text:
What are the impacts of closing STEM departments?
To encourage new answers, I will award the bounty to any new answer. (e.g. answer and you will get the bounty) I understand this question is difficult to tackle and do appreciate all new insights.
According to this UK report:

There were 48 UK institutions offering physics degrees in 2005. This is 31 fewer than there were in 1994.
Since 1996 26 universities have ceased to offer chemistry degrees.
5 [mathematics departments] have closed since 1999.

While the report may be from 2007, this is still a current issue. The Royal Society for Chemistry has reported on a proposal to close the chemistry department at Bangor University. Apparently, Bangor Needs Chem.
Additionally, Bangor University no longer has a mathematics department (source). Also from Bangor University, the Computer Systems Engineering major states:

This degree has been designed especially for candidates without the usual qualifications in Mathematics and Physics to be able to pursue their interest in electronics and computer science to degree level.

Looking specifically at the words "without the usual qualifications in Mathematics," doesn't this speak negatively to the reputation of the college and its graduates?  Is there a benefit (e.g. and in addition to financial) to closing STEM departments?
In summary, what are the effects (both positive and negative) of closing STEM departments? It is preferable if answers draw upon both theory (research studies, government reports, etc.) and practice (historical studies, your original research on past events and effects).
While the examples are from the UK, the question is about the effects of closing STEM departments in general and not specifically in the UK.

I will be starting a 100 rep bounty if a comprehensive answer arises. Don't be afraid to downvote and please suggest improvements! Thanks!

I admit ignorance here as an American, but do UK universities have some rough equivalent to the idea of a service department?  In the US, when we say you close a department, it implies that not only are the degree programs not offered, but that the department doesn't even offer classes — but since everyone needs math classes, the risk of a math closure is basically 0, but without a math degree (or minimal people in its programs), we call it a service department.

I don't have an answer but it's interesting that the report doesn't mention Computer Science. My guess would be that CS plays a role by draining jobs and students away from other STEM disciplines, but that's just a guess.

@guifa By closing departments, it means that the department doesn't exist at all. For example, search "Mathematics" and "Bangor University, Wales." What search results do you get? Supposedly, the math department at Bangor is now the Mathematics Division in the School of Informatics. I can neither confirm nor deny this after a lengthy search.

@Erwan I am talking about the impact of closing STEM departments. Whether or not CS plays a role in catalyzing this process doesn't truly matter to this question (unless you can show it lessens or increase the impact, etc.). Also remember, the report dates to 2007. Is CS as hot then? We can all certainly answer that.

@BarryHarrison globally CS has been on an upward trend for the past 30 or 40 years, but you're right this doesn't answer the question. I'm not sure that you can get a satisfactory answer though, since this kind of impact is going to be observable in the long term. It would also be interesting to see whether the remaining chemistry departments tend to grow bigger, (e.g. more funding, staff, equipment): is it possible that the evolution of the field requires such economies of scale?

@Erwan Regarding "I'm not sure that you can get a satisfactory answer though, since this kind of impact is going to be observable in the long term." I would say that between the 11 years (minimum) that have passed between the closing of 36+ departments, at least some data will be available. I may be wrong though. About economies of scale, good point. And yes, it would be interesting. I have not previously considered this. Thanks for the insight!

It might be good to get student numbers to compare. Maybe the departments closed because others got bigger, and the relative number of students in STEM stayed more or less constant? Also others already mentioned that CS might have taken quite some students from math and other fields, and (theoretical) CS could well be counted to STEM.

Wouldn't it be more meaningful and targeted to ask "Why the UK closed so many STEM departments". Doesn't the study answer this? What the possible impacts are is a sociological question and a lot of guessing. There must be notes why the politically responsibles decided for closing them?

@MichaelSchmidt It may be. I don't care why the departments were closed. I care about what happens after they are. Now that they are, it's hard to get the momentum to re-open them. So while your question may be better, it is different.

@MichaelSchmidt You do raise a fair point. Thanks for the insight.

I upvoted your question yesterday, rather because I cannot believe it, UK is still successful and productive in natural sciences, at least I hat the impression... You can maybe google/answer your question by looking what happened in other countries, when key science departments were closed nationwide or single universities. There is a reason why in US mostly ivy league universities or cambridge oxford in the UK have good facilities in cost-intensive branches like physics, biomed,...other universities become often colleges for humanities. Maybe an intuitive answer to your question

@MichaelSchmidt If you would like to answer, go for it! I like the thoughts that I am reading here. Definitely helpful. Thanks again for the insights! I have used Google, etc. However, I am not in academia, so I am not the most suited for answering this question.

@BarryHarrison May I ask whether you are from the UK or Europe? UK degrees tend to be very focused versus, say, USA degrees, even at the bachelor's level. I checked a few other STEM departments at Bangor...no math beyond "math/stats for subject" were listed. I studied 2nd yr Physics in 1986-87 there. There was no maths courses required. I did have to attend a vector calculus module because I hadn't had it yet in my first 2 USA years. I think other departments will just figure out how to teach the bare minimum they think their students need.

@mkennedy Thanks for your experiences! I am not from the UK, so have learned something.

I can't give you a 100% answer (your question is kind of too wide) but I will try to give you some ideas:

The UK evaluates all departments of universities and research institutes on a
regular basis by a so-called Research Excellence Framework (REF). A bad REF evaluation might force a university to shut down a department. This is because universities are only allowed to teach a subject if they also do well received research in this field. Similar evaluation evaluations might be in place in other countries.
It might be a financial issue of why a department shuts down. Too few students and too high costs (in STEM there are often not enough good students applying)
"without the usual qualifications in Mathematics" I would not see this necessarily as a negative point. If you allow people with different backgrounds into a degree you might create a cohort of interdisciplinary graduates that might be in demand in industry. (They might not be competitive with e.g. pure math graduates but how many people really work in pure math later?) But it might also be due to the previous point that not enough people apply with a strong enough math background.
One more possible reason is that the university is not able to hire/hold sufficient professors in STEM fields as the pay in industry is usually much better and people with strong technical background might be aggressively recruited away.

Impacts:

It is difficult so say what the impacts are as they are university specific but some degrees will not be offered anymore and/or they get external lecturers for e.g. math courses in non-STEM-degrees.
On a whole population level: Fewer people with STEM degrees means
fewer qualified workers
On the positive side: The university might have free-up resources in
order to persue other fields more intensively - but that is more a
strategic decision.

Thanks for the answer! It sort of addresses why departments close, but maybe not what happens after they do (the latter is the question). Could you propose an edit to the question to make it more answerable (while keeping the original goal in mind)?

RE "without the usual qualifications in Mathematics": Won't it show a lack of qualification?

I have added a little bit but I am not quite sure what you mean by "impacts" as they can be manifold

Thanks for the additions.

lordy, When the bounty period ends, would you recommend I award this answer or the other answer?

@BarryHarrison You should award it to the answer that you think is more complete / better - your choice! But I would certainly appreciate my first bounty and it would get me closer to 2k reputation and thereby the ability to edit questions ;-)

I can't speak to the wider effects of closing STEM departments, but will look at the specifics of this Bangor University example. Where it says "without the usual qualifications in Mathematics", this refers to the entry qualification; generally in the UK, entrants to universities will have studied 3 or 4 A-Levels in subjects related to the subject they wish to study at university. For instance, I studied physics, mathematics and history at A-Level, and went on to study physics at university. For a course in Computer Systems Engineering at most UK universities, an A-Level in mathematics would usually be a prerequisite, but this is not the case at Bangor University.
This is not to say that the undergraduate students won't study mathematics; if you look at the modules of the degree course, they will take three mathematics modules in the first year, and another in the second. These modules would usually be taught by academics in the department the course is in, so Engineering in this case. My own undergraduate physics degree had two mathematics modules taught by academics from the Physics department - no mathematicians involved!
So the closure of a department would generally have little or no effect, from an academic point of view, on students from other departments in the university.
(When I say UK here, in reference to A-Levels, I mean England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The system in Scotland is slightly different.)

Emma, When the bounty period ends, would you recommend I award this answer or the other answer?

@BarryHarrison I agree with what lordy said in the other comment about choosing what you think is the more complete answer. That being said, hhile the bounty would be appreciated given I'm just starting out on AcademiaSE, I think that lordy's answer covers wider parts of the background and impact than mine.

Emma, OK, I will award the bounty to lordy then.


text:
Do teachers want students to add their attempts on solving their own question in an email?
I think this question holds for any kind of class, but if it actually makes a difference, it's a graduate level class.
Today I wrote an email asking about a paper I'm supposed to do a presentation on. When posing the question, I added what I think is the solution. However, I'm not sure whether or not to include my attempt at answering my question on my own.
Pros

It shows that I actually tried to find a solution before writing them
It could make answering the email easy because they maybe don't have to explain much if I'm correct
Just asking the questions without any extra text (e.g. the solution) makes the email itself seem blatant
It could reveal even more misunderstandings on my part, increasing the value of their answer

Cons

It bloats the email, maybe making it less appealing to read and answer
They might not care what I think because they "have to" write their own answer anyway
(If the answer is way off, it might throw a bad light on me)

Neutral

Might depend on the person I'm asking

If it depends on the person I'm asking, how would I actually recognize whether he/she wants me to add my thoughts or not?
Should I add my attempts to the email?

"If the answer is way off, it might throw a bad light on me" would probably be much worse if you are way off during the presentation.

Yes totally agree.

You might be interested in this comment: https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/36500/how-does-locking-down-a-country-cause-its-economy-to-suffer#comment55972_36500

As a matter of general principle, I believe it's better to err on the side of writting too much rather than too little. Skipping over superfluous text is easy. Figuring out what's left unwritten is hard.

https://stackoverflow.com/help/how-to-ask and other pages with advice about writing questions across StackExchange sites may apply to asking questions to teachers.

Partial solutions are much, much preferred to no attempt at a solution at all, no matter how muddled.

They might not care what I think because they "have to" write their own answer anyway—seems to assume that there is only one answer to a question and it's independent of the questioner's context.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

That was not my intent so that sentence could probably be rephrased. My intention was to say that for any nontrivial question the teacher has to write an answer that is not something like "Youre right", even if a student already provided a (correct) answer

Dear Prof. Y,  The error analysis in this paper seems to assume [x], would you agree?  Thanks, Hereks  This doesn't need to be more than a two-sentence email.

Yes absolutely include it. That's the only way for the instructor to see where the gaps in your knowledge are. If you think it makes the email too long, then put a concise summary at the top and then the details below.
Edit: consider also that in the above post, you attempted to answer your own question. Look how much context that gave to the question. Imagine if you'd posted the title and the bolded statement only. We would not have understood your thought process. You might not have received many useful answers, just comments asking you to clarify what you were asking

In research this is called "Negative Results". There is a general stigma to negative results reporting but there is movement to remove that to make it more inclusive of all research results.

You could also include only the summary in the email body and have the rest in an attachment. (Depending on what your work is, it might not format well directly in an email.)

@Nelson: And there is a stigma because... lots of people try to cover up negative results? I don't know how well it is known, but we have a reproducibility crisis in science and statistical crisis in psychology...

@user21820 I'm sure the "because" is far too broad to discuss in a comment, but in general, doing research and then saying "It didn't work" tend to not make it into papers.

@Nelson: Yes I'm aware of publication bias, as well as p-hacking and other bad things.

This is basically the same problem as asking a question of strangers on Stack Overflow or other technical Q&A sites.  Part of the reason for requiring an attempt on homework questions is that it makes it possible to see where the person is stuck.  (Also to disallow "gimme teh codez" questions of course; but I assume most students aren't just going to email their professor and ask them to do the homework for them.)

In a reasonable grad-level teaching situation, the prof/teacher (should!?!) absolutely want to hear your thoughts/confusions/partial-solutions.
Sure, there is a balance that you/we/they need to find, about balancing your own work (possibly dragging out too long and wasting your own time due to some misapprehension) and "asking questions".
It is generally better to at least have (and express) your own thoughts, even if you've gotten stuck or disheartened. That does also show that you've put some effort in, so are not simply being lazy. :)
It is true that organization and formatting of emails is very important in effective communication. Shorter things are easier to organize, of course, but may be inadequate to communicate your message. Then the inescapable burden of organization itself becomes significant... and problems of clarity (or lack thereof) grow.
But, as most of the time, "being coy" is not a helpful communication scheme.
Conceivably your task really is to "figure it out all on your own", but that's a bit misguided in my opinion (being at least a time-waster), and should not be the default way you think of your professor/teacher.

Put the question up front in a terse form in the subject.  This allows to know the topic before opening the mail.
Then repeat the question in a longer single sentence para at the start of your email. This allows to perhaps satisfy you immediately without reading the details. And if it is required to read the details at least the prof knows where the story is headed
Then blather the details after with a header, "Details:"  or preliminary efforts, or some topical headers.
And don't really blather in that details section.  Write concisely and with a structure.  But include details. Your pro con here was good.
Executive communication requires to put the "so what" at the front, not after a buildup.  And definitely not after a stream of consciousness.
Oh...and the same applies to SE questions. ;)

I really like this approach

Thanks man. The point is to have the cake and eat it too from your pros and cons. If you only send "short copy" in an email, it causes more work with future back and forth communication.  Like when someone leaves a voicemail and says the phone number so fast you have to listen to it three times.  But by having the key elements up front and separated, it allows to disregard or at least skim the details, if so inclined.

You should definitely include your initial attempts/thinking in the email. Otherwise, it becomes difficult for the professor to see what you are specifically having trouble understanding about the problem. Plus, it is considered rude (at least in my experience) to not show your thinking; the professor may think that you just want the answer.

The general rule of thumb, in my opinion, is that you should do what results in the least work from the professor in order to answer your query. Professors receive a LOT of e-mail, and it takes up a lot of our time. The faster we can answer questions (while still providing illumination), the happier we are.
In general, this will usually mean providing as much as possible of your attempted solution. This enables your professor to quickly identify your particular difficulty and address it; otherwise, they are just left with providing a generic solution and leaving you to figure out where you went wrong.
Having said that, providing working can sometimes be taken to extremes: I once had a student e-mail me with 3 pages of handwriting and the question "where is the mistake?". This clearly fails the rule of thumb I mentioned above.
A wrong solution almost never throws a bad light on you, although I wouldn't say it was impossible; you'd have to be REALLY off (as in, did-not-listen-to-any-lectures off) for that to happen.

As a teacher dealing with student questions (whether by email or in person) what matters most to me is not length but specificity.  Questions which are vague or overly broad are a pain to deal with regardless of whether they are long or short. The shortest (“I don’t understand …” or “How do you do …?”) are often the worst, but long emails that end with “What did I do wrong?” aren’t all that far behind.
A good question is one which is specific. The more specific the better.  In making a question specific, you will need to provide details (i.e. make the question longer) but the specificity will also help you identify stuff that is extraneous to your question so that you don’t provide more information than is needed.
As an added bonus, specific questions show me, the teacher, that you, the student, are putting forward a good faith effort to understand the material on your own.  Though I should be equally willing to help all students, psychologically it is always much easier to engage with a student whom I can see trying.  Students who are just fishing for answers and ones who are trying but don’t ask specific questions often look the same (especially via email).  Combine that with an external stressor, and I may just give you a brush off that you don’t deserve.  Obviously I try to avoid that, but I’m only human and cannot be perfect all of the time.

I'm just going to post an additional remark on your last "con" argument about wrong answers putting you in a bad light.
No competent teacher is going to view you any worse because you gave a completely wrong answer. A teacher's goal, first and foremost, should be making sure their students understand the concepts they are taught. And a core part of understanding is making mistakes.
Very few people are smart enough to be able to understand everything without a single mistake from the very first time they learn about something. It would be completely asinine as a teacher to expect anything even remotely like full understanding from your students from the very start.
I'll even top that: Not even the teacher is expected to fully understand everything correctly, because there are always things that are just that slightly harder to understand than what the teacher is capable of. A teacher who says they know everything is misguided, lying or ignorant of the things they don't know (the unknown unknowns).
You should never be afraid of giving an appropriate wrong answer in school. That's what school is for: learning the correct answers, or learning where the correct answers can be found. A teacher who thinks less of you, or worse, ridicules you for giving a wrong answer is a bad teacher who should not be teaching.
A good teacher won't ridicule you or think less of you. If your answer is wrong, they'll say so and point you towards the correct answer. If your answer is REALLY wrong, they'll say so and point you towards the correct answer, if necessary reminding you to review the basics again. They might do some venting in the teacher's lounge, but they'll keep a professional and kind demeanor towards you.

Yes. @DanielK’s excellent answer explains the main logic behind why this is a good idea. But another large benefit that wasn’t mentioned yet is that when you go through the process of explaining your thought process in detail to another person, quite frequently you will end up realizing what the answer is by finding the misconception or having the thing you were confused about suddenly become completely clear and obvious.
I’ve seen this happen many times when students start asking a question and in the process of explaining themselves to me they suddenly understand what the issue is and I end up not needing to say anything.
(It’s also happened to me on the other side of the situation when I was the person asking a question of other people.)
This is the best way for learning to occur. And you won’t even need to send the email! Win-win for everyone.

Regardless of the setting (academic, industry, government, hobby, stackoverflow, etc...), when you ask someone else for help, it is always a good idea to explain what you've tried so far and the thought process that lead you there. Be concise, but don't leave out any important details.
After all, you're asking for someone else to give you some of their time to help solve your problem, even though they certainly have no shortage of their own problems to work on. Make it as easy as possible for them to help you. It demonstrates respect and gives them useful information that will make any ensuing discourse more productive and efficient– all things that will help persuade them that it's worth investing a bit of time to help you. Really, that is something any decent teacher should want to do as it is quite literally their job.

As a compromise between the two extremes consider the following approach:

Dear Professor Xavier,
I have finished my presentation on mutant transmogrification, but I had a question regarding the nanoregressive turboencabulator principle that I wanted to double check with you. Specifically, it is not obvious to me why Magneto-enhanced particles would disrupt a portal generated by a flux-capacitor.
I have outlined my own approach to this in the attached file in case you'd like to have a look.
Best regards,Wolverine

This keeps your main email clean, while allowing one to open a separate document if interested, promoting the idea that this is more of a secondary document.

While I am a fan of proper exposition, I reluctantly admit that many a time I've lost my audience with what was intended to be a helpfully comprehensive email, and have had much better success at sending short, terse, incomplete-feeling messages, building up iteratively if necessary.
Same experience on stackoverflow, in fact. :|

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it normal to reject a paper based on the review of a single referee?
I just received the answer for my first submitted paper. It was rejected but they annexed the answer of just one referee. Is it normal to reject a paper based on the review of a single referee? Can I use this as an argument to ask for reconsideration? Of course this would not be my single argument, since I found issues with the review itself as well. (It questioned the validaty of my methodology even though I cited a review just about the methodology used.)

It's totally standard.  In fact, lots of papers are rejected by the editors without even being sent to a referee!

It is normal. Often there is one referee who writes an extensive review, whose judgment weight heaviest with the editor. If there are 4 reviews, 3 are in the "publish" half of the spectrum but are brief (not adequately justifying the recommendation), and there is 1 "reject" review which extensively argues against publication, an editor will either have to apply his/her own knowledge of the field and decide which argument carries the day, or will need to request an additional review. Good editors do not just count up the plus and minus values, they have to evaluate the evidence in the reviews.
If you make the case for reconsideration, I think it should focus on the question of whether positive evidence in the reviews has been undervalued. There's not much you can do if the negative reviewer is (unbeknownst to you) The Leading Authority.

It's also common for only for one reviewer to actually return a review of the paper.  In that case, if the review is negative and other reviewers weren't even interested enough to review the paper, it's a good candidate for rejection.

@BrianBorchers: To add to this, if another reviewer agreed to review but did not do it for whatever reason, it might not be the best choice from the editor to wait for another review, and thus (under the assumption that the existing review is appropriate) wasting everybody’s time: The reviewer’s as they are reviewing a sub-par manuscript and the author’s as they are waiting for a negative review, when they could be improving the manuscript.

In my experience, it is typical for papers to receive either zero reviews (editorial rejection) or multiple reviews (usually 3-4, but occasionally 2 or 5). Having just a single review (accept or reject) is very unusual.  One possible explanation is that the editor formatted their editorial rejection as a review; another possible explanation is that you were dealing with a publication venue with a rather slipshod process.
You can email and ask for clarification.  It is not, however, likely that you can get the decision changed in any way: if the editor found your paper problematic enough that they willing to reject with a single review, they are unlikely to change their mind on for purposes of "due process."  Improve the paper, find a better venue, and move on.

This is also field specific, I think. In mathematics, it seems to be common that even very good journals assign only 1 reviewer.

That is very surprising to me: in the fields I participate in, that would be unheard of.

Nate is right. As an editor for mathematics journals, I ordinarily sent papers to a single referee.  And as an author, I usually got one referee report per paper (in mathematics --- not in computer science or physics).

In addition to the field specific as pointed out by @NateEldredge and Andreas, it is also journal specific, and all journals do not concur. e.g. in Physics, there are journals (e.g. Journal of Physics series by IOP Publishing) where it is customary to have two reviewers (minimum), and there are some (e.g. Physical Review C, an APS journal) where it is usually only one review, and additional reviews only occur if there is an appeal by the authors. So, as far as Physics goes, we don't have one standard convention AFAIK. :)

It happens -- at least it's happened to me -- and although I don't know about the etiquette of asking for reconsideration, if you believe the bad review is based on an incorrect reading of the manuscript, then I think it's warranted.
The time this happened to me, I had two very good reviews on a paper and one really bad review. The two good reviews were short because they liked everything in the paper and had nothing else to say. The one bad review was bad because the reviewer was biased against my premise and did not examine the evidence I presented. I contacted the editor and pointed these things out and eventually the paper got published. So, there's not much to lose by touching base with the editor unless in your situation doing so would be a serious faux pas.

It is not so common but it still happens quite often that a paper is rejected by only one referee, especially for smaller conferences. Usually a paper is assigned to a few reviewers. But some reviewers may be busy and may not send their review on time. In that case, the decision may be taken without all reviews.
And generally, it will not work if you ask for reconsideration unless there would be some major error or some very serious reason to do so. Besides, according to my experience, it happens quite often that some reviewers don't understand something in a paper. But most of the time, it is the fault of the author because something in the paper is not clear enough. So if the reviewer did not understand, it may just be an indication that you need to rewrite the paper to make it more clear so that the reviewers will not think about something else. Don't forget that reviewers are not always expert on your topic.

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

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


text:
Is it possible to "convert" my EdD into a PhD, now that the university I went to offers a PhD in education?
About 5 years ago, I completed the 5 year process of completing my EdD at a reputable, large public university. At the time, they did not offer the course of study as a PhD. My faculty were reassuring that the rigor of the degree was on par, just with the Education titling.
Well... with next year's course catalog, they are now offering both a EdD and PhD path. My frustration is that the courses I took and dissertation requirements mostly match the new PhD curriculum.
For the most part, I wouldn't worry too much. Except I work in an industry role, and am constantly explaining the nature of my degree.
Is there any precedent for a university grandfathering in old graduates with a new program definition, or other recourse I might have? Could/Should they allow me to complete any gap requirements and reissue as a PhD? My biggest fear is that people would pull up my schools program, and assume I completed their new EdD curriculum which is lighter than their new PhD curriculum (again, which more closely resembles what I completed).
What are your thoughts? How would you approach this situation?

I've never heard of a university grandfathering old students into a new program. That being said, it might be an easy change. Or it might not be worth it -- 5 years of experience (presumably) may be a heckuva lot more important to your career than going back for the Ph.D.

Totally agree with the thought about experience vs. going back for Ph.D. That being said, if the would consider allowing me to take any "gap" courses, say 2-3 courses that represent the difference in curriculum, I could be convinced that would be worth the effort. I'm just not sure yet if that is even feasible.

Sincere question: is there some reason you're asking us rather than the program? That is, are you hoping to gain some information here that will impact how you approach this with the program (and what might that be)?

@cag51 Not the OP, but perhaps they wish to avoid completely embarrassing themselves by asking something that might be laughably ridiculous

I would petition the school. The same happened to me when I went through the Ed.D. program, and then right after graduation, they became a Ph.D. program.  Because many of my credits were transferred and I did the dissertation through the new school, they originally issued me a Ed.D.; however, my credits and curriculum more closely matched their Ph.D. program. Once I petitioned, they as of this week, converted my Ed.D. to a Ph.D. and reissued me new transcripts and a diploma with the original date of my Ed.D. on it from 2016.  I think it's possible, it's just that many people would not go through the rigor to request it.  Good luck!

Since you asked for thoughts and approaches to the situation, I will sidestep the issues about grandfathering or doing additional work to change your degree to an EdD.
I think it is possible you are misinterpreting a lack of information/knowledge about EdD degrees as a lack of respect for the degree. Surely, there may be circles where EdD degrees are looked down upon vs. PhD in education (for example, in a circle of people with PhDs in education), but I am doubtful that this feeling is dominant in industry.
From my perspective, I can think of several responses to people curious about your degree, depending on the truth of the situation one or more of these may suit you:
"Actually there can be a lot of overlap between EdD and PhD degrees; my program of study was more similar to a PhD though at the time they only offered EdD. Now they offer a choice."
"In theory, EdD is distinguished from PhD in that EdD is more 'practical' and PhD more 'academic', but in reality those distinctions aren't that meaningful, and EdDs in programs like mine do substantial academic work."
"Some ed schools give EdD, some give PhD, and some give both. My school only gave EdD when I was a student. The distinction only really matters at schools that offer both."
In a more professional setting, like a job interview, you could point directly to the work you did as a student: publications, for example, to highlight the rigor and value you produced as a student, regardless of the specific letters indicating your degree.
In summary, three points: 1) It sounds like you might be projecting some insecurities about your degree onto people who are more curious than condescending, 2) It is extremely unlikely that the EdD/PhD distinction will be the deciding element in your job prospects in industry, especially if you already have a job: instead, you will be evaluated based on your experience and productivity as a professional, and 3) You're an educator by training - feel free to educate people a bit, even if they are potential employers!

Thank you for your reply, Bryan. I sincerely appreciate the degree of thought that went into your reply. That being said, my bigger concern is more over how the revised EdD and PhD are being structured. The new PhD is more rigorous, with more prescribed courses, more statistics requirements, and more overall credit hours. The "rub" for me, is that my personal doctoral curriculum more closely matches the new PhD. If others were to review my program website, since I was awarded an EdD, they may likely assume that I completed the less intense of the two programs. Thus my concern.

@AMPinto Yes indeed, I understand your concern, it really seems unfair that your degree connects you now to the less rigorous program when you went above and beyond those expectations. I still think you might be too worried about people reviewing your program website when looking at you for a job. Even in good programs, there is always a lot of variability in the strengths of the actual graduates. A smart hiring manager is going to put a lot more emphasis on the things you personally produced rather than the specific coursework of the institution you came from.

I totally understand your feelings, especially with the rigor, focus that entails a PhD., and the "stigma" that goes with Edd's. I strongly think you have a case, all you need is to present it to your school and be ready to go through the hoops and bureaucracy. Go for it and good luck.

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


text:
Could a paper that's just a title and abstract be listed as a publication in CV?
I submitted a paper that only contained a title and an abstract to an international meeting, which is one of the most important conferences in my major. I will give an oral presentation in one session of the meeting. Because it is not a full paper, I want to know whether I can put it in my CV as a publication.

You submitted a paper or a talk abstract?

Congratulations on presenting a paper in one of the most important conferences of your field. That is certainly something to be proud of, but the correct place to list the achievement would be under a heading such as "Conference talks" or "Presentations" as others suggest. A title and abstract cannot under any reasonable definition be considered a publication, and personally if I were looking at your CV and saw it listed as a publication (and looked it up to see what it contained, which I often do in such situations), I would get a pretty negative impression of someone who is trying to dishonestly pad their CV with dubious achievements.

"A title and abstract cannot under any reasonable definition be considered a publication". Also not when the abstract is 8 pages + references (happens in some fields)? Also not when in some particular field (e.g., medicine) conferences only publish titles + abstracts?

@Danny: well, okay, my statement was referring to a particular meaning of "abstract" which I think coincides with what OP had in mind, i.e. a paragraph of text summarizing the content of a talk or article. In my field, an 8-page long document would never be referred to as an abstract (in some cases it may be called an extended abstract, which does usually count as a publication, but that's not the same as "abstract"). In an area where such things are called abstracts, the answer would be different, but then OP's question would make less sense so I suspect that's not what he is talking about.

Also I am not familiar with the norms for publication in medicine so I can't speak to that. However, since serious research cannot be communicated in a paragraph of text, calling such a paragraph a publication seems illogical to me. At the very least, I am skeptical whether such a custom exists in medicine, but I'd be happy to be corrected on this point.

Danny Ruijters mentioned that the definition of abstract is vague and misused, but you too misuse the word publication. Originally, an abstract is a written paragraph that lets you know if you should care about a specific scientific work, and a publication is anything that is published, i.e. made available to the public. I perfectly understand your concern that an abstract should not be misrepresented as a scientific article, but you're propagating this confusion by misusing the word publication. If you promote a new definition for publication, be ready to accept a new definition for abstract.

If you consider it an important part of your portfolio (which is perfectly possible), then: sure, you should list it.
You might want to indicate that it was only an abstract + oral talk. When you have different sections (e.g., conference papers, journals), you might put it under an 'Conference abstracts' or 'Oral presentations' section. Otherwise, you might just put 'abstract + oral talk' in the reference.
In some fields abstracts + oral talks/posters, is the only way that conferences are published (e.g., medicine). In those fields, full papers are for journals.

If it is published in the proceedings (and if it is a major conference, would suggest it is available online), you can list is as a publication, but I would be cautious to leave it at that.  I would include the information that it is an abstract.  If it is in a publications section, I would make sure to differentiate between peer-reviewed and not (depending on your case).
More realistically, I would see this listed under 'presentations' section, or 'talks'.  Again, this depends if you have sections for both invited talks and talks given through applications.

Even if there are already a few answers that advice caution, to which I agree, I think it is important to consider another perspective.
An abstract is a piece of text that advertises the work. In the case of a conference the work is the oral presentation, the poster, or maybe an article published in the proceedings.
The way I see it, you should want to advertise your the work directly in your CV, not an advertisement to your work. Therefore, you might want to make it clear that you gave a presentation on a specific subject, not that you wrote an abstract to advertise the presentation.
I am aware that there are some fields that use the concept of extended abstracts (that don't obey the rules of abstract writing), for scientific writings that are in essence abstractless articles published in conference proceedings. If you're in such a field, I pity you, and your entire field, and I damn those who abused the word abstract to the point expressions like "presenting an abstract" or "the summary of the abstract" started to make sense.
From the perspective of English language, it is perfectly fine to put an abstract under publications, as an abstract is a piece of text that was made available to the public through the proceedings of the conference. There are some that reserve the word publication only for research articles, and not for other pieces of work that were made public. Why research article or the synonym, research paper, are not enough, I don't know. From my point of view this is another abuse of language, which I hope it doesn't catch. Using publication as synonym to research article, devoids English of a word that describes any work that has been made public. A scientific article is indeed a publication, but so is a dataset, a public talk, an abstract, a blog post, or even this answer on stackexchange.
From a logic perspective, mentioning the abstract, and not the presentation in your CV, is as if you brag about going to a festival, but forgetting to mention that you're actually the headliner, ok, maybe not the headliner, but you're still performing on the main stage.


text:
My PhD situation is giving me anxiety attacks. Is quitting (and losing 2 years) my only option?
I am currently in my second year of my PhD and I am having a horrible time. I feel like I am not cut out for academia and I frequently have anxiety attacks. I would like to do something else, and if it was a normal job I would definitely start looking for another job.
I'm worried I'll lose my reference (And he's a good reference to lose :() and I'm also feeling guilty. I have taken two years of funding and now I just want to leave unpublished? Ethically I feel terrible.
The trouble is it is massively affecting my mental health. I have had to seek help from the student services with this. I cry all the time. I've lost my motivation. I'd really like a job in the charity sector or in health education where I can help people and feel like I make a difference.
The trouble is I don't imagine quitting a PhD or considering leaving a PhD looks particularly great on a CV. I have so many reasons to leave and so many to stay. Any advice?

I am sorry that your Ph.D. is being so stressful, but I am afraid we need more information to give you advice. For example: Which parts of the work is causing you the most trouble? Is your advisor part of the problem or is (s)he supportive? Would you have a little time to volunteer in a rewarding activity (e.g., charity as you mention) while you finish? (This would require some advisor support so the previous question is relevant.) What did you like about the subject you're studying, and why don't you like it anymore?

What does your psychiatrist say? This is not medical advice, but if you are having regular panic attacks, you may have an anxiety disorder which can be chronic and may need long-term management. It would be a shame to drop out of PhD program if that's not the root cause of your problem. I wish you the best of luck and highly recommend getting medical attention not just counseling support.

I second the advice to get professional help and wish to add that you may very well experience similar problems with whatever you intend to do instead.

In addition, our top-voted question may be helpful.

"I don't imagine quitting a PhD... looks particularly great on a CV". For a (non-research) job in industry, it's not a problem. Industry is full of people who have left a PhD for one reason or another. See this answer for more about that.

Please close this question quickly before it attracts the usual avalanche of pseudo-psychological gibberish. This is not a site to get medical advice, God forbid.

Unfortunately, we can't (and shouldn't) really tell you whether to quit, or how to deal with your mental health situation. I've edited the titular question to the most closely related question I think we can answer.

@CapeCode: Psychological discomfort or other issues are not necessarily signs of a medical condition (though, it might be the case). It very well might be (and often is) a natural reaction of our body to stressful or complicated situations.

That is why MSc was created! If you can, get one and leave. However, if I'm funded and my advisor is ok with my progress, I won't quit. Good luck!

@CapeCode No, because answers like Emilie's can be and often are substantial without the pseudo-psychological gibberish you mention.

1- First, you would not be losing 2 years. In those 2 years, you learned things and developed your skills. In your current mental health state, it is probably hard to view this experience as positive, but I suggest you give it a try. Maybe make a list of the skills and experience you gained with your PhD.
2- Get professional help, as stated in the comments. Once you feel a bit better, you'll be ready to take a decision.
3- I get the feeling that most of your reasons to stay are linked with advisor-related guilt (funding, no publication, no reference for future work). You would be surprised, but most advisors are human, and did a PhD. He/She can probably understand your problems and help you reach a decision. Maybe he/she could even suggest some ideas to reduce your guilt (quit the program, but write an article on the side or help another person to pick up where you left).
If your advisor is not human (which, seems to happen sometimes), there's probably a department head that could mediate discussion between you and your advisor about quitting the program. But you need to discuss with your advisor.
Good luck and take care.

+1 If, after applying the above suggestions, the OP still feels that some other career path would be better, two years in is a short enough time to spin on a resume as trying out the academic path and finding it is just not a good fit.

+1 for talking to the advisor. we have related questions on this site, which discuss the topic how to let the advisor in on mental-health related issues.

I would suggest trying to figure out what you want and not worrying about feeling guilty about displeasing your advisor or using up some funding.  Remember that advisors don't use their personal dollars to fund you, and when you're funded, it's for work you are performing, not for some future promise.  Also, it's your life, and whether you stay or go matters a lot more to you than to anyone else!
You can also look into whether you can get a Master's degree if you quit now. This is common at many universities.  And it can help you feel like you haven't wasted two years.
As a side note, if a student of mine told me he/she wanted to quit, I would try to offer the best advice and be supportive.  I wouldn't "hold it against them" ethically, and I would still write them a letter of recommendation.  I think most advisors feel the same way.

If this is helpful at all, research wasn't right for me (it didn't fit my personality and it was very stressful being a grad student; it robbed me of my social and family life, my hobbies--all I did was work and felt guilty taking any time for myself or others) and so I quit my PhD after 4 years of coursework (I had finished my coursework but had not yet found a workable dissertation topic after a year or two of false starts and one change of advisors; research just wasn't for me).  I received a guilt trip by my advisor for having "wasted" funding, but of course I never planned to quit at the outset, so it was not unethical to leave if it wasn't working out.  Almost 6 years later I am extremely happy with my decision though it was extremely scary at the time--I felt like I was failing and ruining my life.  But I found a good job at a good company, and not having a PhD freed me up to not do research-type jobs at that company (it seems that having a PhD in industry can sometimes pigeon-hole you into research jobs).  I already had a Masters for what it's worth, which was plenty for what I wanted to do (computer related field in the U.S.).  Also I think that just having 4 years of coursework at a good grad school really helped me get the job; no one seemed to care that I didn't finish the PhD (I think many very smart talented people start PhD's and don't finish them, so it doesn't seem to be a negative thing at all--most people I tell about it just smile understandingly, realizing that a PhD is extremely grueling and there's no shame in not finishing it).
In summary, I'm not telling you to quit or telling you to keep going, I just wanted to give my story in case it helps you in any way.

In addition to some good advice (especially, the answer by @Emilie, +1), I would recommend to use one of more calm periods to analyze (and, if needed, readjust or set) your goals and corresponding priorities, both short-term and long-term. Doing that might clear your mind and, hopefully, will help you to build a pragmatic strategy, based on the above-mentioned priorities and goals. As others have said, do not hesitate to ask for any help, both professional (medical and/or psychological) and simply human support from family, friends and beyond. Just keep in mind that many people struggle with similar issues, but you need to figure out what would work best for you in your particular situation. Best wishes!

I've been in your position and am currently on my way out of my PhD program by mastering out.
When I first felt that my Chemistry PhD program was not the right path for me I was three months into my first year. I was doing rotations at the time, and everything felt wrong. I forced myself to do homework, forced myself to do research, forced myself to read papers. I had never had to force myself to do anything during undergrad, so this feeling was terrifying. I didn't enjoy any of the work I did and I was starting to realize that I didn't even like doing basic research. I didn't want to be cooped up in a laser lab for the rest of my life. I realized that I wanted out. But it's not that easy.
When you first start having the inkling that the academic life may not be for you, it can be frightening. It can feel like you are a "quitter" or you may have some reservations about what other individuals in your cohort may think or you may feel that you are harming your future career. All of these feelings are mind games that we play with ourselves and they are games that are hard to let go. I just want you to know that all of these thoughts are pointless, and quite frankly, untrue.
Another issue that came along is the guilt of wanting to leave. Since PhD students are getting monetary support in some form or another it can feel very dishonest to our advisors to continue to take support with the intention of leaving. We want to leave gracefully on good terms, but it always seems as though we're leaving our advisors in a lurch. The guilt of this dishonesty began to affect my life physically and mentally. I began having constant anxiety and severe headaches that ultimately landed me in a case of depression. I sought help from my university's mental health program and I'm back on track towards being my old self again.
The point of me sharing all of this is that this is your life. You do not have to do anything you don't want to do. When I first told someone I care about what I was feeling he said, "If I was doing something I didn't like, I wouldn't do it." A PhD is a commitment of time, body, and mind. If you are not doing what you want to do or gaining something in your future career by being in this program, then it's time to move on.
First, seek psychiatric help. Immediately. Until you start to stabilize your mental health, you will not be able to make any rational or helpful decisions for your future. I initially made the mistake of thinking that my issues were not important enough to seek help (compared to other people) and that the counselors would think I was just being pathetic. This is not true. That's the anxiety talking. Get in there and get the help you need.
Second, think about why you initially wanted to go to graduate school. Was it because you wanted to be an academic? Or because you didn't know what your next step should be, so more school sounded right? Are you passionate about your subject? Or is it something that you and others believed you were good at so you should keep on doing it? This was my number one big mistake about grad school. Make sure you are there for the right reasons.
Third, think about your personality in grad school. Oftentimes (especially in the sciences), PhD students are alone. We are in environments that foster individuality, competition, and (to be honest) very little constructive advice. It can be very alienating. Does this environment fit your personality? Personality isn't always a great factor, because you can overcome this issue if you really love your work. For me, it was just another affirmation that the program was not a good fit.
Fourth, try your best to not worry what others (including your advisor) will think of you. Try to control that guilt, that "I'm a quitter" feeling, that embarassment. You are making a decision for you. In my experience, when I told others in my cohort why I was leaving and what my next step was no one was condescending, snide or hurtful. Everyone was encouraging. As for advisors, they know. They can tell in your work. I finally let mine know, and it's been fine. As long as you're doing the work that you're getting paid for, there aren't any bad feelings. No one wants to force you to do something you don't want to do.
Lastly, start outlining what you want your future to be. I started by talking to the graduate advisor and switching to the Master's degree track and finishing the requirements. (This is very important. If you can, finish the Master's degree. You should earn something for the time that you spent in your program and this shows your future employers that when you set out to do something, you finish it in one form or another.)
I then began making a list of tasks and aspects of my previous work that I enjoyed and incorporated that into something I am passionate about. I have been volunteering at charities and non-profits to get experience. I started networking through employment fairs, county fairs, and anything else I can get my hands on. Now, I'm applying to internships and I'll have my Master's degree by December. I no longer feel remorse or am upset by my choice. I'm excited for what is coming next.
The long and short of all of this is: tell people you care about what is going on, get the help that you need, and keep your chin up. Hang in there.

Having left grad school for stress-related reasons myself, I can tell you I don't regret leaving at all. I was very excited about the research I was doing, but upon finding a job that would allow me to do something else I equally enjoy (but without the PhD), I knew it was the right decision.
If I were you, I would start by looking at what else is out there. You mentioned going into charity or health education - what types of jobs in those fields would interest you? Are you qualified to do them? What's the competition going to be like to get the job?
Once you have a list of potential options, try doing an interview or two just to see how you can expect to be received into those fields. I guarantee you will have an easier time making the decision when you know what your options are.
Also, don't worry about how an incomplete degree looks. The company I currently work for is extremely proud of having "stolen" me from grad school, and if you leave to start a career, I bet your company will be proud of "stealing" you too :)

I've never been a PhD student myself, but I can offer this: I've worked with several people who did not finish their PhDs. In those cases, not finishing their PhDs did not count against them. In fact, I've worked with companies where finishing a PhD did count against those people (the hiring managers assumed that if you finished a PhD, you probably weren't actually interested in a job outside of academia).
It also doesn't seem to be an all-or-nothing proposition. From what I've heard (again, from my not-finished-PhD coworkers), it is usually possible to go on leave from your PhD program. There are actually many good academic reasons to do this - for example, because you want to see how your ideas fare in practice, or because you want to understand what problems practitioners in a field actually face. The change of pace might re-invigorate your desire to finish your PhD, or you might find something you care about more than finishing your PhD. I don't know your particular situation, but this might be something worth looking at.
If you have any idea that you might want to move to work in industry instead, it would be a good idea to reach out to someone who works in an area you might work in, discuss with them what it's like, what the job prospects are like, etc.

authors: Александр Наум


text:
What action is appropriate when co-authors admit that the first author committed plagiarism?
I'm the executive editor of a PubMed-indexed journal. Last year The journal published a paper with four authors in the byline. Today I   received an e-mail from the first author admitting that she translated large parts of a research paper published in a local language and used it in the paper's introduction and discussion without referring to the author. She claimed that she did not realize at the time that this was unethical. The other authors, when they discovered the problem, asked her to send us an e-mail containing these details and also sent an e-mail asking us to withdraw the paper.
I could not access the paper written in the local language because it was published in a local journal. Accordingly I'm not sure how much of the text was used.
We use a plagiarism detection software but for this paper it did not yield  any results that warranted attention.
Is withdrawal the solution? If so, how can I contact PubMed to do it?
Are there any further steps to be taken concerning the authors?

I'm rather perplexed as to how an "executive editor" would not know how to contact the relevant people.  I must be missing something here...

@zibadawatimmy More so as OP says he is "the" executive editor.

@zibadawatimmy When did it last occur to you to know everything a position requires before working on it? It's no difference for executive editors.

Retract the article.
That's what editors of reputable journals do when an author spontaneously asks for it for reasons of plagiarism.
What other options were you considering? Adding a note saying "The authors admitted to have plagiarized large portions of this article but since our system did not detect it, we publish it anyway."?
It's the duty of the editorial board to execute the retraction, possibly with the support of the publisher. But surely your journal has a standard procedure to handle retraction...
It certainly would help to notify PubMed that will publish the retraction notice in lieu of the article. I suspect this is part of the information that your journal is providing to PubMed by default...

It seems the plagiarism was the "introduction and discussion" ... But maybe the bulk of the paper describes clinical trials carried out or something.  So maybe merely adding appropriate references will be enough.

@GEdgar I like this sentence found on this thread: "it's not like we assign 50% of the grade during review for brilliance, 30% for writing style, and 20% for not plagiarizing. It doesn't work that way"

If it's just the intro, I suggest: retract, completely replace the offending sections (possibly without your questionable colleague, if that was all he contributed), and submit a fixed version with an explanation and abject apology...

Plagiarism is tricky when it comes to using works that have not yet gone through cross-language publication, especially if said works are not widely known. Common decency would dictate a "cite or do not use" mindset, but since it's already been submitted this complicates things.
As far as contacting Pubmed goes you could use their Help Desk
to see if you could retract and edit where appropriate, then resubmit.
If a decision is made to keep the material but cite properly, you can refer to this question with answers that tackle that.

authors: 一千部禽兽大片耳提面命_禽兽级别1000部惊弓之鸟

authors: 上门赘婿岳风矫枉过正_岳风赘婿当道进入一探究竟


text:
Email netiquette for telling thesis committee member I've replaced
I'm a fourth-year Ph.D. candidate in the social sciences.
I've decided to replace one person in my doctoral thesis committee because she is not giving me any feedback or responding to my emails in reasonable times. I can go sometimes for almost a year without any feedback. Since I have to move forward with my degree, and I've been delayed for almost a year because of her, I have to inform her that I have replaced her. But I don't know how to phrase it in order to not offend her. I need to be very tactful and diplomatic here.
Any suggestions of how I could go about to tell her?
EDIT : She was replaced, I had to tell her by writing, and she was not offended at all. So it's all good!

Do you have an official advisor? Are they part of this committee or not? How is this person's lack of response holding you back? Do you have an opportunity to speak with her? You leave a lot unsaid here. Best to edit the question for a response to this.

You should check with your school if you can actually “replace” a committee member without other committee members agreeing to this.  Certainly where I work students are consulted on the composition of the committee but members are not appointed by the student. Rather members are appointed by the graduate school or its representative.

You need to ask your supervisor.  Your supervisor is stuck working with this person; you are not.  Your supervisor probably knows them better, too.  Otherwise ask your department chair or similar.

To the title question: How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor?

@ZeroTheHero Very interesting, I get to pick mine, according to some rules about composition and their consent, of course.

Before contacting her you should speak to your primary supervisor about the issue and ensure that your primary supervisor agrees to change the composition of your panel.  You should explain the problems you are facing and how the tardiness of this panel member is holding back your research.  If your primary supervisor is in agreement with you (which would be likely in these conditions) then it is likely that he/she will discuss the issue with the other members of your supervisory panel to come to a consensus on an appropriate way forward.  Assuming that your primary supervisor is in agreement with removing this other person from your panel, it is likely that you won't end up having to action the matter at all --- what is most likely is that the supervisor you're having trouble with would voluntarily withdraw from the panel.  You would then email her to thank her for her time and effort in your supervision and that would be it.
Now, if you find yourself in disagreement with your primary supervisor (or your supervisory panel more broadly) on this issue, then it gets trickier and you are going to have to do some more work to look into the rules for panel composition.  You would need to look into the university rules to see whether a change in composition of your panel is something you can execute yourself, or whether it is something that is a decision of the Department or your primary supervisor.  You might need to present a case for why you want a change in the composition of your panel, which it sounds like you can do.  As to how to communicate to the problematic supervisor, the normal rules of professional etiquette apply --- be polite and appreciative of the work she has already done for you, but be clear and candid about what you want to do.


text:
Former PI lists a non-contributor as first author on a manuscript for which I did all the work. Next steps?
I finished my master's degree several years ago, where I was responsible for developing/programming algorithms for a biochemistry lab. I have since successfully transitioned into industry and have been working ever since. I also have a very good relationship with my former PI.
Some time ago, my former PI contacted me and I did some work for him, pro-bono, and he was interested in publishing the results. I personally had no interest in the actual publication, but I did this work more so because it allowed me to explore an area of mathematics in which I had limited experience.
Lo and behold, I receive the manuscript for edits, and a student completely unrelated to this work was listed as the first author!
Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't care. Academia was only a stepping stone in my life and a publication doesn't benefit me in any way. However, something feels "wrong" about just listing someone who has not contributed to this work in any way as the first author. I would like to be listed as the first author. At the same time, I want to keep a good relationship with my former PI. What are my next steps? How do I go about this?
Edit: Based on the feedback so far, I think the next best step would be to follow up with the PI and determine what the student's contribution was. Perhaps the student did indeed use the results I obtained to actually write the manuscript, in which case I would have no problem letting the student take first authorship. Again, as of right now, I only see work that my former PI has done, so I want to clarify.
Edit 2: I think there is some confusion about how many authors there are in this paper. There is me, who wrote the algorithm and there is my PI, who wrote the paper based on my results. Would I deserve first authorship if this a multi-author publication? Absolutely not. But by default, since myself and my PI are the only persons who have worked on this, either one of us can take first author role.
I received an update from the PI. The student was placed on the paper because the student was "supposed to contribute" but they did not want to learn how to use git (which is how I initially decided to version any manuscripts I worked on). The PI has made a promise to make sure the student takes the lead in terms of writing the paper and learning how to use git.

I would consider removing the part where you describe your dislike of the student who is now first author. This is irrelevant to your main question, and it doesn't look good.

@JHare I disagree. I am speculating that the PI listed the student as the first author to improve his own record because the student is in his 5th year of PhD studies and has no publications. I wanted to make the point that I felt uneasy about handing an underperforming student this courtesy given this student's questionable behaviors. However, since this is merely a speculation, I removed this part.

Ask the PI.  Maybe that student contributed something important to it, and you don't know about it.

Did you get any acknowledgement in the paper?

@Buffy I was put in second place with the PI being the last.

So, you are an author, actually, just not first. But i don't really see how programming algorithms for a biochem lab earns first authorship on a biochem paper, unless it was specifically about support algorithms.

@Buffy The paper is strictly about results that the algorithm found while mining a database. I designed the algorithm then I ran the algorithm on my servers, obtaining a dataset. Our arrangement was that I wrote the materials and methods section, strictly describing the algorithm and my setup, and then my former PI who actually specializes in this field wrote the discussion section based on the aforementioned dataset. I have no experience whatsoever in biochemistry. Based on this, the third student played no role whatsoever.

If your description is accurate, consider you are helping out your former PI rather than that student. It's likely the PI isn't very happy about him, and used your help to get him graduated (and eventually get rid of him) without much joy. Maybe you helped the PI in a desperate situation. The situation isn't ethically perfect, but at least your PI found someone who presumably didn't care about authors' precedence. It could have been worse.

Advocatus diaboli here: you potentially signaled that your contribution's value was zero, by doing the work for free, so you got treated that way. Sometimes, pro-bono work gives people silly ideas. This may well not be the case here, but it's a concern nevertheless.

This is vaguely similar to this other question. The similarity being that someone who feels they "did all the work" but who did not write the paper feels they deserve more authorship credit than they are getting.

Before you get upset, I think it would be important to learn more about the actual circumstances of the publication.  I say this because, based on your description of the situation in your post you haven't been acting like a first author.
You may indeed have done all of the initial work on which the manuscript was based, but based on what you have written, you don't seem to have been particularly involved in interpreting the results or writing them up (beyond the methods section).
The first author of a paper, in typical usage for the field, should be involved in every stage of the project and the production of the manuscript. From what you have written, it appears that you haven't been, and so you may not even be properly aware of what the other student may or may not have done for the project. Maybe your speculation is correct; maybe it is not. Ultimately, however, authorship order isn't really your call, because you have chosen not to lead work on the paper.
If you want to be first author on a paper, you need to involve yourself more deeply with the project, including the actual scientific interpretation of the results.
Now, if you are concerned that your former PI may be acting unethically, you can ask for a description of the work that the other student has done. Do this from a perspective of curiosity and surprise, rather than accusation.  Once their work has been described, if you disagree with your former PI's judgement, then voice your concerns. If your PI doesn't make a change after that, you can withdraw yourself from the paper --- you should not lend your name to something that you consider unethical.  But based on what you described, it's not really your paper, and in the end your choice is primarily about whether or not to be associated with it.

This answer will be hard to accept, I know. And I sympathize.
But I think your best choice is to just let it go. This is based on your statement that you want to keep good relations with your old PI, which can be important in anyone's career.
The comment stream suggests this may well be a case of "gift authorship" which is generally treated as unethical in such cases. I can't say for sure, not having seen the paper and what contributions the third party might have made, but it has that sense.
But, even second authorship is worth something and keeping good relations with the PI is worth more, even if they are willing to do such things.
But making a formal ethical complaint or a complaint to the journal could well give you a headache dealing with the fallout and lacking a possible career advocate in future. Worse, if they have poor ethical standards, who can predict they won't retaliate for any pushback.
Sad to have to advise it, but let it go.

I don't believe it's appropriate to advise simply letting ethical abuses stand (if it actually is unethical behavior), because that supports the unethical behavior. For a person in a vulnerable position, avoiding conflict can still sometimes be appropriate, but in this case, the OP is in a good position to act, if needed, since they are not pursuing an academic career.

@jakebeal, I was responding to the OPs desire to keep up good relations. I agree in principle, but I think people need to protect themselves. The OP might need the old PI's support for other than an academic career. If you are going to carry a pitchfork against the king, don't go alone.

I get the sense that you are more discontent with the specific student being made the first author, rather than about yourself not getting adequate credit. I infer this because your initial objective was curiosity, which was (presumably) met.
If this is the case, then I would urge you to focus on what you gained from this exercise and consider that the student just benefitted collaterally. You could, of course, ask the former PI about the situation, although that is likely to cause some awkwardness and friction (it would amount to questioning their decision).
On the other hand, if your objection is not to the student but to your own placement on the author list, you should immediately convey your justification to the PI and seek redressal.

That would be correct, yes. At the end of the day this publication doesn't benefit me in any way as I am no longer tied to academia.

I think the answer from @jakebeal is great and should be accepted, but I just wanted to add some more explicit thoughts as to why I think @jakebeal is right.
"Some time ago, my former PI contacted me and I did some work for him..."
-This suggests that the ideas behind the work were conceived ahead of time, without you, and by others on the author list. This is an important step in the process and is work too before whatever work you did for him.
"Lo and behold, I receive the manuscript for edits..."
-This suggests (as previous answers point out) that much interpretation and writing (including reading other papers and weaving that literature into this paper for context) were done without you. This is a huge amount of work, and isn't to be ignored in deciding authorship. Often in my field, if you pick up an old data set / analysis and write it up, you are pretty much guaranteed first authorship.
"Edit: Based on the feedback so far, I think the next best step would be to follow up with the PI and determine what the student's contribution was. Perhaps the student did indeed use the results I obtained to actually write the manuscript, in which case I would have no problem letting the student take first authorship."
-This sounds like a very sensible solution.

Some of us are extremely nice in putting our PhD students in prime position by default, even when we ourselves (or as in your case, a former associate) did almost all the work.
Some students, like private Ryan, realise they must now pull their weight to "earn it."
Other students abuse our generosity by endlessly playing silly buggers.
(There could be other factors. It happens that a PI takes a shine to a protegee that completely baffles everybody else in the department. You know, people is people.)

I think we have all been in this situation at some point in our academic careers and I think it's best to just let it go.  For example, let's say someone I know published a paper with two co-authors at the beginning of their career.  The third author contributed decisively and deserved co-authorship on the work whereas the second author is well-known and has been around a while but contributed nothing at all to the paper apart from occasional confused email messages.  For a while, the person was annoyed about this and felt that it was very unfair, and it is somewhat unfair, but in the end it was better for their career to just accept it and move on as there would be nothing achieved by arguing about it.

I don't believe it's appropriate to advise simply letting ethical abuses stand (if it actually is unethical behavior), because that supports the unethical behavior. For a person in a vulnerable position, avoiding conflict can still sometimes be appropriate, but in this case, the OP is in a good position to act, if needed, since they are not pursuing an academic career.


text:
Should I include research stays in my CV?
During my PhD I was invited three times by two researchers to stay and do research in their lab, one week at a time. I'm now a postdoc and applying to tenured jobs in Europe (yay). Should I include these stays in my CV for these job applications?
To be fair most of the deadlines have already gone for these applications. Someone just mentioned to me that they did that so I'd like more opinions on this. To be even more fair I'm pretty sure I will still need the advice next year. (Some more research stays are coming up, also.)

Are you able to find example CVs of other people in your area? Often these are online. I find this to be the best guideline.

What sort of research can you get done in only a week?

@Azor-Ahai A lot, if you focus... Although I work in a theoretical field, so "doing research" is writing on a board or a paper. When you meet with someone 5-6 hours every day for a week, things can go quickly.

@Thomas I don't think following the norm always produces the best results. The nature of academic job searches make want to be (or at least look) better than my competitors, not indistinguishable...

Yes, listing them would add some more value to the CV.
This is how I would list it in my CV under a section called Research Visits.
Research Visits

Visiting researcher, ABC Laboratory, University of Alphabets (Duration: January 01 -- January 09, 2018; Supervisor/Collaborator: Professor A. BCDEG)
Visiting researcher, ABC Laboratory, University of Alphabets (Duration: January 23 -- January 30, 2018; Supervisor/Collaborator: Professor A. BCDEG)

Doesn't the title "Visiting research scholar" sound a bit pompous...? Besides I don't really want to list the researchers as "supervisors", they were my collaborators during these visits, I wrote papers with them... They weren't the ones telling me what to do. But thanks for the advice.

I would, of course, include them if they enhance my chances of getting the job. You should simply judge how relevant these are to the job you are applying to. If these stays are relevant, do not hesitate to include them. Otherwise, you may skip them.
Good luck!

With all due respect, that's not really an answer. You're basically telling me "do it if you think it can help". Well, that's my question: can it help?


text:
A PhD student I know was terminated because of mental illness without any accommodation. What is the possibility of legal action?
This question is related to the experience of a close relative. He was a PhD student in the US. During his PhD, a little over a year ago, he was hospitalized with his first episode of mental illness. His advisor immediately terminated his employment telling me that my relative was not fit to do a PhD in his lab. He further told me that he had worked with a mentally ill student in the past and it was a mistake and he cannot repeat the same mistake with my relative. While it hurt to hear that, I didn’t think much about the termination at that time as my first priority was helping with the relative's treatment and getting him back on his feet. He had to leave the country since he could not be on a student visa without employment and he has been staying at home since. The drastic life change and not having an independent source of income have been stressing him out and he recently had his second episode. I know this is a complicated situation but am I crazy in thinking that the professor discriminated against my relative by not considering any reasonable accommodations before letting him go? My relative is not a US citizen and is living outside the US now but is there a legal course we can follow? This has been an excruciating experience for our family and any advice/tips are greatly appreciated.
Note: There were no warning signs of the illness before it manifested and my relative was in great standing with the advisor - his research was going well, he had good grades and was not a cause of concern in any manner.

This may be better asked on Law.SE. Termination of employment issues is not the focus of this stack. But it may be worth checking with a lawyer.

His advisor immediately terminated his employment telling me that my relative was not fit to do a PhD in his lab. What type of lab? I can imagine that a bio lab, for instance, has strict regulations in place and perhaps your relative's illness prohibited lab work. Whether that would constitute grounds for dismissal, I don't know. As @SolarMike suggests, maybe ask in Law.SE, or talk to a lawyer.

For legal advice in a particular case, see a lawyer. No one here can give you meaningful advice.

It's likely that it is illegal discrimination, but it is very difficult for a host of reasons to prevail in such legal actions. Only a good lawyer thoroughly familiar with the details of your case will know for sure.

As others have said, this is probably a question for a lawyer. That said, we don’t have any idea of what kind of information  the advisor/university/HR dept has. Perhaps they had information that made them think they had just cause. It could be that your relative is either ignoring or perhaps just overlooking something you don’t know.
Depending on the environment, mental health issues could be a cause for termination because it would make you unfit or ineligible to continue. If the research involves very dangerous products (infectious organisms, highly lethal compounds) or a strict environment (BSL4, secure environment such as a government facility), the terms were probably spelled out somewhere in a document your relative signed.

It might be true that certain environments have a legally justifiable reason for excluding people with certain psychiatric conditions, but in the OP's case the PI said that he had worked with a mentally ill student before and it was a "mistake." Excluding rather than accommodating mentally ill students as a matter of preference is illegal discrimination.

... but in the OP's case the PI said that he had worked with a mentally ill student before and it was a "mistake." --- For some countries (including the U.S.), this is the kind of statement that could infuriate one's HR department if they caught wind of it. (I wanted to say "could cause one's HR department to go b********", but given recent events in the U.S. . . .)

I think it's possible the PI unknowingly hired someone with a mental illness and only found out when the symptoms manifested in a negative way. Perhaps the mistake was not appropriately screening candidates. I'm quite sure we don't know enough about the situation.


text:
Thinking about leaving industry job and taking up a postdoc
This is a follow-up to the question I posted about a year ago: How much damage would I be incurring if I turn down an informal postdoc offer?
My situation: I moved to industry about 6 months ago after declining a postdoc offer because I wanted to have some money and geographic flexibility to take care  of a sick family member. However, moving to the industry has given me a huge identity crisis because I was passionate about my research and the scientific community I was part of. Now I am itching to just take the postdoc and I got to know that the professor is still looking. I am wondering how I would approach him or has the damage been done already? The word is out that I have transitioned to the dark side and folks that I knew in grad school (including my grad school advisor) have begun to treat me as an outsider. Not sure how taking up a postdoc position would affect me in terms of recommendations and academic relationships. Anyone ever done this? How did it go?
Edit: My PhD was in geoscience.

I am in a different field (maths), but I know the stories of several people who went to work in unrelated industry jobs after their PhD, only to decide after a few months to return to academia. It never seemed to have hurt them, but there is of course a danger of survivorship bias, as I never got to know those who failed.
Since it does not seem like you actively burned bridges but only declined offers, I would simply approach the professor with a bit of humility. You made a mistake, but you are willing to correct it and six months is a short time in academia anyway. To add to that there is less danger of losing you to industry now than there is for a post-doc who hasn't tried it yet.
Concerning the "dark side" jokes, with most people they are merely that, namely jokes, so I wouldn't worry that much. They didn't really move away from you, you did move away from them. After all, with you in industry, there were simply no more research collaborations to be had and less of common interests.

Thanks for your reply. What would count as burning bridges? I felt like my declining the offer was burning a bridge.

As the answer to your other post states, an offer is just an offer. For me burning a bridge would be something that actively wastes their ressources, such as informally taking them up on their offer and then suddenly not signing the contract at the last moment, when they have stopped looking for other candidates. Of course the professor might see things differently, but as long as you ask before quitting your current job, there is nothing to be lost in trying.

If you declined the offer in part because of a sick family member, you really haven't burnt any bridges. Professors understand that people have personal lives, and make allowances for it.

Don't worry too much about it. Just write a friendly email to the professor and ask him if he would still be interested in hiring you (write a sentence or two how passionate you are about the topic). If the professor is in the same city as you are ask for an in person meeting instead.


text:
How much does extracurricular matter for admission to PhD program in Computer Science?
I graduated with a B.S. in "Computer & Information Sciences" from a small, insignificant liberal arts school. My overall CGPA was 3.86 and my major CGPA was 3.80. Average GPA, but I am worried about the quality of my studies, not the quantity. During my undergraduate studies I put just enough work into the CS classes to get the grade, and not any more. And I am guessing it is much harder to maintain such GPAs at state universities with more rigorous programs.
I have no extracurricular work to show: never participated in projects, and never done real research work.
Can I still apply to decent PhD programs? Will any PhD programs consider me seriously?
Thank you!

I should mention that I am not considering MS, because I am told it is a better choice to go for the PhD program directly if I am planning on getting it anyways, and there are more opportunities for full funding and stipends.

Although you are using the word "extracurricular" correctly according to the literal definition -- i.e., outside of the curriculum -- in practice the term "extracurricular" refers to non-academic activities (or academic clubs) done by students.  If what you mean is that you have never participated in research projects, you should rewrite the question accordingly.  Also, please search the site: a lot of questions like that have been asked before.

I've voted to close as a duplicate of a general question, but there are also many questions that address some of your more specific concerns. See e.g. How much research experience do US grad schools really expect from an undergraduate CS student?, How handicapped am I in graduate admissions if I graduated from a lower tier university?, and many others

Having some work experience would help with having no extracurricular works done during undergrads.


text:
How important are review articles to secure a tenure-track position?
My field is chemistry and I have had successful postdoc experiences for four years. Next year I want to apply for a tenure-track assistant professor position.
My supervisor says review articles are very very important (if not mandatory) for a full professor position. Therefore, they can be impressive for an assistant professor application. He advises me to focus on writing 2 review articles in the next months instead of research works because this can increase my chance. He says 1 review article is more important than 5 research articles in a job application.
Considering the fact that writing review articles is very time-consuming. Is it worth of my time to focus on 2 strong review articles?

Please explain your terminology, as I'm not familiar with "review article".  Is this what another field might call a "survey" or something else?    If a survey, I'd be very surprised that would carry more weight than original research, but it's not my field...

This seems like odd advice for fields I'm familiar with, but there is so much variability in fields that it wouldn't really surprise me if this were true in your specific area. You'll definitely want to prefer advice from professors experienced on hiring committees in your specific area of chemistry. It's just the first time I've ever heard of such a strategy, so it does seem...'curious'.

Look at the CVs of some new hires in your field in some target universities.  That could be a reality check for you. // Seems like strange advice to me too -- a strong review article is usually written by someone with an extensive publication record and a panoramic view of the field or subfield.  Four years' of postdoc work, no matter how strong, would typically not be enough to be at that point yet. // Suggestion: judging from your writing style evidenced by your question, it could be helpful for you to work on English writing skills as

you are getting ready to apply for faculty positions, if you are aiming for the U.S.  This comment is intended to help you get the best possible position.

review as in "peer reviewed"?

The "review" in "review article" refers to a review of a specific topic within a specialty. They are exceedingly efficient ways to learn which means that they are extremely efficient ways to build up the reference power of an author if done well. Yes, in this context, it is a peer-reviewed publication.

@TheNate: I am coming from a field (mathematics) where the term "review article" is not standard and for which there are relatively few articles of survey-type written.  So I have a lot to learn about this.  You say: "They are exceedingly efficient ways to learn" Why?  A targeted search through a bunch of recent papers can be one good way to learn...but writing a good paper (especially an expository paper) takes a lot of time.  Wouldn't it be much more efficient not to write the paper?

"Which means that they are extremely efficient ways to build up the reference power of an author if done well." I didn't quite understand what you meant by this.  Like @BrianDHall, I find the idea that compiling a lot of other people's work would be more prestigious than doing your own original work a bit strange.

Usually review papers get a lot of citations. Are you trying to increase your citations? Often, having a large number of citations may help in showing that you are an active researcher.

Writing a review is certainly a good way to increase depth of knowledge, but I meant that it's good for learning by reading which means it's useful to many in the field, thus leads to the citations. (as Fire noted) Citations define high power articles.

@PeteL.Clark - Imagine an annotated bibliography on a certain topic.  Now imagine fleshing it out more. That's a simplistic explanation of "review article." Hope it helps.

I will say, in Physics, I have never heard this advice. I will also say that I have never, ever, heard anything resembling "1 review article is more important than 5 research articles in a job application." I've been impressed by seeing a review when it is Nature, Science, or Rev. Mod. Phys. - though of course it often indicates the advisor's reputation, rather than the candidate's. However, I can also think of a few times when it makes sense to dedicate some efforts to review articles rather than original research, and I did end up writing one as I was applying for jobs.
1) You have been invited to write a review by a journal with a decent reputation in your field. Doing so demonstrates you are taken seriously by the field, and scientists care about your opinion.
2) You are a few months from a job/grant application, and you think you can write/publish the review within this time, but probably won't be able to publish a significant original research article before the application goes in. A review is better than nothing.
3) Your research plans for the future are focused on an emerging field, and your review gives you a chance to both plant your flag and emphasize how important that field is to a broader audience.
If all three points are mostly there, and there aren't other major holes in your CV/application (teaching, details of your research plan, grant-writing), consider it! Beware, though - I found out writing a good review takes more time than you expect, so Point #2 might not be a slam dunk.