text:
I hate taking lectures, can I still survive in academia?
I'm 3rd Physics & Mathematics student and I almost hate both taking and attending lectures; it is not because of the content, but rather the way how it is done; I don't like sitting in uncomfortable in a crowded room for 50 min. unstopped.
To explain what I mean, let me describe an "ideal" learning environment for me, which was what I had during this last winter break - it was like a paradise.
I was studying Quantum Mechanics from the video recordings of a graduate course taught by one of my professors and I was watching them in my home with my pyjamas. While watching the lectures, if I didn't understand something, I would stop and think on about it, make some research, check out the book that I was using etc. and (after all those tries) if I still couldn't find it, I would take notes and think on it for days while I was still making progress through the course material. With this way, in a single day, I was watching almost 4 hours of lectures and taking detailed notes of those lectures (which were actually taking much more time than watching the lectures). That experience was like a paradise for me; I was progressing at my own pace, taking breaks whenever I feel I need it. There was no worry of any grade; I was doing this in a "holiday" just because I wanted to learn quantum mechanics, not because I needed to pass an exam.
But if I were to learn QM by taking a course from the university, most of the time, I would be forced to take the course from a single professor with a curriculum s/he prepared - not I chose - and most probably I wouldn't like his/her teaching (let's say I am a bit picky). Moreover, even though I would be the active student in the class, at some point during the lecture I stop thinking on what is being taught and that would make me sleepy. Also, I would have to take good grades from that course, so there would also be the grade-anxiety. And the list goes on and on, but you get the point.
Now, considering the fact that even most of Phd/Master's programs have some course loads, and even as a professor one needs to give lectures, can I, being such a person, survive in academia? or should I just look for other alternative career options?
I mean I love Science, but just don't like some of "formal" practices, such described above.
Just a side note: I actually like teaching things, but not giving lectures to a whole lot of people; I mean I have a friend who asks me lots of questions, and I love answering & discussing those with, but giving lectures is totally a different experience, which I despise.
Edit: There is no requirement that forces me to attend the lectures, but when I take lectures, I have to "learn" the notation / the content of the materials the instructor is teaching. In terms of what I want to learn and when I want to learn, just not attending the lectures does not solve the problem.

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

I can sympathize. I'm extremely susceptible to "Power Point" hypnosis: 10 slides in and my head is staring to nod, 30 slides and I'm in danger of snoring. This isn't limited to dull talks, or the amount of sleep I got the night before, it's apparently a quirk of my physiology.
However, part of your education is learning to exercise your skills in suboptimal conditions. Schwarzschild wrote three important papers on gravitation while serving on the Russian front in WWI. Attending lectures may not be optimal for you, but is it really such a huge hardship?
If you stay in academia you are probably going to need to listen to talks at conferences, listen to presentations by your students, and attend seemingly endless faculty meetings. There are equivalent obstacles in the non-academic world. By all means, arrange your days and your study environment as you find most effective. But learn to work with the fact that world is full of friction, and learn to cope with the minor inefficiencies it imposes on you.

Up to now, the life wasn't easy for me (not just from the perspective of education), so I definitely agree with you on that; we need to learn how to perform under suboptimal conditions; however, when it comes to learning something physics or mathematics, which are the passions of my life, if I don't think I'm really learning it, I don't bother trying further. However, I see your point; thanks.

It's definitely a negative factor.  But of course one factor among several.
I personally enjoy lectures more when I pre-study the material (even doing some drill) so the lecture becomes more of a review or alternate viewpoint rather than initial learning.  But if you tell me next, you don't like textbooks...
But then again I sort of enjoy lectures, feels like a performance I get to watch.

In physics lecture, yes I totally agree, but in a mathematics, I would disagree in general.

P.S.: I actually quite enjoy studying from a textbook which I like.

@onurcanbektas Well, you added "in general", otherwise I would have said, some of the most artistic and brilliant lectures I have attended were math ones. However, math has the potential for some really uninteresting lectures.

I am a mathematician, and if a lecture is not a good performance, it was not worth going to...

@CaptainEmacs Oh, tell me about it; once the instructor was following a book  word-to-word in the lecture, even though the book wasn't a good one.

@onurcanbektas: Most of my lectures were done in this way..

@guest3 well I don't know what to say other than I'm sorry.

You might have another problem or two that needs addressing. It might be worth sitting and reflecting on what you "really" hate about the experience. It just dull and pointless and wasting your time? If so you might need to work on patience and process (learning to do the thing and be OK with the time it takes), because some of life is doing what your boss/professor/etc asks even if you don't want to and think there's a more productive use for your time. Otherwise, is it hard to sit there because you hate everything and everything is distracting and annoying, so you aren't learning anyways? That might indicate an underlying problem like ADHD or depression, where a combination of mental exercises (self soothing, calming, reducing the noise) and medical treatment (e.g. an SSRI for depression or stimulants for ADHD) can really help reduce the discomfort and annoyance. Or are you just physically uncomfortable the whole time? Is there anything you can do about that or request to accommodate that? Sit in the back and get up to stretch or even walk outside into the halls when things get achy / restless?
In today's world of online education and resources, you may be well placed to work around it, but the setting (sitting through boring meetings with people / things that make you want to burn it all down) will keep coming up throughout your adult life, so nailing down some of the causes and techniques for handling them can be beneficial throughout your life. Otherwise, nailing it down might help you figure out what type of work/study you might be cut out for and what sorts of things you want to avoid.
Source: PhD in a biomedical field and still struggling with some of these issues

Yep, I read the question and thought, "Hey, a fellow ADHD academic! Pity he doesn't know it yet."

As you say you're still struggling with ADD, you might want to read "Delivered from Distraction" : http://www.drhallowell.com/books/delivered-from-distraction-getting-the-most-out-of-life-with-attention-deficit-disorder/ .  (and it'll give you a reason to get our of your office and make friends with your local librarian)

Ultimately you are responsible for your own learning. This is true whether you have lectures available or not. True whether the lectures are helpful or not.
If lectures are required or attendance is graded you will suffer from non attendance, but you know that, of course.
But the opinion that your professor has of you is also important. But attending lectures is only one way to affect that. If you really don't want to attend lectures, I'd suggest that you have a face to face conversation with the professor so that you can meet your goals without upsetting a person with some authority and who may be in a position to help you along the way.
My own opinion about lectures is that they are a poor way to teach. Student practice and reinforcement is much more important than listening to a speech. In the 17th century, lectures were an efficient way to reach more than a small number of students. Books were expensive and other learning aids non existent.
I'd suggest that if you have a way to learn that isn't like what the masses are comfortable with that you discuss it with the prof. who may be able to supplement your ideas on learning.
But you may also, just have to yield to the system to avoid getting penalized for things that shouldn't really matter.
I'll note that if you came to me, I might want to put you to work helping others, rather than attending lectures, and even giving you exams that were a bit different than the normal ones. Probably harder exams.

Lectures often suck, but they're pretty much unavoidable until candidacy. Same thing with using books you don't like or studying material you don't find well-motivated.
It's best not to waste energy fighting these inevitabilities. Of course you should take whatever chances you get for self-study and supplementary reading from sources of your choice, but you won't escape classes completely.
When it comes down to it, what you're really fighting against is most likely that you think the academic system should be better. It should be, but it isn't. Accept what you can't change, and try to make the best of what's there.

I hate lectures too and was a lecturer for 11+ years. I finally realised I could not stand them any longer.
Whenever I could I would convert lectures to task based ones where the students do something rather than listen to me drone.
Now I am in research which is one avenue available to you if you wish to stay in academia, it usually means no teaching, occasionally giving talks.
Just sit at the back with headphones, listening to the videos.

What do you mean by "I am in research" ? Are you doing a post-doc, or working in somewhere like CERN ?

Working for a uni, doing programming on a research project.

I now work for a small consultancy and love it. Interesting problems and flexible hours. I do not mind the 9 to 5 now, it is so much easier to get things done than at Uni.

Once you get out of academia, you will most likely be required to show up at an employers office, sit in a sometimes uncomfortable chair, stare at a computer and monitor for many hours, and not have PJs on.  You will likely need to be dressed in business casual.
You may be able to get away with leaving the top button on your shirt undone and maybe even slip off your shoes while at your desk, but maybe not. Even worse, you job might require a suit and tie, or a dress.
You will not likely be able to snag a 100% remote position, unless you have many years of experience and are in one of a handful specific job positions.
Being in a class, listening to lectures, staying quiet, focused and on task, and all the other things that go with it are training for the job as well as what is being posted up on the white/chalk board or projector display.  If you don't have those skills, you may not have all the necessary skills to survive in a regular 8-5 day job.
Sure, you might get into a startup that allows jeans and sneakers, but those are still fairly rare.  They sometimes get a lot of press because they are still so rare. And I haven't heard of anyone that allows PJs on the job.
Unfortunately, you will have to learn those skills now or you will have to learn them later, probably at the expense of several jobs and a lot of uncomfortable "on the job" learning where you won't have hourly breaks to overcome the oftentimes uncomfortable nature of work that isn't even related to wearing uncomfortable clothes.

Nah.  "Independent Consultant".  Or just start your own company.  When you know what you're bad at, you have to figure out what you're good at and focus on that instead.   No reason to take someone else's path if it's going to make you miserable.  (it's like when someone tells you some food is 'an acquired taste' ... why would I want to eat something that doesn't taste good?)

Well, thanks for letting me know that the industry is much worse (in general).

@Joe, even if you start your own consulting company,you'll still likely have to be face-to-face with a customer at some point. You might be able to just video chat and get back to comfy clothes after a while, but not all the time. Being a consultant usually requires professional experience and advanced knowledge, so the OP still isn't likely going to be able to do it right out of college.  What I laid out isn't 100% of people, but it is around 99.999%.  Personally, I also wish it wasn't.

I think you can survive in academia even if you hate lectures.
I hated them myself but I pushed through and did a PhD. What I would say is that there seems to be a much higher emphasis in the US on taking lectures than there is in Europe ! I've spent time in both academic systems. In my opinion, I think there is much less of a focus on attending lectures during postgraduate study in Europe!

Actually while I was studying (Department of Mathematics, University of Lodz, Poland) we were not requested to attend to the lectures at all. The only thing that mattered was completing the final tests. You had also more practical part (you could translate it to "Exercises") where you had to attend but it had nothing to do with boring lectures. You had to actually work out solutions to the given problems yourself, applying the knowledge you were supposed to get during the lectures (but you could get it yourself ass well).

I barely attended any lectures during undergrad, got into Cambridge for my msc, again didn't go to any lectures, now doing a PhD. I am pretty average at maths maybe less than average (I got lucky with Cambridge) I often have moments when I am really silly and don't see things but that is more my doppy head than me not attending lectures. I am a deep thinker not a quick one... so it suits me a lot more not to go to lectures. In fact I have been like this my whole life, I regularly missed (or rather bunked off to go study by myself in the town library). I think provided you have the motivation to work at home not dick around with your favourite hobby then it is fine.

Just showing up in lecture hall with proper clothes puts you in the proper mindset. In home all kinds of distractions will prevent you from keeping a schedule and maintaining attention on material at hand.
At home the wikipedia rabbithole and time sink is an ever present danger. Externally enforced schedules & limiting enviroments work. The same ideas also apply when working from home. You can do it couple of times, but you can't trust yourself to maintain schedule long term.
If you feel sleepy buy a cup of coffee or limit the classes you attend, leaving the more important or interesting lectures. Generally after 6hours of lectures i would find myself exhausted, wasting time and not paying attention at all.

not really; that is not applicable for me.

In class there are also distractions: your friends, your mobile phone etc. Can you tell us why your argument does not apply to them?

It's generally bad etique to talk with your friends during a lecture and you can always ignore them if they seem more interested on sharing a joke rather paying attention. You also can't just pull up your phone during a lecture for prolonged times. Phones are a distraction both in and out of class and you could always use airplane mode temporary.

There are few options to consider and not all of them will work on every kind of study nor with every teacher but it's always better to try it. One note though - you need to be really good in order to try most of them as you need your teachers to sympathise. Before I move on let me first challenge your approach a bit.

There was no worry of grade

Well, the professor that teaches you has to measure you somehow. Also you have to be comparable against other students. One of the basic reasons is that someone needs to able to decide who's worth of going further so yes, you will be graded. Also grades should show if you make progress. On the other hand the way you are graded may depend on your agreement with a professor.
Let me give you an example. Where I studied each subject has two parts - lectures and exercises. For exercises you have tests, usually two in every semester. You need to pass both to graduate for the next semester or from the course.
Twice I managed to get the grade not by completing those tests but having instead a totally different task assigned. The task was outside of what was regularly taught. In general my solutions were often somewhat different from the "standard approach", leading to results that were considered as quite new by the professors that taught those topics. Once my end result was entirely different to everyone else in the group for the same task but no-one including the professor could find a flaw in my reasoning. I was told I'll get a max grade if I manage to prove that my result is actually consistent. Yes, it took me a month and I had to use some strange theorem suggested by one of fellow students (definitely not taught in the normal course on any subject, not to mention this specific) but eventually I managed to create a proof.
The second case it turned out my solution to the task (which I found obvious actually) was considered by my professor as an extraordinary result. The original task was just to present the solution but the professor told me that if I can provide the justification that my solution is correct (which he assumed he also considered intuitively to be correct) I'll be granted a max grade. So I did it (it was super-easy for me, the most difficult part was building the correct definition of the function I've created but I had it already well thought over).

I'm force to take that lecture from a single professor (...)

Well, not really. A single professor is responsible for grading your progress. You may go to other professors or learn on-line or whatever. Actually most of professors I know will be happy to teach other students if they were only willing to learn.

with a curriculum s/he prepared, not I chose, (...)

Well, this is something that you need to understand. The professor is responsible for teaching and they need to consider what's best to teach. You are not yet fully developed as a researcher so you may miss some important areas. Again, there are also other reasons, for example ability to compare your knowledge (in theory progress) to that of other students.

(...) and most probably, I don't like his/her teaching.

That's something you don't really know.

even as a professor, you need to give lectures

First of all, that's entirely different thing than attending lectures. But still, you may not like giving dull lectures that you never liked attending. That's great. So rather than giving simple dull lectures find more creative ways of showing the same knowledge. Think of TED talks. These are lectures but still you find yourself looking for them and listening on the YouTube even though no-one forces you to do so.
It's more challenging but it gives you far more joy and satisfaction when you see that your students are interested in your teaching. And I believe that's the only way to really achieve that.

Here are some options that come to my mind. Probably best might be mixing few of them depending on what works for you and for specific professor.
Note, the better you are (and you can actually prove it) the more likely those methods will work.
External/on-line studies.
Yes there are such things. Personally I've seen it for Computer Science (actually it was one of the options I was considering). You essentially do all the learning on-line and some 80% of it is own-paced. You have a set of things that you have to learn and that will be tested at the end of each course.
You'll have the courses/lectures recorded plus you'll get a set of additional resources lie books or web pages that can help you when you want to deepen your knowledge.
What t doesn't solve is that you still get the list of things to learn and that you are still graded in a uniform way.
Individual course of studies
I don't know details, I only know it's possible. Essentially you need to find a mentoring professor who will be leading you and you agree with them what to study. Then such study plan has to be accepted by some board (to my understanding it's on Department level).
You may still need to attend some traditional courses/lectures but you'll have much more impact on which ones will you attend. Also you may for example prove your skills by doing some research or other kind of work so at least part of your progress (grades) will not come from traditional means of teaching.
Pre-agreed conditions to pass the course
This is pretty much what I have already described above from my personal experience. You can go to the professor(s) responsible for particular course and agree what you need to learn and how will you prove to them that you did.
It will probably not work with everyone. On the other hand the better you actually are, the more chances you have to succeed.
In the end it's the grade given by the professor that counts, not how you get it. If you have a mutual agreement, you're good to study as agreed (in most cases as you want as long as you manage to develop the required skills - and prove it)
Pre-study
Essentially you can find out what to expect on most of the studies. What you can do is actually prepare upfront. If you can learn the topic earlier it'll be easier to negotiate your attendance to the lectures. Of course that might mean delaying your studies and spending some of your time on learning that you could use otherwise. On the other hand if you manage to do that you may end up with more free time as you no longer have to attend the lectures.

I cannot guarantee if any of those options will work in your case, especially in the place you study. Actually I believe some of the best universities (Oxford comes to my mind) actually support some of those approaches. Others might see it as a problem. Yet it's worth trying. It costs you little to nothing but can really make studying much more enjoyable experience.


text:
Do reviewers go over the calculations (i.e do the calculations themselves) when reviewing?
The question is clear:
Do reviewers go over the calculations (i.e do the calculations themselves) in the paper? For example, it can be the derivation of an equation, or some numerical calculations.
Edit:
What I am trying to understand is that if I am reading a paper and seeing some derivations, should I assume that someone (possibly reviewers) other than the authors went through those derivations in detail.
Edit 2:
The question can be narrowed down to STEM fields only.

Not clear at all. What kind of calculations?

@AzorAhai see my edit please.

@DanRomik see my edit please.

still vague. I'll let someone else answer

Have you put a paper in for review that has errors?

Even if the calculations checked in the review copy that does not mean that errors were not introduced in the final copy.

@SolarMike No, not me, but I am reading a paper in which there is a major error, I think. However, the author is one of the leading authors in the field and the paper has been cited quite a lot, so I am a bit in conflict; that was the motivation for my question

Does this answer your question? Where to get help when we can't understand something done in a paper?

@SolarMike No, of course not. Both stem from the same problem I face frequently, but they are totally different questions.

In one of your own comments there you answer this question... unless you get over there and remove it...

This depends on the field, the paper, and the reviewer. If the result of a calculation seems to be "expected" by an experienced reviewer they may feel no need to go over the calculation in detail. An exception would be when it is a core result on which other things depend. Another exception is if the result surprises them in any way.
And of course, some reviewers are much more meticulous than others and some fields require a lot of care because things can get subtle.
But the author should, on the one hand, assume that they do, so that they don't get caught in error during review, but also assume that they don't so that they don't get caught in error later. (Confusing, I know).
Ultimately it is the responsibility of the author to be correct and accurate and some errors do slip through review and don't get caught for a long time, if ever. People (authors and reviewers) do make mistakes, of course, but the combination of care from both tends to catch most errors.

"But the author should, on the one hand, assume that they do, so that they don't get caught in error during review, but also assume that they don't so that they don't get caught in error later. (Confusing, I know). " I'd also add that a reader should assume that the reviewer has not checked the calcualtions if they are at all in doubt.

It would be unusual for a reviewer to replicate numerical calculations in a paper, but in some cases they might do so, particularly if the supplementary materials include computer script allowing them to replicate the results easily.  (If the author has not supplied the reviewers with the computer script for the calculations, they can hardly expect the reviewer to program it from scratch.)  A reviewer might decide to try to reproduce numerical calculations if the numbers in the paper "smell funny", but often they will just assume that the authors have correctly implemented their calculations as described in the paper.
As to the derivation of equations, these would usually be checked if they are part of the work in the paper, or if they look unusual.  Papers that involve mathematical proofs or derivations of equations are generally reviewed with scrutiny on these proofs/derivations, and a good reviewer will be able to identify if there is an error or a part that is unclear.  Derivations of results are usually only included if they are either original work, or if they are useful in understanding the material in the paper, so in either case a good reviewer will check them.
Ideally, reviewers should give a comprehensive review of the paper, and they should also include a statement setting out any limitations on the scope of their review in their report.  (This is particularly important in multidisciplinary papers where an individual reviewer may only review one aspect of the work in his or her specialty area.)  Unfortunately, most reviewers to do not provide a statement about the scope of their review and so, in the absence of comments on it, you will not really be certain whether a reviewer has checked a mathematical derivation or numerical computation.

On the other hand if the script is supplied, the question becomes "do reviewers validate the script?", leading to very similar conclusions

There are two types of result I'd light to highlight:

Numerical results that depend strongly on computational methods;
Theoretical results expressed algebraically.

Besides, there is the significance of results (which obviously depend on the referee):

Results seen as relevant
Results seen as irrelevant

Irrelevant results will usually be under the microscope if and only if the referee is a true expert in the field, but almost always go unnoticed (if they get published at all). The referee will probably consider them to be unworthy of being correct or incorrect, since they are irrelevant and don't even deserve his/her time. The doubt, in this case, doesn't hurt.
Now, if the results are considered relevant by the referee, then they will be judged as either expected or surprising. Expected results will probably not receive too much attention, but surprising ones might raise alarm bells. If the referee is an expert in the field and the result is algebraic, it is likely that he/she will analyze the steps in the calculations rather thoroughly, and even attempt reproducing them if they look feasible. This a desirable situation of a fair report, that is, the paper has fallen on experienced hands and the report by this referee will probably be favorable and useful - or full of question marks with respect to what was done in the paper if the referee didn't understand the calculations, which should help enhance the paper's readability. An unfair report might occur if the referee is less of an expert, since he/she will not attempt to reproduce the calculations and might question the paper's results with less substance. It is not uncommon for a referee that is not an expert to be convinced by the author's arguments, even if he/she himself doesn't go over the calculations.
We now come to the final case of a relevant, surprising paper whose results rely heavily on computers. In the absurdly vast majority of the cases, these are never reproduced. The expert referee might have some previous calculations pointing in a certain direction and compare what the paper says with his/her calculations, and he/she will probably include this in his/her report. He/she may strongly disagree with the paper due to reasons based on his/her own research, and even recommend that the paper should not be accepted, but he/she will probably never try to redo what the paper does. Sometimes the expert referee will ask for further evidence of the correctness of the results by suggesting another test to be included in the paper, and this often helps a lot in giving the paper more power or finally proving the main result was wrong.
The point is that you should always check everything when submitting a paper, and that if your paper deals with very unexpected results, then your tests need to be especially stringent, and your writing as clear as possible. Ground-breaking papers are the most important ones with respect to creating new research directions, so they really need to be subject to a lot of criticism and replication attempts - but the referee will almost never be the one to try replicating them.

I don't quite believe in an expected/surprising dichotomy.  There are lots of things that weren't specifically but also aren't terribly surprising.  I have in mind various explicit factors in equations, which one has no particular intuition about and computational errors can be subtle.

The answers given before are quite good. I just want to add a few points based on my own experience that may be relevant.
The author of the question did not specify the field. It is safe to assume however that it is of scientific nature.
Let us begin with pure mathematics. Most of computations in pure mathematics are theoretical computations. Here you want to check thoroughly the computation. As you do the hard work, sometimes you realize the bigger picture sometimes you don't. This means that the theoretical result may be simplified, with painless or easier computations. But in general, you do not know yet. So you have to go through the computations. As a personal example, this happened to me when I read Bigelow's paper on the linearity of the classical braid group. This involved a certain detailed computation. Later on the result was understood on another level that greatly simplified the original computation.
Even in pure maths, it may happen that a computation is an example. The author wants to illustrate some of the theory he's building, or is making a certain point. Even in this case, as a reviewer, I immediately go over the example and try to process the computations, especially if the rest of the paper is very theoretical. Why ? Because examples are the flesh of the theory. Without examples, there is nothing to eat. Examples help understand what motivates the author and conversely every fine author should strive at giving illuminating examples that guide the reader. So if the example involves a computation, I will go over it.
If the computation is related to an aside comment, it is a different issue. But it is relative to the field. If a pure math paper numerically computes some CPU time to convey a rough impression of complexity, this is one thing. If it is a computer science paper, it's an altogether different issue.
A computation may mean very different things for a mathematician, a computer scientist or a physicist.
Ultimately, the decision is up to the reviewer's best judgment. And it should do justice to the paper submitted in the sense that the relevancy/motivation to go over the computation is directly related to the originality of the paper.
This is particularly relevant to cross-field literature or interdisciplinary paper. As a mathematician, I occasionally stumble across common errors or bias in papers in neurosciences. In general I want to be able to reproduce the computation just as my co-author wants to reproduce the experiment.
But equally often, I do have to state that I can review only a few aspects of the paper, since I am not qualified in some other fields. With respect to this particular issue raised by interdisciplinary papers, Ben's last paragraph is sensible.
A final word: errors are common. But somehow, over time, big (and not so big) errors are corrected or neutralized. I mean most errors that have resisted the reviewer's critical reading are either inoffensive or disappear. This is not meant to imply blind reliance of the reviewers or peers. But you should not be excessively guilty either on relying on them, especially if their field of expertise is far from yours.
FDW

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is not being paid in an internship common in academia?
I'm a to-be third year Phyiscs and Mathematics student, and in the beginning of this summer, I was invited to do internship at the lab of one of the professors in the Physics department by that professor herself, and I accepted directly.
During this last 1 month, i.e since the beginning of my internship, I have basically invalidated the work of 2 master student, 1 Phd student and a undergrad student's joint work as a whole (the methods that they were using to analyse the data methodically insufficient and wrong, and I have shown this), and solved the problems that they couldn't solve, and got consistent results.Further, I have made suggestions for how we can improve our result about the experiment that the lab is conducting.
Now, this is my first internship that I have ever done, and I did (and I think I still do) not have any idea about internship in general, and I did not asked for any allowance for the work that I was going to do, and just interested with the job, and I have learned a lot of (literally a lot) things in this 1 month, and enjoyed with the work I was doing.
The thing is, I cannot take any course credit from an internship (this is a thing in my University), and I did not get paid; it is OK, I have learned a lot of things, but I'm asking just for the future internships, is this kind of situation common in academia in general ? Because, after some time the situation transformed from helping researchers in their research to doing the very work of those researchers that they cannot do properly while they still got paid.
Edit:
I'm in Turkey.

Please state the country of the university

@JenB See my edit, please. Thanks by the way for reminding me.

Sadly, yes. It is all too common, though not universal. Not only for internships in labs, but also in businesses. The US Congress, even, doesn't pay its interns, though there is some move to do so in future.
The "justification" of this is that the students are "learning", which can be true or false. But normally they do work for which pay would otherwise be required.
In my opinion, this is just wrong. If people are contributing, they should be paid. If they are not paid then many people who need to support themselves - somehow - will be closed out of these opportunities. I would have a bit less objection to it but for this fact. In economically diverse countries such as the US (and others) it is especially important.
The solution to it is political, however, whether at the university level or the governmental level.
As you say, of course, an internship teaches you things that are hard to learn otherwise. They are valuable for themselves. Your CV can reflect internships you have done.
Well, some internships teach you things. There are also examples in which "interns" become bottle washers, not learning much of anything. This is pure exploitation.
But labs, agencies, and businesses need to include sufficient funding so that students don't get exploited.

+1, However, I would like to add that actual jobs also teach you many things, potentially more than many internships. Yet, jobs actually do pay you a salary. Basically, the fact that you can "learn" something by doing a job does not in itself excuse the omission or reduction of a salary.

@AbbasJavanJafari. Exactly so.

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


text:
Should a scholarship be acknowledged in the paper if it is not given for the work that is being published?
If a student receives a scholarship for their  (B.Sc. or M.Sc.) studies, but at the same time works on a project that is totally unrelated to their studies voluntarily and receives no funding for the project from any entity, should this student acknowledge the scholarship in the paper?
To make it clear, the scholarship is given just for the purpose of the student completing their studies and the project is not a part of it, but regardless the student works on this project in their free time and receives no funding for their work.

My rule of thumb is: acknowledgements cost basically nothing and there is no reason not to err on the side of being very generous with them.

Is the student an author?

Ask yourself if the funding body would be happy to hear about it.

@ScottSeidman the student is the leading author of the work.

@user541686 I suggest you to change your comments into an answer

I would not mention it. The scholarship didn't support your work. It supported your studies (which I take to mean tuition, housing, etc.) just as it was intended to, and anything outside that is your own life. It's nobody's business how you finance independent parts of your life. In fact by mentioning it you're basically giving another entity that has no rights to your work a reason to doubt themselves and wonder whether they may have some claim to your work after all. Just as honesty requires you to give credit where it's due, it also requires you to avoid giving credit where it's not due.
What I think you do want to do, though, is mention your university affiliation in the paper (like where people usually mention it along with their emails), at least if you even talked to anyone affiliated with the university about the topics in your paper.
Also, I'm assuming the scholarship was solely for your studies (tuition), not for research. If your degree program has an official research component you're being paid to do, even if it's not this particular project, then it's muddier and would really depend on the situation I think.

If the scholarship indirectly gives you the opportunity to conduct the research, for example by freeing up time that may otherwise be spent in a part time job, it would seem appropriate to acknowledge it.
It might depend on the level of unrelated, an undergraduate research project in your university (yes) vs a community project litter picking (no). Still, unless inappropriate, I would always err on the side of acknowledging support as significant as a scholarship to complete a degree.

"a community project litter picking" seems to be missing a word, did you mean "a community project like litter picking"? Which doesn't sound quite right to me but it might be OK in a different dialect :)

@AzorAhai-him- Parses just fine for me (AmE): "a (community project) [performing] (litter picking)".

I think your answer is reasonable but I disagree with it. Why does it matter if you'd have had a job outside your studies? You're saying if this person (or their parent!) was wealthy enough to not have needed a part time job, the acknowledgement would've been different, despite the fact that in both cases the scholarship would've been the same, going solely toward funding their tuition? Sounds bizarre to me. Why should the reader (or anyone) be entitled to know if this person is wealthy or not? Why should the author indirectly reveal their wealth (or lack thereof) like this?

It depends on the scholarship but if the work is part of the studies, and the scholarship is for the studies, it may have to be acknowledged, even if the topic of study is not specified.  (Some Grad. Scholarships work that way.)
In most cases I know where an acknowledgment is required or expected, the scholarship comes with explicit instructions on what should or need not be acknowledged.  Certainly most research grants come with such stipulation.
You might have to check with the contact person either at the grant agency or its delegate (possibly a university financial aid person) if you want a definite answer.
However, as a rule, it doesn’t cost anything to acknowledge a scholarship, so why not do it unless it’s clearly out of place?

"as a rule, it doesn’t cost anything to acknowledge a scholarship, so why not do it unless it’s clearly out of place?" This is the important point, I think. Expressing gratitude reflects well on yourself, even more so when you weren't compelled to express it.

"However, as a rule, it doesn’t cost anything to acknowledge a scholarship, so why not do it unless it’s clearly out of place?" Uhm, because it might risk you losing some rights to your work that you don't need to? You might have done the work entirely independently, but now you're potentially giving another entity the ability to lay some claim to your work. Why would you do that against the facts?

@user541686 if a funding agency wants to eventually lay claim as you suggest, this is spelled out explicitly before the recipient agrees to the scholarship, and the OP would know about it.  One cannot make retroactive claims of this nature.

(As far as I know) If the scholarship is unrelated to the study you are trying to publish, you do not have to acknowledge the funding source/scholarship.

The question was if the student should put in acknowledgement.  I agree they probably do not have to do so, but do you think they should?

@TerryLoring From how I understand the situation, I dont think that it is necessary. However, I have to side with other answers here, as it does not hurt to acknowledge the scholarship and to express gratitude towards the funding source, although unrelated to the work.

I second others' comments that acknowledgements are low-cost and the indirect support of a scholarship in allowing one to engage in research may be sufficient reason to include it.
But here's another way of thinking about it.
Many agencies you will get funding from for your academic work are only the lowest members of a towering hierarchy of agencies. As an example, consider the US Department of Energy's Org Chart:

Say I get a small grant from the Western Area Power Administration, which is nested under the Assistant Secretary for Electricity under the Office of the Under Secretary for Science and Energy under the Office of the Secretary under something... something... the POTUS.
Each level within an organization can compete for funding with other agencies at the level in a zero-sum fashion. The output of fundees is evidence that an organization is using its funding well and should continue to receive that funding, rather than it being given to one of many other needy, competing agencies.
This is one reason agencies like XSEDE supercomputing place such a strong emphasis on citations and standardized acknowledgements: this allows them to mine publications to justify their continued budgetary allocations.
Because acknowledgements are helpful to my funders and I want to reciprocate the help they've given me, I try to build a "big tent" with my acknowledgements and err on the side of including folks.


text:
What are the financial offer or opportunities for international PhD students in US and UK?
I'm an undergraduate student in Physics and Mathematics, who plans to do a PhD in Physics or Mathematics. I know when you are doing a PhD, you can be a TA or RA if it is provided, so that you can handle financial issues or you could be accepted into the PhD program with funding or scholarship (I don't remember the correct term) but what about loans or any other financial support for international PhD students in US and UK?
By the way, if it any helps, wherever I go for PhD, I will take their citizenship, at least apply, since I have no intention going back to Turkey.
A side question: Apart from the loans, what is the general procedure for financial offer from the universities? I mean how does it work?
Note: I'm from Turkey.

In the US, financial aid from the US government under Title IV of the Higher Education Act (student loans, Pell grants, and work study) is available only to US citizens and permanent residents (and a small number of other categories of people who have some permanent status in the US.)  Generally, foreign graduate students aren't eligible for this kind of aid.
Typically, individual academic departments make decisions on who to admit and who to offer teaching/research assistantships.  If a department decides to offer you admission with an assistantship, you'll typically receive an offer letter from the institution describing the aid in detail.

In the US, foreign students on F1 visas have temporary status rather than status as permanent residents planning to immigrate permanently to the US.  Once you've completed your degree you can try to find a job with an employer who will sponsor you for an H-1B visa and eventual permanent resident status, but there's no automatic path to immigration.

Well in Europe it depends a lot on the particular country. In general you have:

TA positions funded by the department
Research positions attached to a specific project. Usually, the professor managing the project decides who to get. Not much transparency here, if the professor likes you he gives you the position.
Research positions funded externally by governmental bodies. For example, in Belgium it's FNRS and FRIA. In UK one example is EPSRC. These are usually very competitive and there might be some restrictions  (EU citizen, etc.)
Other funding from not for profit or charitable organizations. These need a lot of searching and depend on the country. In Belgium I know there are some to promote candidates from African countries, others for people coming from developing countries, single mothers, etc. But many countries have different procedures. Since these are not governmental, there is no central application system. You need to chase down each one separately.

If you add the country/ies you are interested in, you might get more specific answers.

International student funding in the UK is hard. I've explained why in another post. http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/66687/why-is-discrimination-based-on-citizenship-allowed-in-phd-funding-in-the-uk/66689#66689
And you should only do a PhD overseas if you don't want a TT job in the US generally.

I couldn't exactly understand what you mean in the second sentence ?

@lafemmecosmique By the way, does Turkey considered as an European country or not ? or  you meant European Union by EU ?

There's a thread somewhere on here about how TT (tenure track) jobs in the US are already competitive, and having a 'foreign' PhD is considered a  huge disadvantage compared to a US PhD. So if your ultimate goal is to be a prof in the US, you should do your PhD in the US. And by international, I mean non-EU. I believe that also means Turkey. In the future, it may mean anybody non-British, but it's non-European for now.

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


text:
Is it okay to use source code from another paper in thesis?
I am currently writing my Master's thesis in Math and part of my results involves using running simulations to test for certain types of algebraic properties of parameterised equations. The theoretical basis for these simulations were derived from a paper, in which the authors published their code online. I wish to copy this code and put it in the appendix. My reason for doing this is that I don't trust the link to always be available and the interested readers of my thesis will always be able to view said code which makes it easier to reader the thesis, as opposed to looking it up.

As an alternative, you could host a copy of the code yourself online and reference the original link and your mirror, assuming that license is attributable.

You will of course be citing this paper in your body text. But in the appendix, you would need to be absolutely clear that the code is reproduced from the paper. If instead you have based your own code on the code in the paper, be clear about which bits are yours and which are from the paper, as well as to what extent your work is derived from the literature.

It depends on the licensing terms of their code. If it's under an open source license, then you might probably be able to use the same by giving due credits to the authors of the same. It would also be better if you could try to contact the author of the paper and ask their permission before using the same if you're not able to find any specific licensing terms.

This addresses copyright, but I suspect plagiarism is more of a concern.

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


text:
How to handle offers of auto-transferring a paper to another journal following a desk rejection?
Following a desk rejection of a paper submitted to one of the Springer journals, the editorial submission advisor sent me a recommendation of other suitable journals, with an offer to automatically submit the paper in my stead. I politely declined, noting that I intend to revise my paper sufficiently before submitting it again independently. The submission advisor, however, replied again, pointing out that letting her transfer my paper will save me some time, while also allowing me to make any revisions before continuing with the process. I was told that in doing so, I would also be receiving the "benefits of the transfer service", though I am not quite sure what this means.
I'd like to avoid a faux pas and would appreciate any input regarding the following.

Is it rude if I would insist on submitting independently, even if I submit to another Springer journal? I will actually use the service to auto-transfer -- see next point -- I'm just wondering what if I didn't.
I intend to submit to one of the other Springer journals, but one not on the list of the recommended ones, and one that has a higher impact factor than the first one. Is this a bad idea, signalling some unawareness that if my paper were deemed sufficiently good, higher impact journals would be included in the list?
What happens if my paper is rejected again; will the same submission advisor offer me help to re-submit elsewhere? I would feel like a dolt going through a series of rejections with the same advisor witnessing my failures.
If my paper is rejected again, I may first submit it to one of the non-Springer journals. If rejected there again, I would return to the list of proposed Springer journals. I don't believe this should be problematic, but should I watch out for something?

Is the "submission advisor" a researcher in your field (presumably on the editorial board), or a Springer employee? In either case you want to be polite, and it's perfectly fine to say no -- but it's only in the former case that I'd seriously consider the suggestion.

@academic she's a Springer employee and not a researcher as far as I can tell.

This process saves some time for the journal, for example certain initial checks they make on a newly submitted paper.  But if you intend to change the paper, or if you intend not to submit next to a Springer journal, of course you should decline.

Rejections happen to everyone but a desk rejection is often a sign that you submitted to a journal that is not suitable to your paper. If that happens frequently to you, you should put more effort into finding journals where you paper would actually be a good fit.

Of course there is no risk of misunderstanding, but, in case it was not just a typo, you may want to know that the phrase is "faux pas" (a false step, I think etymologically related to, but not the same as, a false pass).

@LSpice I stand corrected, thanks.

You are probably overthinking this. Springer likely has the same editorial management system configured for every journal, i.e., every journal has its own submission system. These journals don't directly communicate with each other - the new journal probably cannot tell that your paper was rejected by another journal, unless they explicitly search for it (or if you agree with the transfer, since in that case they get a notification). It is possible the same employee is assigned to both journals, but for a large publisher this is not probable, and even if it is the case the employee is not supposed to make academic decisions like whether to reject your paper.
From the perspective of the publisher, offering a transfer 1) helps keep the paper within the publisher's stable, which is generally a good thing; and 2) simplifies matters for the authors, since they only need to submit once. Compare e.g. graduate admissions - if you could write only one application total (as opposed to one per program), everyone would do it.
With that in mind:

Is it rude if I would insist on submitting independently, even if I submit to another Springer journal? I will actually use the service to auto-transfer -- see next point -- I'm just wondering what if I didn't.

No. The other journal likely won't know, and even if they did, they're more likely to think there's some change to the paper and/or metadata that you wanted to make.

I intend to submit to one of the other Springer journals, but one not on the list of the recommended ones, and one that has a higher impact factor than the first one. Is this a bad idea, signalling some unawareness that if my paper were deemed sufficiently good, higher impact journals would be included in the list?

No. The other journal likely won't know. Besides, there is a good chance the list of recommended journals is (largely) autogenerated, and/or there are so many possible journals that they have truncated the list.

What happens if my paper is rejected again; will the same submission advisor offer me help to re-submit elsewhere? I would feel like a dolt going through a series of rejections with the same advisor witnessing my failures.

It's quite possible they will offer to redirect to another journal again, for the reason in the second paragraph of this answer.

If my paper is rejected again, I may first submit it to one of the non-Springer journals. If rejected there again, I would return to the list of proposed Springer journals. I don't believe this should be problematic, but should I watch out for something?

Not really, except your paper would be in "limbo" while it moves between journals. Since peer review can take a long time, make sure rapid publication is not important to you.

Don't worry about "rudeness" as long as you are polite. The paper is yours and a publisher benefits from publishing it, given sufficient quality.
But, your alternate scheme seems sub-optimal in two dimensions. First, it is riskier, since a referral from an editor will hold some weight with "sister" journals. I'm guessing that the desk rejection was more a matter of journal scope than paper quality. Those other journals are likely a closer "fit" for your paper.
Second, your alternate scheme will take time, with no guarantee of success. Each independent journal you submit to will have its own procedures, all of which take time; years in some cases, depending on field and such.
You have to judge whether those two factors outweigh any perceived benefit from submitting to a higher "heat index" journal. My guess would be no, but it is yours that matters.

Thank you for your answer, I appreciate it. To be clear (I edited my post slightly), I actually intend to use the transfer service offered, given that my next choice is a journal of the same publisher. However, the journal is even slightly more selective than the first one - would you deem this a risky scheme of the "big no" category?

Not so much if it is one that the first editor will recommend. As I noted, I think it is scope more than quality. I could be mistaken, of course. It could even be backlog at the first journal.

I would add that there is no need to see a rejection by a journal as a failure. It happens all the time also to good quality manuscripts, for all kinds of reasons. Of course you want to avoid wasting time, but if you are convinced (for good reasons) you want to aim for higher impact than suggested by the editor, this is the right decision, even if the manuscript will be rejected again.

Some good answers were posted already, I would just like to add that in my experience the time-saving factor is vastly overestimated by the journals. I once went with the transfer option for an Elsevier journal and in the end not only did I have to pretty much fill out all the forms like for an original submission, but I even had to adjust the cover letter and create some additional documents that the referred-to journal asks for.
So I found zero benefit in the tranferral, I could just have submitted there on my own.

Actually the "time factor" refers to the expected time between submission and publication (assuming acceptance). It is not the effort required to submit.

I see, but that cannot be much different anyway for a desk rejection. The most time-consuming part is of course the peer-review and that will not change with a transfer. The only exception to that would be when some reviews have been conducted that are not quite positive enough for the desired journal. Then I could see how a different journal would accept the submission with fewer or even no additional reviews, but this is not the situation in this question.

@Buffy indeed. But in all likelihood, while the publication date would probably be sooner, the transferal system would increase the time between publication and submission. Because the submission date would be before OP's revisions, which in OP's scheme would not count towards the time from submission to publication. I know even of (letter) journals that have adopted a policy of rejecting papers that need major revisions with the strong suggestion to resubmit. This has the advantage for the journal that their rejection rate is increased and their publication time is (artificially) decreased.


text:
How important are CS courses for a pure mathematics PhD admission?
I am a junior majoring in math and I am thinking about doing PhD in pure math, but my transcript got low grades (two Cs) from the two CS courses in hardware systems and programming languages.
How much will these two courses affect my application chances? My general GPA at this point is 3.5, while my math GPA is 3.8. Also, I have research experience with letters of recommendation from my professors.

Some would say real men don't eat quiche -- and pure mathematicians don't write computer programs.  This won't be a problem (other than the slight effect on the gpa).  Plus, look at the specific CS classes you took!  Not theory of computing, not numerical analysis, not integer programming -- you took hardware systems and programming languages!  What would be farther from pure math?  Only databases -- maybe.

@aparente001 Some would be wrong. In my experience, the only difference between a mathematician and a theoretical computer scientist is that one of them writes code, and the other calls himself a computer scientist.

@JeffE - Good one!  // But do you agree, OP need not panic about these particular C's?

Other than lowering your GPA, I don't think these two grades will matter much in a pure math PhD application.  After all, many pure math applicants take no CS courses at all, so it is certainly not the case that admissions committees are systematically screening for CS skill.  Moreover, not everyone in pure math values programming ability, skill or experience (not as much as we should, probably) and those who do are probably math-centric enough to believe that an applicant who is mathematically strong could become a good programmer if they put their mind to it.
Anyway, what's done is done.  I wouldn't worry much about it, and in particular I would not feel the need to try to spin / justify these grades in your personal statement.

If I were on the admissions committee, I wouldn't look twice at the hardware grade, but I would see if the programming languages grade was related to B grades in some math courses or weaknesses hinted at in letters.  Programming languages is a more mathematical subject than many people (including computer scientists) realize.  If you can't twist your mind to think about programming from different points of view, this indicates you may have trouble twisting your mind to think about mathematical topics from different points of view.


text:
What does it mean if a professor does not respond to an email about research in a week
I emailed a professor a week ago about any potential undergraduate opportunities he might have in his research lab. I have not yet gotten a response. Is this normal? the end of my email went like this, was I too pushy or was I not explicit enough with my question? would it be rude to send another email asking again? thanks for any comments

I would appreciate the chance to talk with you about any possible
  undergraduate opportunities you are currently offering for the Spring
  2016 semester or Fall 2016 semester. I understand you are very busy.
  We could schedule an appointment or I can drop by your office when you
  are available. Please let me know if there is any other information I
  can provide. Thank you, (my name)

It means the professor is up to his butt in alligators.  It may mean that "undergraduate opportunities" are low on his priority list.  If the professor has posted office hours, drop in.  If you get the cold shoulder, go away and look elsewhere.

This is very common. I am a doctoral student and my advisor is the director of department. Sometimes, it took him two weeks respond my email. You can send him/her again with a friendly reminder as start or you can stop by his/her office. The latter one is what I usually do.

What if that office is across the ocean? I mean how do I remind her/him the politest via mail or maybe on the phone?

No answer at all is a possible result
Depending on the situation, unsolicited emails "about any potential undergraduate opportunities he might have in his research lab" may not get any response ever, and it may be normal for some professors to discard all emails of such type without delving into the details - if they currently don't have a spot in their research lab due to funding issues or whatever, it's not practical to spend time on appointments or discussions about that.
It's the same as spamming unsolicited CV's to random companies asking for a job, if they aren't interested, they go into the 'round folder' without reading.

The research group presumably has a webpage, where you can rummage for possible projects. Talk to current members to find out what they are doing, and see if it interests you. After the above, if still no answer, sketch a few alternatives of interest to you that are in the line of the research group (and aren't already taken!) and approach the professor again, perhaps in person.
It does happen that email gets sidetracked indefinitely into the "to look at later" queue. A reasoned suggestion of a possible thesis is presumably less likely to suffer this fate than a "What do you have on offer?" question. But how each is received does depend on the recipient, and about that we can offer no suggestions.

Consider sending a followup email which is less vague, hence requiring less energy and time from the professor. Professors love to help but are always short on all of those things. Do what you can to make it easy by giving some information to work with.  Mention some things about yourself: your major, what courses you have enjoyed/excelled in, what about this professor's lab interests you, what your ambitions are (applying to grad school?), what you want out of the experience, etc.

Don't take the lack of a response personally. Professors get lots of emails -- for me, it was over 9000 last year, not counting things I immediately deleted -- and so it's easy to forget to respond, or to intend to respond "later," where "later" keeps getting pushed back. I think most professors would not mind at all if you sent a follow-up email, asking again if it's possible to meet. Again, though, don't be upset if a response doesn't come promptly.
That said, it is also the case that a lack of response can indicate a lack of enthusiasm for taking on a new student. Again, don't take this personally -- there are a lot of factors unrelated to you that influence this. You can help stimulate enthusiasm though, by (i) pointing out potentially relevant things like courses and grades, and (ii) indicating effort you've put into learning about the lab's research, e.g. via reading or talking to other students.

Well, perhaps there is no opportunity or he feels your work is not relevant to him? In the latter case you may see no response.
Be careful not to sound patronising or berate the prof (sometimes students in fear of disappointment tend to do that on the second mail).


text:
Comparing career prospects across fields in Applied Math
A professor casually mentioned that when submitting abstracts to a conference in some fields in Applied Math (such as numerical PDEs), it is highly likely that they will be accepted (unless the work is garbage) - unlike some "other fields" (like computational neuroscience).
By this I understand that those "other fields" are more competitive, but I am not sure if I am interpreting this correctly. In general, how does this affect career prospects on the long run? Will it be likewise a lot harder to get an academic job in such "other fields"?
P.S. I am in a U.S. college.

I think you're taking that professor's claim a step too far - it says more about how competitive conference presentations are than how competitive the field is.

Thanks! Do you know of any reason why conference presentations are deemed more competitive in some fields than in others?

Generally in fields where a conference presentation carries prestige, many serious and highly qualified people want to do it and there isn't enough room for all of them. In other fields, other things are considered prestigious. See Academia varies.

I work in inverse problems, more or less a field of applied mathematics.

Conference plenary talks are prestigious.
People are invited to also give other talks. This might carry some prestige, but I am not really sure.
People give contributed talks. This gives little prestige, but is a good idea for other reasons. Typically, for small conferences, all or most contributed talks are accepted, though it might be different in larger conferences.

The thing to learn is that conference talks are of minor importance. Publications in journals count far more. This depends on academic field.


text:
Adding Authors After Manuscript Acceptance
I was recently informed that a manuscript that I submitted to a journal a long time ago has been accepted.
I submitted it as the sole author, however, my advisor had some comments and suggestions that I applied to the manuscript.
As a courtesy I would now like to add him as an author.
My question: can a second author, i.e. my advisor, be added once I receive the galley proof, or whatever that is called, to the manuscript.
Any thoughts would be highly appreciated.
Possibly related to this question.

It's more closely related to Is it appropriate to add a co-author at the stage revise & resubmit? than the one you link to.

Giving someone authorship as a courtesy is commonly considered unethical: see http://wustl.edu/policies/authorship.html for one view.  Consider adding your advisor only if you feel he made significant intellectual contributions - but not simply as a way to thank him.

I would like to draw your attention to the Vancouver Protocol for Authorship:

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

According to the protocol, a candidate for authorship must meet all four criteria to be considered an author on the piece. Of course, some do not follow such protocol, but this is the expectation.
Considering that you have already submitted and the piece has been accepted, it would appear that your supervisor does not meet all four criteria, in particular points three and four. Otherwise, for your supervisor to meet the criteria of authorship, they would have had to have given you approval and permission to submit the manuscript in the first place.
Thank them in the acknowledgements, that's usually the appropriate way to handle this situation.

This isn't necessarily true. It sounds like the final version to be published has not submitted yet and without extra information, it seems impossible to determine if the supervisor meets poin four.

The difficulty here is that there's not a lot of ethical flexibility.  It's possible that this is a borderline case, where it's genuinely unclear whether your advisor should be an author and the two of you could reasonably change your minds.  However, most cases are not near the borderline.  As a general rule, either your advisor should have been an author all along (in which case submitting the paper without him was unethical), or he should not be an author now (in which case adding him would be unethical).  It's possible to change the author list after acceptance, but the editors will be suspicious and will ask for an explanation of why nothing unethical is going on.
I assume you discussed authorship with your advisor when you submitted the paper, and both of you approved of the author list at the time of submission.  (If you didn't discuss it, then you need to do so immediately.)  In that case, what has changed?  It's usually best not to revisit the authorship once it has been agreed on, but if you feel strongly about it you could explain that you feel the current author list undervalues your advisor's contributions and that you think he should become an author.  (Note that as Nate Eldredge points out in the comments, this is only allowable if he made substantial intellectual contributions to the research, not just to thank him for his supervision.)


text:
High number of single author contributions - what does it suggest for external evaluators
I have a lot of single author contributions/articles (e.g. 30% of my total papers). This is uncommon in my field, medicine. The reason is that I regularly write commentaries/letters for 2 specific journals. Yet, I also have some original articles (secondary data analyses) I did on my own.
My supervisor advises against this (we have a good relationship and he is about to retire soon). He says it could suggest a "lone-wolf" attitude to others, e.g. evaluation committees. My colleague says its fine, as it demonstrates independence.
May I ask your opinion about it? Should I care?
Unlike here, I am not asking about the impact on tenure, etc.

Can you clarify what you mean when you say 'commentaries/letters'? I would interpret this as typically short communications on a recent paper (usually in that journal) with little to no additional data or new research. Is that the sort of article you mean? If so, this wouldn't be a negative by itself, but my main concern would be I would not consider them the same as full peer-reviewed research articles. So if I saw them grouped all together on a CV my first thought would be article count padding, rather than 'lone wolf'. Put them in a separate section of your CV and you may avoid both issues.

@ Stephen McMahon - yes your are right - I refer to non-original articles (e.g. commenting other research / perspectives on current topics). In the CV, they are listed under a section called "Editorials and Perspectives".

Whatever others think about you only matters in two circumstances: (i) annual evaluation and continued employment, and (ii) when you apply to other positions. Which are you concerned about? Whatever anyone else in your community thinks about you does, in a sense, not matter very much: The ones who know you and your work personally will know how to put things in perspective, and everyone else is, well, someone else who don't need to worry about.

What is your 1st author ratio for regular peer-reviewed articles?

@WolfgangBangerth i suppose I'm unsure of your advice. Research is small, and you never know who is going to be on the next committee evaluating you, or who might need to invite someone for an invited talk or something.

@ Azor Ahai -him- ; about 20% of my original articles are solo-author contributions (mainly clinical/epidemiological analyses). 80% of articles were produced with others.

Based on the clarification in the comments that these are typically editorial/commentary types of submission rather than research (and are clearly identified as such) then I would see no problem with this.
Even in medicine a lot of these types of articles are single-author, and don't carry the same expectations of collaboration as research articles. They likewise don't carry the same CV weight as peer-reviewed research articles so they'll likely not be a highly-weighted positive factor for committees either, but so long as you have a decent profile in your main research area I can't imagine these being viewed as a negative.

I'm not in medicine so things may be different where I am, but I am very sure that in my field 30% single author papers are not too much, very far from that really. In fact I have worried, being in commissions, about applicants who don't have any substantial single author paper, because that makes it more difficult to assess what they actually have done in the research. As long as you have a substantial number of collaborative papers I don't see any issue, not even in medicine, as you have quite something to show your ability to collaborate. I may suspect a "lone wolf" behind a list of publications that has 9 single author papers out of 10.

I would not be surprised if the majority of (very good) people in biomed never write a single-author paper, so I am not sure this advice directly applies.

It is true that solo papers are rare in medicine, and in biology in general. That's because most biologist and medical researchers work in teams (labs) and share authorship. So your advisor's concern would be correct if we were talking about research reports: even a couple of single-author papers could bring suspicious about lone-wolf type of difficult personality. But you seem to be instead writing commentaries and letters, which are usually authored by one or two people at a time. Just make sure you don't end up like this guy https://retractionwatch.com/2023/07/24/meet-the-author-who-has-published-more-than-500-letters-to-the-editor-in-a-year/


text:
Who owns unpublished research data?
For example: a thesis is proposed by a student at a university and it requires funding for research. They secure private funding. Then for whatever reason, the research project is cancelled and shut down before the results are published. Who now "owns" the left over research data? The researcher? The funding agency? The university?

What does the contract with the funding agency say? What does the student's employment contract or university policies say?

"Owns" is a tricky concept. Fuzzy at best. "Data" is another fraught concept. And, the answer, if possible to give, would depend on where this occurs. Even copyright law in US can be difficult to interpret for "data".

My best answer would be the lab in which the researcher worked for, since its the one in which they are employed. If the researcher does not work in a university lab, but for the university itself, then it depends on their contract -could be theirs could be the university's. I don't think the case in which the funding source is the owner is very common, perhaps if it's a private company.

Are you actually interested in legal aspects (implied by the copyright tag), or academic norms?

@Azor Ahai -  academic norms only thank you. You can't post a question here without a tag and "copyright" was the closest I could think of.

Usually in the US, the institution retains rights if you conduct the research with their resources; e.g. while receiving a salary.  This is different from being paid a stipend, as salaries are considered a wage for a service; a stipend is not.  NIH and NSF Fellowships e.g., are likely paid by institutions using a stipend and not salary.
Large institutions typically have a data ownership / intellectual property (IP) page.  When in doubt; check with your Vice Provost Office.
Examples:

Harvard
Columbia
Boston College

Thank you and I appreciate you taking the trouble to include the links.


text:
Seemingly insurmountable requirements to being admitted to a veterinary medicine program in the US/Canada
In three years time, I will have (hopefully) finished a biochemistry degree at the ETH Zürich. I'm thinking about moving to the USA/Canada after that to study Vet Med. In most places I've read, there are so many requirements that I'd be surprised if any international students actually get accepted into those programmes. The most common requirements are: having taken enough English courses (mainly literature); having completed a 4-year Bachelor's degree and having completed one year of undergrad studies in the USA (this last one is especially bothersome when applying for an MD).
Are there any common paths for international students that I've missed (the requirements seem impossible)?
On a side note, what's funding like for non-residents (grants ...)?

Veterinary medicine and MDs are different things, so why have you brought up MD requirements?

I also remove [tag:graduate-students] because vet and med students are known as "professional" students in the US. Congrats on a new tag

You seem to be confusing the requirements for earning a bachelors in the US (general education requirements) with the requirements for joining a graduate or professional program. Once you have a "suitable" degree as determined by a university, you don't need to also fulfill US bachelors requirements.

As a side note, getting in to veterinary school is harder than into medical school - there just aren't as many vet schools as med schools, and lots of folks apply. Source: rooming with some vet students many years ago... As for grants - good luck...

You've probably seen it, but I'd recommend looking at VMCAS. It processes applications for most vet schools and has lots of information.

Veterinary medicine degrees in the US, like human medical degrees (and graduate degrees in law or terminal masters programs), are considered professional degrees to prepare you to earn a relatively high professional salary. Most US veterinary medicine students pay their way with loans that they plan to pay back while working in the US as a vet. Programs at state colleges and universities may be subsidized for residents of that state, but not international or out-of-state students.
Knowing some people who have gone down this path, a DVM is a tough career path. The education costs aren't much less than an MD, the pay is substantially less, and the hours can be pretty intense, with lots of time spent on call on weekends, overnight, and holidays. I would not recommend it unless you are passionate about caring for animals, and certainly would not recommend a US DVM education if you do not plan to work in the US unless there is another place with comparable salaries. That said, while the financial aspects of the job tend to be a target of complaint, the actual job itself seems to be very rewarding.
There are a handful of grant/scholarship opportunities for DVM students, but it's not something you should plan to rely on. Your specific admissions qualifications are better directed to individual programs. I expect that European 3-year programs will substitute for US 4-year bachelor's programs; specifying "4 year" is meant to make clear that a 2-year US associates degree is not appropriate, they just aren't outlining all the different possibilities for international students, the programs likely have too few international applicants at all to bother with a country-by-country breakdown.

Speaking as a long time pet owner in many states in the US, and who has invested in relationships with DMV's for my pets, this→ "I would not recommend it unless you are passionate about caring for animals…" seems strongly prevalent among vets.

I would also point out that only a small percentage of vets are 'urban pet doctors' and the vast majority work in industrial scale agriculture.

Veterinary school in the United States is intended to prepare students to be licensed as veterinarians in the United States.  As an "international student" without a visa to work in the United States, you have no use for a license that is not valid elsewhere.  There are plenty of domestic students.  That is why veterinary school is not set up to admit international students.
Some countries give residency to international students who earn certain degrees.  The United States does not.
Canada has a completely different education system.

-1 (a) A vet degree is not the same as a license to practice. (b) A U.S. vet degree is not invalid or useless elsewhere. Source: My dad's a DVM of 50 years and several of his classmates came from, and later worked in, foreign countries.

@DanielR.Collins The answer is from the perspective of the U.S. vet school.  A student who works in another country likely finds the degree useful.  The vet school does not.  In most cases, the vet school serves the state that contributes to its funding.

My comment is also from the perspective of a U.S. vet school -- with close contact with someone who actually went there and worked in that profession. The claim that "veterinary school is not set up to admit international students" is simply misinformation. For example, here's the page for Cornell University's College of Veterinary Medicine, International Student Admissions.

And here's the U. Penn vet school application page: "Penn Vet welcomes international applicants. Currently, Penn Vet accepts the majority of the starting class of 125 students from outside the state of Pennsylvania. This includes all other states within the U.S., U.S. territories and internationally." Etc.


text:
Are tenure-track applicants background checked?
What's the standard procedure in tenure-track jobs when it comes to "background checks"?
Do they call my current employer or is it limited to a "criminal background check"?

I'd expect the following:

Some institutions do a criminal background check, others don't.  This will usually be disclosed in the job ad.  For those that do, they might do the check before making an offer (in which case the application will ask for the necessary identifying information), or they might make you an offer that's contingent on passing the check.
US faculty jobs will require letters of recommendation, or contact information for references.  The search committee might actually contact them to ask further questions about you.  (Your recommenders might or might not tell you if this happens.)
They will normally not contact anybody other than your letter writers or references you list in your application.  This is pretty important because people in existing faculty positions often don't want it known within their department that they are on the market; it could have political blowback if they end up not leaving.

Thank you, Nate. They have already contacted everyone in my reference list, and they all said good things about me. So then, it's probably safe to assume that they will focus on a criminal background check. Also, I remember the dean mentioning that the only thing left for me to do would be a criminal background check. I hope that that's all.

My institution also verified my degrees during the background check.

@DanielHatton: That's not my experience for academic employers in the US.  There is an unwritten expectation that you will have a reference from someone at your current institution, but not necessarily your "line manager" (= department chair?); it can be a trusted colleague instead.  As noted, it's understood that you may not want to tell your department chair you are applying for other jobs.

@DanielHatton: I see, but this question is tagged [tag:united-states].


text:
Authorship ordering ambiguity in math and CS
There's something I've never really understood about authorship order for papers.

If the contributions of the authors are more or less equal, they are often listed alphabetically, as is standard
Sometimes if an author had outsized contributions, they are listed as the first author, and so on for second, third, etc. authors.

It means that if you see the authors as A,B,C, there's no way of knowing whether A had outsized contributions, or if the order was just following the typical alphabetical order.
How do people in academia treat this? I'm in CS/Math if this is one of those things that differs wildly by field. I have an A name so I will be "first author" on most papers I write that just list alphabetically. I'm thinking that someone looking cynically at my publications can assume I'm always at the front for having an A name and never for contributions. On the other hand, someone looking generously can assume I'm at the front for always being the significant author.

Please see this answer and that answer and another answer

Traditionally, in many fields, academic contributions to papers have been usually treated as being equal across all co-authors unless there is evidence to the contrary.  In other fields, author order can give information on the contribution level.  Major research breakthroughs and other important papers in a field may attract further attention where people in the field come to know the contributions of the individual authors through interviews, conferences, etc., but often people simply assume that the contributions were roughly equal.  As you point out, idiosyncratic use of authorship order as a marker of contribution-level has the drawback that there is usually no way to identify if an author has made an outsized (or undersized) contribution.
Largely for the reason you have identified, some journals are now moving to a system where the authors specify their individual contributions and this statement of contributions is included as a part of the paper.  For example, the Lancet requires a statement of author contributions to be included in submissions; each author is listed with a set of tasks they did on the paper.  I suspect that more and more journals will move towards this system eventually, but it is a slow process.
Once you have been in academia for a while you will find that there is a whole raft of silly and inequitable practices in relation to assessing the research contribution of individual academics.  Far more blatant than ambiguities over authorship contribution is the fact that many departments assess academics based on citation metrics that do not even adjust for co-authorship (e.g., rating an academic on their raw H-index instead of their author-weighted H-index).  In this regard, academia is still pretty much in the stone age, largely resisting change to more rational metrics as a result of inertia and vested interests.

Sounds like this is a plus for people with alphabetically terminal names. If you appear at the end, well that's just the standard alphabetic order, no evidence to the contrary that you were a minor author. If you appear at the front, that's evidence of outsized contribution.

As I said in the answer, I think the more usual assumption when names are in alphabetical order is that contribution was (at least roughly) equal.  So if your surname starts with Z, it is unlikely that people would infer that you were minor author on your papers.


text:
How much of a role tuition revenue plays in underwriting research?
I knew that TA positions in American schools are usually borne out of tuition revenue. Tuition revenue (that is, the cash that comes from the sometimes exorbitant undergraduate tuition) is usually unrestricted so one would wonder whether tuition money is directly used in order to fund research.
But other than start-up research funds, what other research expenditures are borne out of tuition money, if any? Would a university use tuition revenue to make up for a shortfall in research grants?

Be careful: it is much, much more vague than that. See http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/36620/what-percentage-of-a-professors-salary-is-paid-for-by-tution

start-up research funds — At my university, exactly zero startup funds come from tuition; instead, they come from indirect cost recovery from research grants.

Much of my answer here, holds in this case. It's basically impossible to tell. If a new professor gets a lighter teaching load in their first year, is that "underwriting research" even if the professor's nominal work distribution is 1/3rd teaching, 1/3rd research, and 1/3rd service/admin?
Professors are paid to teach and research and serve internal university goals. How much they do each of those day to day is hard to tell. Now, that being said, if a professor fails to bring in grants to cover their summer months, I doubt many universities would indefinitely provide for them out of general funds.

Could they provide for their research out of general funds as a stopgap measure then?

They can, but they generally don't. A department that regularly bailed out it's under-performing faculty would soon be bankrupt.