text:
Is it easy to change your major after starting your PhD or masters, if it is necessary?
I’m a mechanical engineering student and I am about to apply for a PhD.  I am certain about my desire to pursue advanced studies.   However, I have serious doubts in what I want to pursue my studies on.
I have done research on structural health monitoring and power electronics.  At some point I thought that I had interest in electrical engineering and after some research I got interested in mathematical physics and then in applied mathematics.
I started doing undergraduate research when I was a sophomore in the area of structural health monitoring. However my job was to write an algorithm to implement the methodology.     I realize now that what interested me was not structural health monitoring, but to study the origin and derivation of the theoretical equations.  I saw the profiles of various faculty in applied mathematics and I found some of their research interesting.
Doubts about applying:

Although I have a GPA above 3.60 some programs require certain number of courses in mathematics.  I only have the mathematics included in the mechanical engineering program and one course of elementary statistics.  I have taken 5 courses in mathematics.  However I don’t show strength because out of the 5 courses, in 2 of them I got B when I was a freshman.  I think that the taking the elementary statistic course last semester was not a good idea.  I should have taken a more advanced course.
I have not taking any advanced course in mathematics.
The application to the program requires the GRE, TOEFL and subject test in math.  Some graduate programs say that the GRE math are not mandatory but not taking it puts you in disadvantage.  I am not sure I will have time to prepare for it and as a result I don't know if I will do well.
I have research experience, but it is not in this area.  In addition, the reference letters will be made by engineering professors and not math professors.
Since I am about to finish next semester, I don’t have much time to take more courses or do research in the area.

I looked at a few topics that I found interesting in applied mathematics but I haven’t done research in them.  As a result I don’t know if I will get tired or if I will change my mind once I start on the program.  If I were to apply for this program and I change my mind would it be easier to change even if it means going to other department?

This depends heavily on which country, university and field you are in. For example, switching between mathematics and theoretical computer science can be easy in some circumstances.

Unfortunately, no, it's not so easy to change PhD programs.
It isn't like changing your undergrad major, where you just have to fill out some forms and get your advisors to sign off.  At the graduate level, each department does its own admissions.  So if you are in a mechanical engineering program and want to switch to applied math, you have to submit an application to the applied math program just like anyone else.  You'll be competing for a seat against every other applicant from around the world, most of whom will have completed a full undergrad mathematics major.
You might be able to improve your odds by getting to know faculty in the math program before you apply, perhaps discussing (or working on) research projects with someone there.  However, keep in mind that you will also need to stay in good standing in the engineering program, and you won't have a lot of spare time to explore math opportunities.
Also, from your description, your math background sounds much too light for entry into a math grad program.  Applied math can be more flexible than pure math, but having no advanced courses at all doesn't sound too good.  In fact, I'd be concerned that without advanced coursework, you may not even have enough of a sense of the field to know that it's really what you want to do.  Mathematics courses have a sharp change in flavor and difficulty as you transition from lower-level computational courses (calculus, differential equations, etc) to upper-level theory courses (real analysis, abstract algebra, topology).  Entering a PhD program having only the former kind of courses would be roughly analogous to being a go-kart enthusiast racing in the Indianapolis 500.  And it won't be easy to pick up extra math courses while in an engineering program; grad program requirements rarely allow for free electives.
Perhaps something that might better fit your situation is a post-baccalaureate ("post-bac") program.  These are one-year programs designed for students who have completed a bachelors and want to attend grad school in math, but need further preparation.  Such programs are offered by relatively few institutions, but I believe some of them are quite well-known in the community and have very good placement rates.

+1.  I was just in the middle of writing almost exactly the same thing.  One way of summarizing the central point of your second paragraph is that in graduate school you don't have a major, you have a department.

@MikeMiller for women and mathematics http://www.math.smith.edu/center/postbac.php

@MarkMeckes I think it would be even more appropriate to say in graduate school you don't have a major or a department, you have an advisor.  I suspect as long as you are switching from one of your adviser's funded interests to another, switching "majors" will not be that difficult.  So you should choose an adviser very carefully.

@emory: That really depends on the field and administrative circumstances.  In some fields, like math, your funding is not tied to your advisor (or you may not even have funding), and changing advisor's within a department is trivial.  On the other hand, changing research focus while working with the same advisor may be easy, but actually switching departments would be more complicated.

@emory: In fact, most math PhD students spend 1-2 years without having a thesis advisor.  Their eventual advisor has little or nothing to do with their admission to the program, and many advisors -- even very eminent ones -- either have no funding of their own or cannot use that funding to support students.  Finally, in many departments, students must pass most of their exams before they get an advisor, and many potential advisors have a policy of not taking on students even informally until they pass their exams.

My own (former) thesis advisor is, truly, one of the world's leading mathematicians, and I never got (or needed) any funding from him.

My advice is the same as Nate Eldredge's, but let me make a few points.

I am certain about my desire to pursue advanced studies. However, I have serious doubts in what I want to pursue my studies on.

To be very honest, for me the second sentence largely nullifies the first.  Wanting to pursue a PhD in the abstract is a poor idea.  In order to get any satisfaction out of a PhD program, you need to be pursuing a PhD in X because your love for X is so strong that you want to have a career doing X.  If you think it might be X,Y or Z, I worry that you don't have a deep enough commitment to any of the three to make it worth the time, effort and career uncertainty of today's very harsh job market.
Perhaps by expressing "serious doubts" you are really explaining your desire to transition from your undergraduate field to mathematical physics / applied mathematics (henceforth I'll just say "math": that's where you would apply).  I agree with Nate Eldredge that your coursework in mathematics is so minimal that you probably haven't been exposed to the flavor of graduate level mathematics....or at least, you haven't demonstrated that exposure in a way that would be convincing to an admissions committee.  Further honesty: your self-described profile would make you a very likely decline from the math PhD program at UGA (about the 50th best in the country), except perhaps if you took the math subject GRE and did well on it.  It would be a little surprising if you did well on that exam given your description of coursework...but of course it's possible, especially if you are very mathematically talented.  It could be useful information for you to know how you might do on this exam, but unfortunately this exam is notorious for having had the same crappy study materials for the last 20 years (or more?).  I don't know of any reliable way to gauge your score.
There are a lot more than 50 math PhD programs in the US, and I can't speak to your admit-worthiness for all of them, but honestly I would think twice about scraping the bottom of this particular barrel.  The job market is so tight right now that degree pedigree is something to keep your eye on.
In conclusion, I come back to agreeing with Nate Eldredge: you are not currently a good PhD candidate in math, and math faculty like us would worry about your lack of exposure.  Of course this does not mean that you are locked out of further study of mathematics: that never happens to anyone.  But if you think you are interested, find out by taking more math courses, in a non-degree program if need be.  I should say though that your stated background of five math courses required by an engineering degree -- at least two taken as a freshman -- is less than halfway to a graduate-preparatory math major.  In your case, after enrolling in a non-degree program for a semester or a year, if you really discover that this is what you want to do, you might actually want to explore a second bachelor's program.  Either that or really work hard to develop a relationship with a department so that you can essentially do this over the course of 2-3 years with a lot of faculty contact.
Good luck.

+1 for "Wanting to pursue a PhD in the abstract is a poor idea." In fact, wanting to pursue a PhD in the abstract comes dangerously close to the stereotype of staying in school for the sole purpose of avoiding the need to decide what else to do with your life.

A PhD is not like an undergraduate degree where you can do a bit of this, a bit of that, add up your scores and get your final grade. It's about doing research in a fairly narrow area, leading to writing a focused thesis on a particular topic. Spending, say, a year doing electrical engineering would normally give you almost nothing that would be useful towards a PhD in mathematics, and vice-versa. As such, transfering from one department to another is, essentially, starting a new PhD and would likely be treated as such.
It sounds like you don't know much about what a PhD involves and you should definitely find out before committing several years of your life doing one! I'm also a little confused by your statement that you're certain you want to commit several years of your life to studying a fairly narrow topic but you're not even sure what broad area that topic will come from. It seems that you're much more excited by the idea of doing a PhD than about any of the areas that you might research, yet doing the PhD requires being in one of those areas that you seem to find less exciting than the PhD itself.

I typed my answer before I saw yours.  Obviously I agree with it: +1.

Much depends on the specific university and department arrangement.
However, moving departments at the PhD level is usually quite difficult because it involves changes in your financial package. Transferring from physics to mathematics, for example, would mean your funding is coming from a different source. It also means that physics is losing a student, which can be bad for the department. Things are even more complicated if your funding is tied to a lab or an individual faculty member.
Many places consider transfers alongside new applicants (meaning, you are, in effect, applying to graduate school for the second time). You would have a slight advantage of knowing your professors, and perhaps of having an advocate for your candidacy, but you still have to write essays and get recommendations along with everyone else. I would not count on a transfer as a plan. You could just as well not get in, losing support from your home department in the meantime.
For these reasons, I often recommend students take some time between graduation and graduate school. Get a job at a lab or with a firm, take some courses, travel. Graduate school is like marriage--a long-term commitment. It is not a good place to explore or experiment with careers. There is no rush to make the decision, but once you do, make sure you are committed to your department and to your chosen discipline.
Master's programs are a different ballgame, since they do not normally fund students. It is probably easier to switch out of a Master's program. But once again, you would probably have to apply anew.

"For these reasons, I recommend my students take some time between graduation and graduate school." You recommend this for students contemplating a PhD program in math or physics?  I am not sure this is wrong (or even that it is meaningful to call such an opinion "wrong"), but it is at odds with the standard practice in this area.

Moreover, I will say that students who try to get back into mathematical studies after several years away tend to do so at a disadvantage compared to others who go straight through: the type of coursework that someone does at the end of a PhD-preparatory undergraduate math major is much more like what will be done in graduate school and much less like either what has been done before or what one is likely to encounter in most non-academic walks of life.  I wonder if you could speak to these issues in your answer.

Of course going through without a break offers some advantage, in any discipline. But making the wrong choice, or proceeding without perspective is a much larger disadvantage, in my opinion (and relevant in this particular case). Please feel free to contradict in your own answer--it is useful for students to hear a variety of perspectives. Note however that I said nothing about "several years" or "non-academic walks of life." Depending on the specific situation, time off can involve academic research, additional courses, or specialized training.

Taking a job at a firm or travelling are what I meant when I referred to non-academic walks of life.  I admit to confusion about your advice to take time between graduation and grad school by doing coursework: sandwiched in between other non-academic things, I guessed that you meant taking courses unrelated to the intended graduate study.  If you mean instead that the student should consider doing post-bac work: yes, Nate Eldredge has recommended that.  My answer would be the same as his.

"Of course going through without a break offers some advantage, in any discipline."  It is my understanding that there are some disciplines in which it is virtually mandatory to take time off between undergraduate and graduate school: e.g. social work and business explicitly encourage this.  Mathematics is a different field.  It may sound small-minded to say that real world experience tends not to be directly helpful for graduate study in mathematics...but that has been my real (academic) world experience.  Most students who take time off do not come back.

@PeteL.Clark  Most students who take time off do not come back — This is compelling evidence that for most students, taking time off before grad school is the right strategy!

@JeffE: I see what you're getting at, but your comment is a bit glib.  I certainly agree that grad school is not for everyone and indeed probably is only really a good idea for a small percentage of the people who contemplate it.  This makes your comment true.  But it does not follow from this that the people who decide to take time off and then don't come back are necessarily the ones who wouldn't have done well in graduate school and gone on to promising -- or even pivotal -- academic careers.

There's something a bit perverse about advising people to take time off while knowing full well that if they take your advice they are much less likely to go to grad school.  The part of the answer that I quoted earlier has been edited in a small but significant way: it now says "often recommend students take some time..." That makes a lot more sense to me: presumably the students that one recommends take time off are the ones who seem less than completely focused on and ready for grad school.  There are also students -- fewer, perhaps -- that I would recommend not take time off.

It is perverse only if the goal is to fill graduate programs. But, if the goal is to help a student make the right decision: time and space for reflection are vital. Consider that by the time of graduation a student has been institutionalized for more than 16 years. The momentum along that trajectory is immense. Consider also the sometimes exploitative labor conditions and the overproduction of PhDs in general. When can we ever, in good faith, argue against time for deliberation? Against being exposed to options and opinions other than our own?

Rick, you are not alone is feeling that the application process for PhD programs is enigmatic. It requires you to take knowledge that you have acquired and show evidence that you are committed to applying this already-obtained knowledge to a long-term research endeavor. Of course, you will learn a lot along the way, but depending on the institution, you will have very limited time to play catch-up. So, if you are absolutely set on your goals to pursuing a PhD program, either find a school that will be impressed with your credentials and allow you 1-2 years to settle into a research group, or you can work toward a more competitive school while maybe pursuing a master's degree in your chosen field of study.
Everything has its risk. Applying only to overly-competitive institutions can leave you stranded with no place to go. I recommend having a job or 10 lined up as a backup. Likewise, applying to only master's degree programs will mean spending more money. Sometimes, an employer will fund a master's program. I've been to career fairs where the recruiters brought that up without me asking about it - so it's quite common. If you want to pursue a prestigious PhD program safely, I recommend in the meantime finding an employer who hires engineers for math-oriented tasks (Two Sigma is a great example). Then see if they will fund your master's.
It may take you a few years, but there is plenty of time (assuming you are of traditional undergraduate age). I am 28 and will be finishing up my second bachelor's degree. I might not be that much more sure of myself in terms of research goals, and sometimes it feels like I'm faking it until I make it. But when the time comes to write your statement of purpose, show the department that you are competent in both research and your acquired knowledge at an appropriate level (we're talking at least two semesters of 400-level coursework in your target discipline).
Nate, Pete, and David give some very harsh but honest advice. Don't let that discourage you from pursuing advanced studies or ultimately a PhD program. If it takes you 7 years to finally get there, just remember, you're not alone. Just always have a backup plan.
Never forget: being intuitively skilled at math requires not only practice, but also an ability to recognize patterns and sameness among many things. In the words of Henri Poincare, an often-declared polymath, "Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things."


text:
Are salaries for academic jobs in New Zealand negotiable?
The academic salaries and compensations in new zealand universities seem tobe fairly low compared to most other countries such as US, UK, Australia, etc. Is it however possible to negotiate the starting point in the prescribed academic levels (read: salary levels)? Are the salary levels also related to the No of years post phd?

Everything is negotiable if both parties are sufficiently invested.

Please don't make edits that dramatically change your question. "What exactly determines the level of appointment in NZ universities?" is not the same question as "Are salaries negotiable," so please ask it separately.

Your starting salary is indeed negotiable for New Zealand positions. Whether you get what you ask for will usually be tied to your relevant experience. This last point is related to your further question about experience post-phD. For research positions, your research output during your years post-PhD will be a strong driver for what your starting salary will be.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to find an academic mentor as a professional
I'm a professional programmer with 15 years of experience, working in game development as a game and engine programmer, currently working at a prestigious game company on two well known games.
I've submitted a paper to a graphics journal (jcgt.org), and am waiting on the review process. (2.5 months into an expected 3 month process!)
In the meantime I'm working on a computer science paper which doesn't pertain to game development, but is more related to cryptography and metaprogramming.
That realm is a little bit more of a challenge for me since it isn't my area of expertise, so I don't know as many obscure things, proper terminology, or what people expect to see, etc.
How would someone like myself - who is a professional with no academic ties - find a more academic minded mentor who knows more about these areas, that I could ask questions to, bounce ideas off, etc?
Or is that even a likely possibility?

Other than academics at universities, have you considered reaching out to the strongly research-oriented parts of your industry - like intel research, or certain groups at google, or...? There are lots of PhDs of all sorts. Maybe you have a friend or a friend of a friend in these places. A second idea is to attend conferences in fields of interest. They are not usually restricted to only university researchers.

I think it this can be achieved. Here are some thoughts on how I would do it.
Many academics lack practical skills but require practical skills to evaluate and test their theories and get the publications they desire. These are the kind of academics who will be interested in working with you. To find them, you should first find areas of research that you are interested in where your skills are relevant. Find researchers in those areas who are looking for people with skills you possess (look for what they want for their funded PhD positions and Post-doc positions).  Based on this information prepare a clear value proposition - a set of things which you can offer the researchers, and what you would want in return.
Make contact. Ideally do this through a mutual connection who is well liked and respected. If that is not possible then you should try to talk with the academic face to face or on the phone so you can make it as easy as possible and create trust more quickly. Academics are often very busy and cautious of having their time wasted so this is important.
The suggestion above might seem like it involves too much commitment, but you will almost definitely need to show you can provide some sort of return for an academics time before they will work with you so unless you can show how working with you will get them publications or grants they probably won't be interested in helping you with your personal interests.
With that considered, if you are successful with your journal publication you will have a much better chance as the academics will be able to see that you have what it takes to write papers and thus infer that you will be likely to be able to get more publications with relatively little help from others.

Method 1.  Look for scholarly articles that get you really excited, and that are somehow related to what your own scholarly interests.  Once you find half a dozen such articles, look up the authors.  Find their home pages, find their CV's, their page describing current research interests.  Choose three scholars that look like likely candidates for some level of collaboration.
Now that you've identified them, work on cultivating a relationship one at a time -- because one may be enough -- you might not need to proceed to #2 or #3.  Here's how you do it: after reading one or more of this person's recent articles, you write an email saying you read such-and-so article(s) with interest, and you wonder if s/he has thought about such-and-so related aspect.  Ask for recommendations of other articles about such-and-so.  The length of this email should be about 100-300 words.
(Small vignette to inspire you: I was interested in a particular topic, looked for articles about it, only found one author who was working on that topic, wrote to her to ask for more information about specific aspects.  After a couple of emails back and forth, she invited me to a skype conference.  A few days later came an invitation to collaborate on a project.  Most researchers really enjoy collaboration.)
Method 2. Attend a conference.  Don't be shy about talking to people.
Method 3.  Take a course as a non-matriculated student, or audit.  Preferably in person, but online if necessary.  Attend department seminars.  Don't be shy about talking to people.

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


text:
Will the person writing my LoR know my GRE score?
So I told my Manager that I’d like to quit work to pursue my master’s & he asked if I had given my GRE. I panicked and told him I hadn’t, as most universities waived GRE. Now I need a professional recommendation letter from him. Is there any chance he’d know my GRE score or that I took the test?

You need to give permission to release your scores, actually.

I'm not sure under what circumstances they'd be able to find out, but this seems like a moot point because you really should* just tell them the truth. You made a mistake here and it will probably do you well to correct it. It is, after all, very minor and easily fixable. On the other hand, keeping this secret seems petty and unprofessional, at best.
(Not to mention that it's easy to imagine a scenario where they don't find out, but that still becomes your problem. For instance, what if they view your lack of GRE scores as a serious problem and they spend a substantial part of their letter talking about how capable you are "despite your lack of GRE test"? How do you think that would look to the admissions committee?)
There's no need to overshare or be overly apologetic. Mistakes happen. Just say something simple like "I think I told you that I had not taken my GRE. Actually I have; it just wasn't on my mind since so many schools had waived the requirement."
(* Obviously I don't know your full situation and yes, there are corner cases where this will be bad advice. But I can't imagine a situation where this is bad advice and it's a good idea to get a LoR from this person.)

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


text:
It is worth to apply for a postdoc position a few days after the deadline?
Is it OK to apply for an advertised postdoc position a few days (not more than one week) after the deadline? It is not an on-line application form, but sending an email with attachments.
Will this application be dismissed? Or more like "Let's see this candidate too". How does such hiring work? Are there any downsides (untrustworthy candidate etc.)?

Why not? Is there any downside to trying?

Yes, can be there any dowsides? I'm going to edit the question a bit.

I'd always suggest to call before applying, and this is really a case where you have something important to ask.

Why couldn't you apply on time?

The obvious question in the mind of the potential employer will be: why were you not able to meet the deadline? I would suggest you have a good reason for this. If it's just that you were disorganised, this will not reflect well on you. While you could take the attitude of "I've got nothing to lose by trying - they can only say no", bear in mind that many fields of academia are quite small communities and you may well end up wanting to apply for another job in the same lab, or collaborate in the future. Therefore, making a good impression is important even outside of trying to get the job. You need to weigh this up against how much you want that particular postdoc.
On the other hand, if you have a good reason for missing the deadline, then you might as well get in touch and see what they say. Sometimes people don't receive enough good quality applications and are delighted to include an extra candidate.
I would agree with @VonBeche's recommendation to call beforehand to ask whether they could accept a late application, before sending the completed forms.


text:
Professor takes our money and goes incommunicado, do we complain to the department or the police?
Several years ago an academic publisher I worked for were setting up a new journal. We approached the prospective editor-in-chief, lined up some plans for the first issues, signed a contract, and paid him the first installment of his honorarium. Then he ceased being contactable. We knew he's still alive & active because he was writing papers, supervising students and attending conferences, but he didn't answer our emails and phone calls.
If we had chosen to pursue the matter then, should we have taken it up with his department/university/research institute, or with the police?
If it matters, the prospective editor-in-chief is from India.

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

This question describes a situation that is (1) highly unusual, (2) almost certainly criminal, and (3) largely unrelated to Academia (e.g., this exact same story occurs regularly in every field; the fact this is about a journal is largely irrelevant). As such, I agree with the other close votes and have voted as such. If anyone wishes to disagree they may definitely post on [meta].

@eykanal: yes to (1),(3). Not (2), it's civil but probably not criminal unless it was clear fraud. People agreeing to do stuff for money then having a dispute is generally not criminal. Anyway yes it seems offtopic. Unless the OP's recourse included complaining to the professor's university, but the OP attacked me repeatedly for asking if they meant.

Obligatory disclaimer: I am not a lawyer...
This sounds like a contract dispute: whether the editor has discharged his side of the agreement. As such it is likely to be a civil matter rather than a criminal one. I very much doubt the police will be interested in pursuing anything. In general terms, the legal recourse would be to sue the editor in the civil courts. I suspect that the costs of doing so outweigh the benefits.
Could you report it to the editor's university? Yes. However, it isn't clear what this would achieve. As @ZeroTheHero says, they (apparently) have no involvement in the dispute so far. From their perspective it will be your word against the editor's; even if they wanted to resolve the dispute, it is not clear how they would go about doing so.

The first paragraph is correct. The second is not. Taking such a dispute to a third party (the university which is not part of the contract) simply because they have a relationship with the professor would probably be considered defamation and could generate a lawsuit of its own against the ones complaining.

@Buffy I suspect the University's role in this is legally 'interesting', and a lot will turn on the details of the various contracts (between editor and publisher, and between editor and university). The fact that this person was a professor at the university was undoubtedly central to them getting appointed as editor. My contract of employment has a clause about not bringing the university into disrepute. I'm sure a good lawyer could find something to work with...

@Buffy Doesn't defamation inherently involve making false statements which have caused injury? I confess to ignorance of Indian law on this but I doubt it's all that different from the British or American systems...

@KevinCarlson, in the US, yes, but not everywhere. But when making accusations it is easy to go beyond the actual facts. Especially if you impute motives. This is a civil matter. Going outside civil procedures, I repeat, is fraught. Sue the professor if you need to. There would be enough publicity in that alone.

What do you hope to achieve by contacting his current institution, which does not have any skin in this dispute?  As you describe it, this person is doing well at his current place of employment so it seems unlikely admin there would get involved.
Somehow, I cannot imagine that the police would treat this with significant priority now.
A better alternative might be to work through the publisher.  I presume this publisher may have formal or informal communication channels with other publishers, and thus might be able to organize some sort of pressure campaign through collective action (v.g ban on publication of papers by this person, or this person is not allowed on editorial boards of journals, etc).

Such a ban would probably be illegal in many places. Civil law, at least.

@Buffy A journal is under no obligation to publish a manuscript.  Indeed a publisher recently refused to publish a Woody Allen biography.

@ZeroTheHero There's a big difference between individual publishers making decisions not to publish something, publishers jointly agreeing to boycott something, and a person organising a boycott

IANAL but they absolutely have a skin in this dispute. The behavior of their professors is a core part of the reputation of the institution. Plus in may well be that the University itself might be the ones to repay the money if he's spent it on work done for the university. Plus as the university has lawyers they are better positioned to negotiate an outcome that sees the money returned.
I suspect the police would just tell you its a civil dispute, not a criminal dispute unless evidence of intentional fraud (And intents hard to prove) was produced. Contact the university via your lawyers

@Shayne they should but in practice they don't.   The odds are overwhelmingly against this affecting the reputation of the school in any meaningful way.  Most likely it would be brushed off as a dispute and "explained away" by the institution.

@Shayne I mean... how many institutions crack down on the publication in predatory journals... which would be higher on my totem pole than some dispute of the type mentioned by the OP.

Its a money dispute. Administration wonks are genetically programmed to take it seriousy. Accusations of fraud look very poorly in the eyes of the public.
And most people have no idea what the deal is with predatory journals. Its an internal matter. Profs running off with journals money is a potentially very public matter. Granted its probably not a lot, its still serious.

@Shayne I'm sure that "somebody you never heard of lost some money investing in a startup publishing company founded by somebody else you never heard of, several years ago" is front page world news right now ;)

@Shayne: how US universities treat US public/federal funding (which is governed by US federal laws, and strictly audited) is not representative of Indian universities would treat a matter involving private moneys.

alephzero well to be honest if its not coronavirus not much makes front pages now. My point is more people behaving dishonorably IS something thats significant in the world of University administration, particularly with vaguely hostile govt auditors lurking about as is so often the case with universities

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


text:
A professor I know is becoming head of department, do I send congratulations or condolences?
I don't know much more about the transition - only that the professor is becoming the new head effective [date], and that they have the support of the department.
Do I send congratulations (because it's a promotion) or condolences (because apparently some professors don't actually want the promotion, and only become the head of department reluctantly)?
Edit: what about the outgoing head of department? I clearly shouldn't send condolences in that case, but should I send congratulations?

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment.

If you're so uncertain as to be Asking, consider saying nothing.
If you want to follow convention, congratulate the new head of department.
Again, if you want to follow convention, congratulate the outgoing head on his or her retirement.

That would depend on how well I knew the person. If they were a very close friend of long standing, I'd probably offer condolences, just as a joke. But that would take a special relationship.
In the general case, only congratulations are in order.

Why would sending condolences be a joke?

A better way of putting that might be "...offer tongue-in-cheek condolences".

@ZeroTheHero: in France you would say (to a good friend of course) "I heard that you became head of the dept. My sincere condolences, you will have somehow to deal with that extra heap of money they will throw on you" - or something similar, in a tongue-in-cheek way. It very much depends on culture and your relationship.

@ZeroTheHero (cont'd) In France we love the "second degree" - that is things that not to be taken literally. This can be cynical (it is awful) or as a way for someone not to feel obligated to explain why they got the promotion (and reply "oh yeah, it will be easier to bribe the students not to come to the course so that I can have a nap" instead)

I did upvoted because it is exactly what I think is the spirit of the question. Which I would never have asked, simply as per this answer. I am surprised that it got upvotes and discussion. I would also say it is not about academia.

@ZeroTheHero "Why would sending condolences be a joke?" - because, typically, offering condolences is reserved for significantly more serious occasions (e.g. death of a family member), so sending condolences because someone got an unwanted promotion feels too strong in comparison, and thus has a joke-like quality. The  tongue-in-cheek implication is that the person is terribly shaken by this change in their position and/or lifestyle; they mourn their old life. A: "Congrats on the promotion!" -B: "Thanks. I hate it." -A: "Well, my condolences then :P"

@Allure & ZeroTheHero - In other, offering condolences in this context almost has the opposite effect of offering sincere sympathy; you're lightheartedly making fun of their situation.

@FilipMilovanović I understand very well the irony in offering condolences.  My comment was an irony on the irony.  I understand condolences very well, and I do not wish the burden of being chair on anyone.

@WoJ Does the head of the department get paid significantly more than a normal professor in France, or is that also part of the joke?

@user3067860: this is part of the (somehow lame) joke I made on the spot (I rather wanted to show that this would be the kind of "congratulations" one can expect to get from friends). The salary structure in academia in France is extremely flat (and low)

@ZeroTheHero It would be similar to sending condolences for "high.aged" birthday (i. e. over 30 or over 40) or so.

If you have to ask this question of us, then don't send "Condolences".
It really is that simple.

Send a message expressing your enthusiasm for their upcoming chairpersonship, your trust that they will steer the department well, and your willingness to support them as needed to achieve their goals for the department.
At base, "condolences" and "congratulations" are saying "a bad/good thing just happened", information that the recipient was already in possession of. The important part is what you say after the condolence/congratulation.

If you suspect that the person is taking on the job reluctantly, it is presumably for the good of the department that they have agreed to do so, and the appropriate sentiment to offer is not condolences but thanks.
A benefit of this approach is that it is also appropriate if the new chair was not reluctant to take the job.  And it works for the outgoing chair, too.

If they didn't want the appointment, they almost certainly could have turned it down and it would gone to someone else.  So, I would offer congratulations.

Many departments do not have a "someone else."  That's the point of condolences.

@AnonymousPhysicist Unlikely.  At most institutions, the department chairman doesn't have to be a full professor; at many places, it could even be a lecturer.  If they enough faculty to need a chairman, there is almost always someone else who wants the title.  The only reason to offer condolences is because you think you're being funny.

This led to an extended discussion with many possible reasons and much empirical evidence being debated; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment.

I would consider that offering condolences is appropriate if you know the professor well enough to be confident that they will understand that it is a joke and not be offended by it. Otherwise, congratulations is the safe thing to offer.
As others have commented/answered, being department chair is often treated as a duty more than a prize. That doesn't mean anyone is forced to take the position or that it is a bad thing. It's just a reflection of the fact that most professors enjoy research and teaching more than administrative duties. (Of course, some professors do want to move to a career in university administration.) The joke is a succinct way of acknowledging that the position comes with heavy responsibilities that will leave less time for research, teaching, and family.
I want to add that department chairs are not meant to dictate what the other faculty do and a good chair will wield their power in consultation with their colleagues. Treating the position as a duty rather than a privilege is a way of emphasizing that.

In these days, especially, although also forever, being a dept chair has tooooo many impossible responsibilities. Sure, there is some "power", but unless one reeeeally highly values power and is not disturbed by responsibility... it is a negative trade. Yes, in my experience, in math in the U.S., a significant number of people willing/hoping to be dept heads are not really competent, either in terms of appraising the mathematical work of the faculty, or in dealing with people.
A very few people have been willing to "do good"... but very often have been completely obstructed (and vilified) by "good-ol' boy network" kind of action.
So: a few people do take up chairperson jobs in a positive way... but often not so positive, but greedy... and, even when motivated in the best possible way, will be completely blocked (and insulted) by people who have their own agendas.

Can you expand as to how OP should approach their situation? Even if the promotion is not wanted, it might not be appropriate to offer condolences.

Yes, and the "power" comes at the expense of a fairly large loss of freedom. Freedom to set your schedule. Freedom to follow your research interests. And more.

My working theory on power is as follows and I recommend it. When a person becomes chair or dean or some such, they have various tools to lead. Persuasion and building consensus, for example. But they also get a teacup worth of authority and every time they apply authority rather than another tool they need to give up a pinch of authority from their remaining supply. No one will ever refill the cup. When it is empty you are done. You have no more true authority and no one will respect you in the future. Use other leadership tools and retain your authority.

Department chair has almost double the salary and the position is rotated at my university.
There is no reason to be sad someone is getting an extra 100k.


text:
Job prospects at ill-fitting university?
My fiance and I are trying to find jobs in the same city within a specific region due to family. My partner is a physician, I am an academic - recent PhD graduate now post-doc'ing abroad for 1 year. My partner has an unofficial permanent job offer that's practically ideal, from "university x" in the region. Unfortunately, university x has almost no research / faculty / courses in my research area, and there are no other nearby universities (e.g. for commuting). I am wondering if I might still get hired at university x, knowing that I would likely teach other topics, but still try to build up a lab in my own research area if they are open to it. Is this a reasonable possibility? Common? A bad idea? Has anyone had a similar experience? Is there anybody I could/should talk to at university x about this (e.g. best-fitting department dean)? I am meeting with my PhD supervisor to discuss as well. I also appreciate that academic job hunting is difficult at best ...

How much change in your research area would be required so that you match X? Would that be acceptable to you?

Similar question: Does what you call your "research area" at least fit into one of the departments/faculties at the university (maybe with some generosity)?

Thanks - there is one department that I could probably teach most of the intro-level courses, and one other faculty member that does slightly similar work. One concern with this department is whether they expect publications in field-specific journals, since I would probably not publish in any of those.

The right place to start is with the department that will hire your spouse. Most university have partner placement programs. Let the department of your spouse get you in contact with the people who run these programs, and talk to them about what is possible and what is not.

If university X has hired your spouse as a physician and you are a new PhD in a laboratory research field, your chances of getting a permanent job at X are extremely low.  If your "lab" would be a computer science lab in the "right" field (not infectious disease modelling, probably), it might be slightly higher; I do not know that as well.
X might hire you as an adjunct instructor, but that will not help you earn substantial money or advance your career.

Thanks for your answer. Can you edit to remove the identifying information you found it my profile, that I purposely omitted from my question in a weak attempt to remain slightly more anonymous?


text:
Where to include the Summer School or Winter School participation in the curriculum vitae (CV)?
I would like to include a Winter School I attended last year in my CV. I am not sure which heading of the CV this should be added to. Should I make a new heading called Participation and add this single Winter School there? (Along with 2 other conferences I participated in? or it is not so important to mention the conferences I attended?)
This is how I have included it so far: My CV. Do you think it makes sense? Or better if I format it in another way?
Please let me know of your kind opinion.
Thank you.

This might vary depending on what jobs you are applying to, but generally in academia, at least early in your career, you would likely want to include conferences attended on your CV. A header such as "Conferences and Workshops" might work well on your CV and you could include the winter school under this heading along with the conferences you have attended.

I have included a sub-section as "Non-Formal Education" under main section "Education" where I put important courses. You can put recent/important summer schools/ online courses/ conference participation under that.
I have seen some people list them in Skills and competencies as a supplement for a specific skill.
Hope that clarifies your problem...


text:
Getting in touch with a professor who has no longer an e-mail address... how to?
This question could sound weird. I'm reading through a computer science book which is the only reference I personally have about an algorithm, and I'd like to get in touch with the author of the book, which is quite famous in the field. I don't understand some of the conditions stated in order to make the algorithm work. I have another book which implements the algorithm, but some of the key aspects are not actually explained, and somehow I don't find the correspondence with some of theoretic aspect.
Just to clarify the algorithm is a long division algorithm for which I've tried to work out the theoretic aspect exposed in the book by myself. Some of them are fine other instead aren't clear enough, at least to me. I've tried to ask in math exchange for some help I didn't get much information XD.
The issue is that apparently this professor has no longer an e-mail address, and he suggests that if someone wants to get in touch with him it's for the best if you use the "old fashion" mail post service... which I mean... it's not that handy...
Do you have any suggestions?

He says himself "old fashion" - so, that's your best bet. You are not going to argue with a famous author how he is supposed to interact with people, are you?

He doesn't say "old fashion", that's what I'm saying to describe you the problem. What do you mean with your arguing question? Do you think that arguing is inappropriate in this case?

I think I can guess who you mean.  Honestly, there isn't anything to discuss.  If your question is important enough to be worth the time for you to write a letter, then write a letter.  If not, then don't.

What can I say... shall I just give up? (To be honest when I find something that interests me, in papers/books etc I always write to the authors and they're happy to reply).

Indeed, the question does sound weird, but maybe for reasons other than you think. The professor appears to give clears instructions how to contact them. If you want to get in touch with them, I suggest you follow the instructions whether you find it handy or not.

Ok, I let it go, maybe it's for the best. I'll keep eventually looking for other references to read through.

@CaptainEmacs, I wasn't try to argue "how he's supposed to interact with people". (Just to clarify)

I'm not sure how multiple people saying "write the man a letter" translates into "let it go". The professor says if you want to contact him, write him a letter, so ... write him a letter! As in, either type one up and print it on real paper, or find a pen or pencil and hand-write one using neat penmanship that should be legible by an 80-year-old emeritus professor.

I think I'm going to write down a letter if eventually I'll keep thinking that some of the points I don't understand aren't clear yet. Otherwise I'll maybe figure out that there's actually no problem (i.e. I'll understand the proof) and there's then no need in bothering the professor.

@user8469759 Ok, grant that you didn't want to argue about communication modalities. Now look at his point of view: he is famous and probably would get 1000 emails a day? (Much less famous people get a not far from that order of magnitude). No chance of being responded to. But, if people indeed have to think thrice before writing to him and make it worthwhile, not only will the letters be more relevant and meaningful, you have actually a real chance of getting a response. If one is too comfortable to actually go down and write a proper letter, the question might probably not be that urgent.

@CaptainEmacs "If one is too comfortable to actually go down and write a proper letter, the question might probably not be that urgent". I disagree... strongly.

After reading your comments herd I have to disagree with everyone else. Don't bother writing the letter, it will not clear up anything.

Perhaps ask your tutor or professor first, before bothering him. @shoover, if it is who I suspect it is, he just turned 79 :) Especially the long division algorithm is a classic one, so spend a bit more time reading the textbook first.

@DeboraWeber-Wulff, yes, I suspect the same, but was rounding up. ;-)

Another suggestion would be to contact the authors of the implementation in your second book to help you with a better understanding of the algorithms theoretical aspects. Because honestly, if you did not find an error in the algorithm answering you might be rather low in the mentioned famous persons todo pile (and not necessarily out of ill will).

@skymningen, that's a possibility. Although I think I already know what kind of answer I would get from the second author.

Write the letter.  You might not even have to mail it.
I think you will find that the effort of expressing your questions in writing may actually help you find the answers.  For those who object that the same is true of email, I doubt it.  With an actual, on paper, letter, things move more slowly, leaving more time for reflection, than with electronic communication.

That's what I thought actually. Out of curiosity what do you mean by "leaving more time for reflection"? Is that a "benefit" that you're pointing out?

@user8469759 For many of us, email is "compose, hit 'send,' and move on."  It is not unusual to find errors and other indications of haste in email.  A postal letter has to be printed, maybe even proofread, put into an addressed envelope, and mailed.  The very process leaves time to think.  And, until the letter carrier picks it up, it's not "sent."  You can actually stop a postal letter and revise it for some period of time.  Yes, that's a benefit.

Do you have any suggestions?

My suggestion is for you to get some perspective. If the person you are referring to is who I (and everyone else here) think it is, you need to understand that this is a person who has reached an extraordinary level of celebrity in the scientific community. Saying he is "quite famous" doesn't begin to describe the situation accurately -- I'm talking about a level of fame where (I have seen this with my own eyes) when he gives a talk at another institution, star-struck graduate students and postdocs approach him one after the other asking to have their pictures taken with him. Moreover, this person famously dedicates his life to thinking, writing, and speaking at public events in various places. Being in close touch with his very large fan base is quite at odds with his lifestyle and his legendary dedication to his work.
In other words, there is a very good reason why he does not have a publicly listed email address.
For the same reason, I expect that even if you go to the small trouble of writing him a letter (which, amusingly and for a reason I can't quite understand, you seem to think is an incredibly onerous thing to do), the chances that you will get a reply seem rather low -- I wouldn't expect that he can spare the time to explain long division algorithms to random people asking for more details than he already put into his books. But in any case do give it a shot, in the event that you do get a reply you will have something to brag about to your friends. And maybe it will help free you from your psychological inhibition against writing old-fashioned letters, which is something that could be of independent benefit.

+1 Better put into words than I could have dreamt of doing.

@CaptainEmacs thank you ☺. FWIW your answers have on occasion given me the exact same feeling...

If you include an email address in your snail-mail letter, you might even get an email back — he does know how to send them; what he doesn't know how to do is read all the email he gets without taking 24 hours a day.


text:
Permission for using publicly available questionnaires in Dissertations
I have used and/or adapted several questionnaires for my dissertation study. I have already asked the authors for permission to use their scales. However, I have not received a reply from an author about using his scale.
I wonder if we have to have the permission of the authors when we use their surveys (when the questionnaire items are published and publicly available), or is it a courtesy to ask for the permission. Is it still okay to use a public scale when no confirmation is received from the author who developed the scale?
Thanks for any suggestions!

If I understand the question, you're talking about taking a published survey instrument and administering that survey to your own subjects as part of your research, possibly with changes of your own to the instrument.
I'm no lawyer, and I'm not in a discipline that uses surveys much, but I'd say you need permission, most especially if the survey form carries a copyright notice.  In the United States, copyright exists the moment something like a survey is in "fixed" form, so the survey is covered by copyright, and you need permission to re-use or adapt it, so says the law.
Re-using someone's survey instrument is not like citing their results.  Based on the comments to an earlier answer, re-use of survey instruments seems to be common, but I still think that, legally at least, you need permission.

I understand, thanks! then, how about if a questionnaire is used more than 1000 times? I also see some dissertations with no permission information about the questionnaires that they used. Also, I wonder what to do if an author does not reply to my permission request? Thank you sir!

I am utterly not qualified to give you legal advice.  I can tell you my understanding of the law, but I can't give you advice.  It sounds like you may be so far along that it's too late to do something else.  Talk with your committee chair and explain your dilemma.

Cite them.
If the questionnaires are published then you do not need to ask for permission, just give them credit.
In Psychology there are some very popular questionnaires that were presented in papers that have been cited more than 5000 times. It would be a full-time job to reply to every person's email who wants to use it!

Thanks for the answer! How about when we have to change some items to make them better fit to our context? As long as we cite them, do you think this is fine?

@renakre That is fine/common too. You'll need to cite them and be sure to use language such as "based on Blah et. al's questionnaire" and explain the differences in more detail. One such questionnaire by Fred Paas has been modified dozens of times. So much so, he wrote a paper comparing all of the variations people have made to his questionnaire.

Thanks! I understand and it totally makes sense. I hope my committee members will not attack me for this during my defense :) (since one author has not replied yet).