a difference in the quality of that program versus this one.
I definitely think you have reason to find this situation irritating, though. As far as the issue of what to submit for your assignments, I'd recommend having a conversation with the professor to see what their expectations are - perhaps given that they are assigning the same task to two courses, they'd be fine with you putting in a commensurate level of effort and just submitting the same assignment. If they want two distinct products, they should be able to express to you what their expectations are for making the products distinct.
Of course, that doesn't solve the problem that you've signed up for these courses expecting to get a certain level of training, but if you want to act in your personal best interest it's probably better focusing your energies on some self-learning on these or related topics, rather than going through the bureaucracy to complain formally.
You always have the option to take your money elsewhere, but there can be clear downsides to that option as well if you have already earned credits that won't transfer someplace else.

+1 for ask the professor what to do. Perhaps they will suggest a more in depth version of the same project.

OP here. Thanks for your thoughts. The program is accredited and it came highly recommended, but perhaps it's gone downhill. I'm close to finishing the program, so changing schools isn't an option. I guess at this point, the best option is to just make the best of it and hope that I'm able to pull something together for the capstone project. Maybe my expectations were too high. It seems like a lot of people in grad school just want the piece of paper. Live and learn, I guess. (I don't want to ask the prof what to do bc I think they may get defensive; I don't want it to neg. impact my grades.)

@FoxLake If you don't attack them they are unlikely to get defensive. Asking what you should do is not an attack. Saying it's ridiculous or awkward or that you feel ripped off probably is, but you can ask without saying any of those things.


text:
How do I determine the direction of my research?
I'm a first year PhD student in Microelectronics. I started my PhD because I was interested in the idea of Neuromorphic engineering, but I've been so confused lately.
The problem is that neither my supervisor nor my colleagues in the group has that enthusiasm or experience in this area, and my supervisor has been suggesting I use the hardcore solid-state circuit techniques to do the neuromorphic stuff (as he's good at circuit design). I feel like I'm stuck in the middle. My supervisor can hardly provide good ideas to my project (while he can do so to his other students, as they are doing the pure circuit stuff), and I feel I'm doing the neuromorphic engineering in a wrong way...
Should I change my direction to what my supervisor's good at? I don't know where to put my efforts right now (circuit or neuromorphic engineering).

How did you end up in a lab that does not do what you are interested in?

@BryanKrause I'd say I regret not finding out sooner. Our team claims to be doing neuromorphic stuff, but they aren't - at least not the kind I thought of.

If you think you have your future in what your professor is suggesting go for it. Otherwise, I strongly suggest you change the lab if you are not doing what you want to do in your research before it becomes too late. Changing PhD in the first year is a lot easier than later years.

You have two options and probably only one of them will work for you. But there are people who can deal with either one.
The first option is to decide that you are on your own and are essentially an independent researcher. Get buy-in from your supervisor that they think this is a path to success. Perhaps you can use outside discussions with others to firm up ideas. Perhaps the supervisor can suggest some people. Some people are able to handle this as long as the university agrees and can fairly evaluate your results. There are places, I think, where this is the normal path.
The other is to change your research in the short term so that you are a better fit for the supervisor's abilities. This is probably the more common path (many places). You can change research direction once you have the doctorate and some stable position. You can "tinker" in off moments with your desired project, keeping a few notes, while you devote main energy to the project that the supervisor can deal with.
Either of these can be frustrating, depending on the individual. But think long term about your career, not short term. Some things can wait, but find that "acceptable" path. But keeping a "future research" notebook is a valuable thing for any researcher. If you keep one, review it periodically and update it when the opportunity arises.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

I haven't yet mentioned the third possibility which is to find a different supervisor, maybe at a different university. This might be less frustrating, but is expensive in time.

Find A New Supervisor
Or at least seriously investigate that route.  As Buffy says, it can be expensive in time.  But it can also be expensive to spend two and a half years researching something you really don't like or feel passion for, only to end up burnt out and hating the very act of research.
This doesn't need to be a contentious thing, either.  You look around your department, see who else might be doing research closer to interests, and have a few informal and confidential conversations.  See where it goes.
Get Committee Members Closer To Your Interests
If for some reason that approach isn't viable (maybe there are no researchers at your institution doing what you're interested in, or they're all full up on students) maybe you can formulate your committee in such a way that it balances your interests with your supervisor's interests.  (Remember, there is usually an outside member on a committee.)
This doesn't need to be contentious, either.
Nothing you've said so far indicates that you're having any sort of personality conflict with your supervisor, or that there is any animosity between you.  Your know this person-- do you think they will react well to a conversation where the thrust is, "Professor X, I really want to bring my research closer in line with neuromorphic engineering, and I think it might be smart to get one or two people on my committee who specialize in that-- do you have any suggestions?"
Your supervisor should be both willing and able to advise and assist you with this.

Instead of replacing the supervisor completely, he could also talk to him about adding a new supervisor if it makes sense. Here in Portugal, we can have more than one supervisor in the PhD. I assume it's the same elsewhere.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Applied Mathematics to Neuroscience Transition?
I am currently studying Applied Mathematics in a university in Bangladesh. I have always been deeply interested in psychology and neuroscience. I want to complete my degree in Applied Mathematics and after that I want to do research in Neuroscience/Cognitive science (not in Bangladesh) Is the transition from Applied Mathematics to these fields academically possible ? Without any degrees in psychology or biology?
I want to go abroad from Bangladesh and get involved in these fields.
I would need a scholarship because I can't afford to go abroad all by myself. Is it possible? How should my path be?

Why not take some basic psychology and biology courses while you are in Bangladesh university ?

Unfortunately Universities in Bangladesh don't work like that. Once you are admitted in a subject you're stuck with only it's courses. That's actually the problem

Are you not allowed to sit in the psychology/biology classes ?

No, I'm not allowed.No ones allowed except for the ones who are having a degree in psychology/biology

@ShadmanSakib You will likely struggle, then, with the biology portion of these programs; you may need to take remedial classes even if you are admitted. Does your degree at least include courses in Physics, especially electricity/magnetism?

I am quite confident that a background in mathematics will be a solid asset for doing research in neuroscience. Neuroscience is a continuum, ranging from very biology-oriented topics (clinical, experimental, or system neuroscience) to more math and theory-oriented ones (computational and theoretical neuroscience, machine learning). In any case, a strong quantitative and mathematical background will be at least an asset, at most a requirement.
I did my PhD in theoretical neuroscience (context: Western Europe), and everyone in my lab had a bachelor or master degree in physics, mathematics, engineering, or computer sciences. And we were actively collaborating with experimental neuroscientists, who often had background in biology and medicine.
Two recent books will likely offer useful information for you:

So you want to be a neuroscientist, by Ashley Juavinett: it nicely introduces the different fields of neuroscience to the layperson and discusses different ways to study neuroscience, although mostly focusing on the US system.
The idea of the brain, by Matthew Cobb: an history of neuroscience with a special emphasis on the links between neuroscience and theory and machine learning, which might be your jam if you are found of mathematics.

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


text:
In what ways do authors of an anonymous paper reveal themselves unintentionally?
I am asking this question simply out of curiosity. I have reviewed around 4-5 papers of double-blind conferences. One pattern that I have found in common is that when authors use techniques/results from their previously published works, they do not properly cite that particular section/theorem since they are the same authors and they do not take this task very seriously.
Due to this, it becomes easy to figure out the identities of the authors.
Therefore, I want to know the other ways in which a reviewer can figure out the identity of the authors? Then, perhaps, we as authors can avoid making these mistakes when submitting our papers.

When the paper builds on existing work, it is very hard to stay anonymous. One example I tried is to remove some of the relevant references and leave a remark like "removed for peer-review". These references are then only sent to the editor and are reinstated after the manuscript is accepted. I have no clue if this worked or not since I never managed to figure out the identity of the reviewers, though.

Authors may do that intentionally, especially if the paper has a big name author.

Opposite thing. We were so good at hiding our identity in one of our papers that it backfired. We cited our old papers as if they were 3rd party ones. Reviewer claimed that it was just a rehash of previous work of Captain Emacs (it wasn't, there were substantially new results). It would have been funny if it weren't that sad. Had they realised (or we allowed to indicate) it was a continuation, they may have found it easier to identify the innovation.

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/161693/contributing-to-a-software-project-vs-double-blind-review/161697#161697

It's not just possible to figure out the authors. Often, it's just as easy for the authors to figure out who the reviewers are, simply by noticing "where they are coming from" in evaluating the paper.

Or maybe, how did we learn Student was William Gosset?

I once saw a sole author chemistry paper with 53 references: the CRC Handbook plus 52 papers by the sole author. Hard to hide that one.

@CaptainEmacs I think that perhaps that might be a hint that you failed to communicate sufficiently well how it differed from your previous work.

@nick012000 Actually, we did. But the problem is that the reviewers have to read so many papers that I found that unless you repeat your novelty multiple times in a paper, they can miss it, especially if it's a technical rather than conceptual novelty. And there is little space, so you are forced to be concise and to the point. But the reason I bring it up is that I think the review was written in a way that indicates they were actually guided by the (presumed) identity of the author (despite the anonymity requirements and it penalized us for going out of the way to really hide our identity).

I work in a small experimental field where the groups around the world know each other very well . There's no double-blind peer-review, but things that make papers from my colleagues easily recognizable are the following (I think I'd recognize with high probability the authors of virtually any work in my field):

The presence of certain specific pieces of equipment. Certain pieces of equipment are owned by only 2-3 research groups around the world, and finding it in the description of an experiment clearly delimits the possibilities.
The description of a long-term experiment Certain experiments have been developed and described in several papers along ten-twenty years and are quite unique of certain groups. A paper on the topic clearly identifies the group.
The manufacturing of certain specific devices. There are devices for which only one or two groups possess the manufacturing capabilities.
The style of symbols in schematic diagrams. Each group typically develops along the years certain personalised symbols.
The choice of symbols for certain quantities. For instance the usage of U to denote a voltage is typical in Germany, Czech Republic and some other countries in Eastern Europe. If there are just a few groups in that area, this can be a revealing detail.
The presence of certain idiosyncratic expressions.

Maybe a little stronger on point 6. Someone who writes a lot can often be recognized by their style.

@Buffy Yes, I wanted to expand but didn't have time. Will do.

"This paper is based on the dissertation of Noche (2013)."

Even if it is changed to "This paper is based on the dissertation of Author (2013)," if the dissertation is listed in the bibliography, then the title and the university it is from can be used to search for the author's name.

In some cases the subject matter makes it almost impossible to anonymise the work. For instance, a couple of years back I was asked to review a paper about a proposed improvement to the methods used for estimating the national accounts of a certain country.
That work is done by a specific national agency (the only agency that has access to all the relevant data) so it was obvious where the authors worked. Looking up recent publications connected to that agency would probably have allowed me to make a good guess as to who in particular was working on this topic.
Unfortunately I'm not aware of a good way to avoid this particular issue.

Probably the biggest and hardest to mask is writing style.  A given author will structure their writing in certain ways, and use certain turns of phrase and grammatical quirks; someone who's read a number of that author's works can identify the author just from those cues.
As an example: my writing tends to make greater use of colons, semicolons, and qualifiers than average, and there are probably some other indications that I'm not aware of.  Here on StackExchange, there are other users I can identify just from patterns of grammatical errors, or the use of large quote blocks, or how the introductory sentence of an answer is structured.

Because of the rules of my PhD program, I have to state sentences akin to the following in the acknowledgements:
„This paper is part of pbaer‘s dissertation project at the University of Academiaville.“
I dont think one could make it any easier for a reviewer to identify me as the author during a double-blind review.

OTOH, that kind of thing can be removed by an editor before passing the paper along for review.

And some venues explicitly mention that acknowledgments must be added only when submitting the final camera-ready version.

Shouldn't such a statement be removed from the manuscript prior to review?  It can be added back in later if the manuscript is accepted.

@GoodDeeds I have not seen any mentions akin to what you describe in my field yet. As far as I am concerned, the journals I submitted to asked to send in the paper with the acknowledgements already inserted. I should take a closer look at this issue.

They do so by citing themselves unnecessarily. They do so by inappropriately ranking a reference to their own previous work ahead of more relevant references.

I actually just refereed an “anonymous” submission.  After a simple copy-paste of the title in GoogleScholar, the search immediately produced the arXiv version with full author details.

Haha. Here authors want to reveal themselves intentionally.

You actively trying to find out who the authors are is hardly the authors' fault.

@Maeher  I suppose it depends what you mean by “active”: I subscribe to this particular section of arXiv and remembered the title from the previous week.   So I would say yes it is the authors fault if they choose to promote their pre-published work through a public database but expect at the same time to remain anonymous.

Conferences like NeurIPS explicitly prohibit searching for working papers:  "do not attempt to find out the identities of the authors for any of your assigned submissions (e.g., by searching on arXiv).  This would constitute an active violation of the double-blind reviewing policy."

@Meaher I have in the past asked a trusted colleague to do exactly this search in my place, but only because I strongly suspected who the authors were and had a conflict of interest with them (my colleague would only confirm or deny my suspicion here). I feared accidentally unblinding the authors halfway the reviewing process, when googling some more info on the papers topic. The authors were who I suspected and I denied to review. They unblinded themselves by use of a certain symbol to indicate a part of the paper was moved to the appendix.

@Xi'an All problems are avoided if the authors simply wait after the peer-review is done to post on arXiv.

@ZeroTheHero No, they are not. Conferences like NeurIPS and ICML are very selective and it's normal for a work to be resubmitted in different years without any major changes. My paper spent two years on arXiv before being accepted.

@Serge well I just learned something.  What you describe would never happen in my field.

In my area of research double blind reviews are used to minimize unconscious bias. The earlier a reviewer knows the authors, the more she may be biased.
The goal of anonymity should thus only be to remove the obvious hints. Hide author names. Instead of "our previous paper [5]" write "the paper [5]", etc. not making major changes. If you think the authors could improve in this regard, you could mention it as 'minor comment' similar to how you would mention typos.
In my area anonymity is a fickle thing. In particular, for papers the following make it night impossible:
1) Experts: Commonly there are only few people who are likely to publish on a given topic and if I am asked to review a paper I am an expert and probably know them.
2) Follow up work: They build strongly on previous work and seem to know all the ins and outs. Moreover, structure, writing style, idiosyncracies of this particular work are identical. Guess what.
3) Preprints: There is a good chance that you google the title and find the paper on arXiv.
4) Writing style: The most devious one because it pervades even reviews, which should be anonymous. Do they write British or American English? Do they make certain grammatical mistakes typical for non-natives of a certain background? Do they overuse CERTAIN words?
If you combine these, there is really no chance to anonymize papers in many areas.
In fact, 1) and 4) suffice for an expert to make pretty good guesses about stuff that definitely should be anonymous, like reviews.

authors: Xi'an ні війні


text:
Using an Indirect Citation
I am writing a research paper. There are a few known results for which I want to add citation in my paper. However, all those results have already been cited in a well-reputed book.
Can I cite the book directly? For example: Result 1 [book citation], Result 2 [book citation],...,etc.
or should I add the proper citation of each of the results? like this: Result 1 [this journal], Result 2 [that journal],...,etc.
Note that the results in the book are not explicitly explained in any section. They are just briefly stated in the chapter notes. And, if I cite the book directly, I am feeling like I am not adding to the citation count of the original authors who deserve it.

Since it appears that you have used all the sources, you must cite them all.


text:
Is it possible to enter a competitive PhD program with a mediocre GPA and several publications?
I'm intending to apply to biostatistics PhD programs this fall and can't stop worrying about the fact that I'll almost certainly have a lower-than-average GPA (< 3.5) when I apply to the institutions in which I'm interested.
By the time I apply this fall, I anticipate having a GPA of 3.3. However, I have two publications, one being a first author and the other of which is a third author, both of which are in top 20 journals. I'm also hoping to publish a second first-author paper before applying.
With excellent letters of recommendation (one from a senior statistician at the CDC who has cooperated with me on research), near-perfect GRE scores, and the publications stated earlier, do I have a chance at top PhD programs?
I am in the United States.
Any advice at all is greatly appreciated!

Thanks, added the country

In the US, acceptance into doctoral programs is normally based on a large number of items, none of which is likely to be decisive on its own (unless extreme). The GPA is a bit low, but not extreme. If you are talking about undergraduate grades, then the grades in the major mean a bit more than the overall GPA in any case and recent grades a bit more than older ones.
On the other hand getting into a "top" program, as opposed to a good, or even great, program, is very difficult and competitive. You have some plusses and a negative. No one can predict unless they are on the admissions committee.
I suggest that you cast a wide net in application. Sure, try a few "top" programs, but also those from a broader selection. It increases your chances. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


text:
Emailing professors in Japan
I have started sending emails to professors in Tohoku University in japan to pursue my graduate studies in Medical Science. The following is the sample email which I am sending. I am a medical doctor and I don't have any undergraduate research experience. Can I get some opinion on how it sounds? Also should I make any modifications to increase my chances of getting responses? Thank you.

Dear Professor “Professor's name",
I hope this email finds you well. My name is Afsana Rahman. I have
completed my Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) from
Rangpur Medical College, Rajshahi University, with a first-class
honours degree in Bangladesh in May 2018. I am very interested in
developing my career in Medical research, which motivated me to pursue
Graduate Studies in Medical Science at Tohoku University.
My TOEFL iBT overall score is 103 out of 120. After completing my
one-year internship training program at Rangpur Medical college in May
2019, I have been working as a Medical Officer in Rabeya Clinic and
Nursing Home, Gaibandha, Bangladesh since September 2019. It is an
independent healthcare establishment dedicated to providing
comprehensive healthcare within a vast area of North Bengal. I am also
working as a Lecturer at North Bengal Medical Assistant Training
School in Gaibandha, Bangladesh since December 2019.
I have been through your website and studied details on your research
topics and publications. Your research theme on new drug delivery
system for retinal disease by developing deployment type nanosheets
creation technology for sustained long-term drug administration to the
retina has struck me as revolutionary and inspiring. As my future goal
is to be a cutting-edge researcher in this field, it would be a great
honor if you kindly consider me in your research group and provide me
the opportunity to enhance my potential under your guidance.
I have attached my Curriculum Vitae and Academic transcripts for your
kind consideration. I will be at your disposal if you need any kind of
detailed information. Please let me know if any opportunity is present
for me.
Sincerely Yours, Afsana Rahman, MBBS (Rajshahi University),
Bangladesh.

Have you read this question and the corresponding answers? https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/119787/how-to-ask-via-email-for-supervision-of-professor-for-japan-graduate-program-adm?rq=1 I think there are some very useful tips in there that would answer your question, do you agree?

Just to be sure, have you read in detail their application guidelines in the university's website? (https://www.med.tohoku.ac.jp/english/admissions/admissions/apply/) It would be frustrating to send an email, and later find out that you couldn't be accepted because of some minor issue. Also, it is debatable whether you should include attached files in your first email, because  it might be misidentified as spam. I'm not sure what is best, but in your first attempt, you might ask "Please let me know if I can send you my CV and Academic Transcripts for you to evaluate".

Does this answer your question? How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in Country X?

@Jeroen thank you, I found some really useful tips there.

@djohn thank you for the advice, I have checked their website, apparently, they have completed their qualification prescreening for 2022. I am not sure if I should send emails for 2022 admission now.

@enthu Thank you. I have checked the link. It was helpful.

@afsana rahman It is better to send emails to professors in early or mid-January, because right now all of the university staff is going to be busy evaluating the applications. In the meantime, during this month and December I advise you to prepare all of the application documents beforehand, and to read carefully all of the application guidelines. Check if you need to get any certificates from your previous academic institutions (ex: GPA certificates, diplomas, etc.).

@afsana rahman If you do need to get certificates,, the next two months are the best time to obtain such documents (if possible, try to 3 copies of each certificate, you might need them in the future). Use your computer to prepare the application papers for your two most desired universities. Even if you get accepted by a professor from a different university, you can always copy-paste the contents of your previous applications into the application papers of another university. In Japan, you always need to prepare for everything way before the deadline, otherwise you might get into trouble.

@djohn so I have to start emailing professors in the January of the year before the one I want to get an admission, right? I mean if I want admission in 2023, I have to start sending emails in January 2022.

@afsana rahman it is possible to send emails later than January, and I know some colleagues who were successful in getting accepted by advisors 6 months, or even 2 months before the application deadline. However, the longer you wait, the more difficult it will be to get an advisor to accept you . Each advisor can only accept a limited number of students, and students compete for the most reputed advisors in the best universities, so the ones who contact first will have an advantage. But if you still have a chance to apply for the 2022 year, there is no harm in trying, you might get lucky.


text:
Where to propose a joint PhD program
I am a mathematician, doing most of my research in dynamical systems. I would like to propose to an European academic partner to co-fund (50%-50%) a PhD position.
Is there a place on the web where I can describe my research interests and propose such kind of a joint PhD program?

Please explain what you mean by "co-found (50%-50%) a PhD position.".

With my research fund I am able to cover half of the cost of a PhD position, I'm searching someone pursuing similar research goals and interested in contribute to a PhD position with the missing half of the money.

@Nobody I'm sorry, I don't understand. I mean 1/2+1/2=1 PhD position (joint supervision).

So, you are a supervisor and looking for a co-supervisor? You actually mean "co-fund"? Please clarify.

Sure, co-found -> co-fund, corrected.

Are you sure you want to do this via some website? To me co-supervision of a PhD student sounds like an substantial investment and I would prefer to have someone I know and trust for such an endeavour.

@Christian You are perfectly right. My problem is that I changed my main research field recently, so the personal relationships I built in some 15 years of previous activity are not so useful for my current purposes.

In general, I feel that such a web tool, if built cleverly enough, would increase the occasions of fruitful interaction. But maybe it simply doesn't exist.

I'm thinking that the rate of successful outcomes for the student of the near-random pairings of advisors coming out of even a 'clever' web tool would be pretty abysmal...


text:
Is data falsification in undergraduate courses bad?
I remember that I had a course in college called "Integration Project" and we had to do surveys, I went to the local mall to do surveys to people, everything fine. Then I discovered that my other team members were falsifying the survey responses because of lack of time.
The results of the survey wont be published in journals or a thesis, etc. It is was just for the course.
I know that data falsification in thesis or master's degree are really really bad, but how about in simple college courses?

Data should never be falsified. This should be a point of honor.

From your past questions, it seems that you graduated some time ago but you keep thinking of new ways in which your degree might be tainted. Granted, knowingly putting your name on falsified work is less than good, so this particular concern might be justified. Still, our answers will be based on the facts you give us, and I am concerned about your objectivity given that you seem determined to find some ethical transgression in your academic history.

Data should never be falsified. However, surveys should never be meaningless.
Maybe the point of the course was to realize that to have a statistical representative sample, visiting the mall was not enough.

I'm going to agree with @cag51 here. It seems like you are having a lot of anxiety about your degree. These sorts of questions might be better served by talking to a psychologist. None of your degrees are in any danger.

It's hard to answer this without being subjective. It's not like we can write "it's exactly 3.2 micronazis bad".

@FedericoPoloni It's worth about four authors who didn't contribute, or one paper in medicine

UPDATE: I am not anxious about my already recieved degrees, I know about my rights and how the thesis investigacion process is. My question was just for curiosity.. thanks for answering

I think this is the sort of question which is not literal, in the sense that everyone, including the asker, already knows the answer... So, the only genuine question is some meta-question, which we can maybe guess, but...

Bad by what standard? The reality is it doesn't matter, at all.

Fabricating data would be clear academic misconduct in any college course and if brought to the instructor's or school's attention, would normally result in penalties.  At Michigan, for example, a typical penalty for misconduct would be a zero on the assignment and a 1/3 letter grade deduction on their final grade.  If the assignment was a major part of the grade, it was an instant fail.  If the misconduct wasn't discovered or didn't happen until they'd already received a final grade, the usual penalty was community service.
The question for you is whether to report it.  Michigan is an honor code school that asks students to report suspected misconduct, which answers the question for Michigan students, at least as far as telling them what they're supposed to do.  If your school doesn't have a policy requiring that you report misconduct, it's a more personal question.  When do you think you have an ethical duty to report wrongdoing?  You might also consider what could happen to you if the misconduct is discovered and reported by someone else.  Could you be tarred with the same brush as your dishonest teammates?

In the context of an assignment for academic coursework, it is likely that data falsification would constitute a breach of the rules of the assignment and so it would be regarded as a species of academic dishonesty in the coursework, similar to cheating on an exam.  Since the work is not published this would be considered a much less severe instance of academic dishonesty than falsifiying data in an actual study.  Nevertheless, it is not good practice for students to get into the habit of cutting-corners and dishonesty in the context of coursework.

It is rarely a good idea to bring legal analogies, but I consider this to be one of those rare cases. Notice, I am in no way implying any particular legal connection of falsifying data to particular crimes.

Let's consider a typical US criminal law, and take Connecticut as an example. Connecticut's laws define various crimes which can be of different classes (A–D, unclassified). Class A crimes constitute the more serious types of crimes and carry longer sentences and large fines, while Class D crimes are the least serious kind. For example, Class A felonies can lead to a life sentence, while Class D felonies can lead to a small fine. However, no matter what class does the crime belongs, it is still a crime.
Similarly, data should never be falsified. However, the seriousness of the offense and the consequences (in case, it is discovered) would differ. The impact and, maybe even more importantly, mens rea (guilty mind) of the falsification from a first-year B.Sc. student is different from an established researcher.
Moreover, one could argue that more serious crimes usually originate from less serious ones (discovered or undiscovered); therefore, it is extremely important to have students educated about the Code of Honor and the importance of research\educational integrity as early as possible.
To summarize, falsification of data is always really-really bad. The severity of the consequences might vary. But, as it is with any criminal record, it makes it very hard to overcome this event in the future, potentially closing some roads forever. And even if not caught, this might lead a student onto a dangerous road, and I would strongly advise against it, no matter how much immediate benefits such data falsification might offer in a moment.

My goodness.  When did this become a criminal prosecution with any doubt about the guilty mind?  This is garden variety college-level academic misconduct.

@NicoleHamilton "Notice, I am in no way implying any particular legal connection of falsifying data to particular crimes." ?

What's the purpose of the assignment?
If we're talking about an undergraduate course, I think that it would come back around to the purpose of the assignment. What is the purpose of the assignment? Often, assignments are meant to teach as well as to assess; if this assignment had your team performing interviews with random people (presumably after the professor got IRB approval for that particular piece of assessment), then you have to ask yourself why the professor was intending for you to do so. Was teaching surveying and interview skills the primary part of the assessment, or was it a secondary part, with the primary thrust of the assessment based around your analysis of the data you gathered?
Assuming that my university's academic dishonesty policy didn't have explicit instructions on how to handle this (in which case I would, of course, follow them), then I think that my response as an instructor would vary depending on the purpose of the assignment. If the primary purpose of the assignment was to teach and/or assess the students' interview or survey skills, they'd just get a flat 0 for the assignment, because they haven't done any actual surveying. If the surveying was just a secondary part of the assignment, I'd give them a 0 for the part of the assignment that involved the survey - and I'd probably rethink including a survey section on that assignment when I ran the unit again the next year, and would likely just give the students data to analyze.

Sorry, I'm appalled by the argument that fabricating data could be okay depending on the "purpose" of the assignment.

This just isn't right.  If the students write down that they did something, and they're lying about it, that's academic dishonesty.  Further, under many policies, if you're on a team that does that, you're responsible too.

I think it's important to distinguish between simulating data and fabricating data. Simulating data is just fine, fabricating is not. There is often no distinction in the process, though, the key is in the description of methods: with simulation, you describe how you've created your data; with fabrication, you lie about where the data came from.

@BryanKrause Sure, lying isn't good, since it makes your job more difficult as an assessor, but in the context of undergraduate assessment and barring a university policy to the contrary, I'm not sure that the distinction really matters much. If the student has failed to demonstrate the learning that you're assessing, you still give them the appropriate mark.

@NicoleHamilton The two broad goals of assessment are to teach and to assess. Any given piece of assessment should have a detailed criteria sheet explaining the breakdown of the marks and what is required to achieve a particular grade in each section of the assignment; if they have fabricated data, you mark them as getting 0 marks in the data collection section of the criteria sheet and move on. If data collection is the primary focus of the assessment, that gets them a 0 overall. If it wasn't, then they get the marks from the analysis section of the assignment.

@nick012000 If you're the instructor, you get to run your class any way you like.  In my classes, if you fabricate data or engage in any other type of academic misconduct, I will report you and you will be suffer the consequences.  At Michigan, those consequences are a zero on the entire assignment + 1/3 letter grade deduction on your final course grade.

@NicoleHamilton Obviously, you should comply with the policies of your institution, but for undergraduates, lying about what they did is not so great a sin because you shouldn't trust anything they say anyway, because they haven't earned that level of trust yet. That's why they're required to include citations for every statement of fact that they include in their assignments.

@nick012000  Absolutely ridiculous.  It is impossible for me to believe you have ever taught at the college level.  I'd be appalled to hear this even from a student.

@NicoleHamilton You're right, I haven't. I have studied secondary education at a post-graduate level however, and I just finished my (coursework) master's.

Your approach might be valid with children still learning about the importance of honesty and ethics.  But college students are expected to behave as adults,  We're trying to do more than teach them some skills. We also want them to leave as moral, ethical, honest, responsible and socially-aware adults.  We're preparing the leaders of the next generation.  At the college level, academic misconduct is treated far more seriously than you think.