text:
Should I wait to upskill myself or contact professor about the PhD opening asap?
I'm completing my Masters in Artificial intelligence. My thesis is about the social robotics and cognitive sciences. However, During my Masters, I've self-studied a little about big data and machine learning and I want to do my PhD in that area. Currently, I'll be done with my thesis writing in a week and after that I'll be working on machine learning and big data.
Meanwhile, during my search of phd position, I have found one opening whose deadline is November'15.
I have two options now:

I finish my thesis writing and get some machine learning concepts for around 1-2 months and then talk to the relevant supervisor.
I contact the professor now, showing my interest and keep in touch with him or ask him for guidance before joining the PhD with him?

I need your guidance in choosing the best option among two. In two months i think i'll have some basic concepts about the big data and data mining but i have to wait for two months and the position may not be available by that time.
On the other hand, I have no prior work experience in the proposed Phd field, will the professor appreciate my interest and will help me to cover basics after finding me interested?
Thanks.

By "explore" I mean that i have studied about machine learning i.e. books, papers. I find it quite interesting to work on in future but No hands on experience though.

If you mean, edit the question then Its done.

What country or part of the world?

The deadline is three months off -- why the hurry in contacting the professor?

@aparente001, I'm not in hurry. It's just that i wonder if its better to talk the professor and do the necessary preparation instead of waiting for deadline. and secondly , the position may be taken anytime and by then waiting for deadline won't serve any purpose.

I don't think you stand to gain much by waiting. Especially if, as you state in your question, the position might no longer be available within two months.
Either the supervisor is open to working with you and you'll have the opportunity to get to know him a bit and to demonstrate your ability to find your way in his field of research, or he's looking for a PhD student with a prior skillset you're unlikely to acquire in 1-2 months time anyway.
If he's up for it, I'd say it's always a good idea to have a general talk with him to get to know your prospective field better, show your interest and to get targeted feedback on whether your Masters might simply be good enough in the first place. That doesn't exempt you from reading up a bit about his current research and it's background though.

Thanks @frasermaler. you are right. contacting soon may give me some time to know about professor and the project. I'll surely contact him after reading up a bit about his research and background. Nice suggestion.


text:
Maximize the credit vs. easy proof for big conjecture
I have a similar situation as in this question. I can prove a big conjecture by combining results from literature.
However, the difference is I want to maximize my credit. I tried to come up with a different proof. I have come up with a slightly different proof, but the proof is longer and it seems it has no new insight or new techniques. If I want to maximize my credit, should I just publish the easy proof, or the longer proof, or both on the same manuscript?

Could you clarify what precisely you mean by 'maximiz[ing] [your] credit'?

"I can prove a big conjecture by combining results from literature." Are you sure that both your overarching argument and all referenced results are correct and fit together? Often one finds such proofs only to figure out a day (or year) later that he missed some subtleties that ruin the argument completely. So I would start with checking everything. As to "maximizing credit", just "take it easy" and "memento mori". People are quite often not idiots and can see what exactly has been done no matter in what form you choose to present it.  So maximize the clarity instead. :-)

This is not the first time you have made claims to have solved open problems, and I would advise you to follow @fedja's advice about being your own sceptic. Correctness is more important than fame, if you are trying to get started as a researcher.

"I want to maximize my credit." Or equivalently, you want to minimize the credit of the other researchers whose work you are relying on. If you put it that way, it doesn't sound so great, does it? And if people get wise to this, it won't exactly leave a good impression.

If your "longer" proof has value for application to other problems then it may have value in itself, never mind maximizing credit. In math it is fairly frequently the case that a proof is more valuable than the theorem it proves if it gives wider insight.
There is also value in short proofs for important conjectures, especially if they have been around for a while. I'd love to see a short proof of the Four Color Theorem that doesn't rely on computers.
If reviewers would consider both proofs, then that might be best. If you can stay within page limits then a first submission might include both and then look at what the reviewers say, but be sure to explain why you have both proofs.

This is not an answer to the post itself, but a commentary on the title of the question, "Maximize the credit vs. easy proof for big conjecture":
There are no "easy proofs for big conjectures". If there were such an easy proof, someone would have written it a long time ago. "Big conjectures" are, by definition, the ones a lot of people care about and many good people will have considered the question. They will have thought deeply about coming up with proofs, and will have brought their decades of experience to the task. Experience in the mathematical community shows that, typically, when someone claims that they have a "simple proof", they are usually wrong about their claim. As a consequence, I would suggest that before wondering how you can maximize your credit, you spend a good amount of time convincing yourself that you are the exception to the "usually wrong" rule.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Submitting an "old" rejected manuscript to the same journal even though method and conclusion are different?
I have submitted a manuscript to a journal before, but they rejected it. I have rewritten the manuscript in the sense that the title, the method, and the conclusion are different. The new manuscript is the same as the old one only in the introduction part. I have read the policy of the journal and they don't accept a rejected manuscript, but can they view my new manuscript as the old one?

If you have a new paper, then you need a new introduction. You can freely "self-plagiarize" from things that you previously submitted but not published, but might cause the editor or associate editor who remembers your previous manuscript to read the first page and decide falsely that this is the same manuscript as the one rejected.

And, really, if the method and conclusion are different one would think that the introduction would be at least slightly different as well - the new paper is heading down a different road and the signposts should not point in the old direction.

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


text:
Submit a revised manuscript to another journal
I have submitted a manuscript to a journal. After submitting it, I found mistakes in the manuscript and corrected them. I tried to send the revised version of the manuscript to the journal, but it is not available. I tried to withdraw the manuscript, but that seems impossible too. Under this situation, is it appropriate to submit the revised version of the manuscript to another journal?
I am not sure if the original manuscript is under review since the status is "submitted to the journal" for a long time.

While @Allure's answer is the right one, I still have one question. What kind of mistakes did you find? It's a different scenario whether they were some typos you corrected, some missed references you fixed or if you accidentally accepted the main hypothesis while the data suggested otherwise.

@Jeroen The proof is not complete(This is a math paper).

The problem you're facing is down completely to the lack of response from the first journal. Therefore you should contact them (I would contact the publisher, not the editorial board). Tell them what you have written in the question and see what they say. It's fairly straightforward for them to withdraw your paper so I would assume that's what they will do.
You could add something to the tune of "if I don't hear from you in the next ___ weeks I will submit to another journal", if they don't respond.
Do not submit to another journal until you have made a real attempt to resolve the situation with the first journal - it would be duplicate submission in that case.

It is your right to simply withdraw the paper by giving notice. The copyright is still yours and they have no rights to it at all. You don't really require a response. Tell them unequivocally that you withdraw the paper from all future consideration. You don't need to give them "deadlines" for a reply.
They have no right even to string you along by not replying. That is their poor process. Being "under review" makes no difference in your ownership.
Once you do that you are free to submit it elsewhere. But don't submit until you make the withdrawal final.

Note that I can't judge whether you are doing the right thing by withdrawing or would be better off waiting. And you don't say how long this has been since first submission. But as long as you still hold copyright, you hold all rights.


text:
Is sending an almost entirely new revised version of manuscript to the journal appropriate?
I have written a manuscript and sent it to a journal. Right now they are reviewing my manuscript. In the meantime I have rewritten the manuscript due to mistakes, and now it is entirely new, in the sense that the method and the conclusion are new.
Should I submit this new version of the manuscript to the journal? Or just find another journal to submit? I am afraid the referee will not read my new manuscript because they have spent lots of effort studying the old one but they gain nothing. How should I proceed?

I think this is a question best asked to the editor, and as soon as possible to not waste any more reviewer time.

"the method and the conclusion are new". I wonder how you could keep the introduction and the discussion, as well as the results, but I am a nit-picker.

How much time passed since the first submission?

At the very least, you should retract your paper asap because of mistakes. Even if the editor is for-profit (e.g. Elsevier, Springer), the reviewers are usually volunteers and you are wasting their time.
If I were an editor receiving an update like this, I would be miffed. You did not check your manuscript sufficiently before submission and now you are submitting again. But I would appreciate your honesty in admitting the mistake, which might allow me to not desk-reject the second submission.
I would recommend you send a very apologetic letter to the editor with your new version, assuring the editor that you did check the new version over and over again. People make mistakes and can be forgiven for making mistakes.

Ask the editor how to proceed. They can probably respond fairly quickly after consulting with any reviewers. You will need to assure them that the new "version" is better than the old and clears up deficiencies. Maybe outline the changes. If the result is improved, indicate that.
The alternative of waiting for a decision seems worse in many regards. If the decision is to reject, they may not be interested in a new version. If it is to accept then you have a real dilemma.
But by getting the editor involved you may save reviewers some fruitless work and also get a better chance for success.


text:
How can I find contact information of potential reviewers when submitting a manuscript?
I am planning to submit a manuscript. The journal is asking me to provide a list of names and contact information of potential reviewers during the submission process.
I have found many potential reviewers, but I do not have email addresses for these people. What should I tell the journal or how should I find their contact information?
If it's relevant, my field is math.

I'm curious... I don't work in math, but every academic i know has a institute/university profile page where they list their contact info.  Is this not the norm in maths?

Here are some possible ways for finding the email / contact information for a potential reviewer (or any researcher, really):

Just try looking them up in a search engine. Of course, this is less effective if they have a common name, in which case it might not be obvious that you found the right person. Also, sometimes you can find out-of-date information.
Look up their latest publications or preprints. If they're recent, there's a good chance the affiliation information is up-to-date. If they provide a correspondence address within the paper you're already done. If not, look them up at the website of the institution/department they're affiliated with. Often you'll find their email that way. You can also try seeing if a search engine finds anything when searching for their name and institution. Perhaps their group page is not yet linked from their department.
Since your field is math, there is a good chance they have a preprint on arXiv. Under the "Submission history" there is a "view email" button where you can check which address the preprint was submitted from, which may be of use. (Other preprint repositories may have corresponding functionality.)
Ask others, e.g. their colleagues and coauthors. This can be the only way of finding some researchers who have retired or otherwise left academia. Whether these researchers are willing to accept review invitations is another question.
As suggested by Richard Erickson, you could also consult professional society directories. Many such societies provide contact information of members through online portals. However, note that this information is sometimes only accessible to other members.

Finally, given that many editors prefer not blindly trusting author-provided contact information for suggested reviewers (or even inviting author-suggested reviewers) in the first place, leaving the field blank might be a better option than spending a lot of time looking up someone's email address. On the other hand, some journals make providing this information mandatory, so it varies.

Good ideas. One more possible location: Professional society directories. Many societies have online portals with contact information.

@Faoler Great to hear! Best of luck with your submitted paper.


text:
How can we identify and filter AI-generated statements of purpose (SoP) and recommendation letters?
How can we effectively identify and filter out statement of purpose (SoP) and recommendation letters that are generated by AI tools?
The authenticity of these documents is crucial for our admission process, but distinguishing AI-generated content from human-written content has become increasingly challenging. Are there any known methods, tools, or best practices for detecting AI-generated texts in academic admissions?
Additionally, how should institutions approach this issue ethically and practically, considering the rapid advancement of AI technology?

Hard to believe this is a real problem at the moment: SoPs are too personal (AI can't explain a poor grade given a particular transcript for example, especially since it doesn't know the reason), while you can always request recommendation letters from official email addresses.

Do you already have a system in place to filter fake recommendation letters written by the students themselves without the professor's approval? How does that work? Because that looks like the hardest and more important problem to me; this question might be a X-Y issue. If a recommender used AI as a writing assistant but signed the letter and confirmed that its contents are accurate, that's fine for me.

@FedericoPoloni We require recommendation letters to be submitted from an official email address not associated with the candidate. The candidate is going to have to be doing pretty well to fake a submission from i.sudbery@uni.edu

You can only identify if they use a bad model. I don't think it is possible if they use current state of the art LLMs.

@IanSudbery "The candidate is going to have to be doing pretty well to fake a submission from i.sudbery@uni.edu" Depending on how the sending and receiving mail servers are set up, that might not be especially hard. Without extra authentication, forging a From: header is exactly as hard as writing a bogus return address on a physical letter.

"The authenticity of these documents is crucial for our admission process" OMG really? I mean, I wrote my own myself, but I'm a terrible writer. I've been assuming the transcripts and portfolio are much more important. Hopefully the cruciality of statements of purpose is mainly for degrees related to writing.

@Ray Pretty much no university is going to be without SPF these days, and DKIM and DMARC are quite common. Those technologies make forging a header much harder. Or, I suppose forging a header is still just as easy but the receiving mail system can easily detect the forgery. Undetectable forgeries are much harder to pull off.

Why do you care? Is 'writing SOPs' a critical skill for your program? I'd hope you judge an SOP for its content, not on its writing style or the tools used to write it.

This question seems posed by an AI trying to find its own weakness ... or at least by a candidate trying to see how their own AI-generated SoP can be modified to be perceived as human generated ...

Honestly, I question whether SoPs are even a useful indicator in the admissions process

@IanSudbery you can send an email with a forged from field pretty trivially

@ScottishTapWater True, but there are ways around that. For example the application server sends the referee a message to confirm their submisison.

Is that server respecting the replyto field?

@ScottishTapWater Every system for letters that I've interacted with lately requires the letter writer to be able to receive email at a given address, from at which point they authenticate to the university application system. A student could submit a fake email address under their own control, but forging the from field isn't going to help them.

That's good at least

There is a nontrivial security hole in the systems used by most universities, as pointed out by @RLH. Students can put whatever they like as contact details for their referees, and that will trigger automated emails to those addresses containing a one-time login password for referees to submit their letters. There's nothing to stop a student creating a fake account named iansudbery@gmail.com or whatever and then writing a letter purporting to be from Ian Sudbery.

It would take a very sharp-eyed admissions tutor to spot that the letter came from a non-university address (particularly since academics move around a lot, and hence many genuinely do prefer to use gmail or other non-university addresses for work purposes). Universities' attempts to get around this are frequently utterly risible ("the letter must be on headed notepaper" etc, as if that wasn't trivial to fake). But this has very little to do with ChatGPT.

There is no need to filter out AI-generated statements of purpose.
Even without AI, it is not reasonable to assume that applicants have generally written their SoPs all by themselves. They have received substantial input from others, or even have had someone else writing the entire thing for them. The spread of LLMs might actually be beneficial here, because it could lessen the difference between applicants with friends or family that knows how to write a good SoP and those that don't.
Contentwise, an AI-generated SoP will probably read well, but very much generic (because it is going to mimic typical examples of SoPs available on the internet). To a large extent, LLMs are bullshit generators: They create text that sounds good on first glance, but they don't really have coherent arguments. Thus, I can easily believe that a LLM can write a decent SoP, but I'd very surprised if they produce a great one.
In conclusion, if AI-generated SoPs might have a significant impact on your admissions process, there is probably something wrong with the process. The solution is to improve the admissions process, not to try and filter for AI-generated texts.

"I can easily believe that a LLM can write a decent SoP, but I'd very surprised if they produce a great one." It can actually make a good one into a generic one; those who wrote great ones always win...

One thing that seems to be creeping in - though I haven't tested it myself - is AI-assisted writing. In that case the applicant throws something together and uses an AI tool to rewrite it (often in more formal language).  I wonder how the OP would perceive that.  Is it just a spelling/grammar checker with a sense of superiority?

@ChrisH What i'm looking for in an SoP for a PhD student is that the student is actaully intrested in working specifically with me, understands what it we do in my lab, and specifically keen this particular project. For a job, and SoP can help the assesor map evidence of skills/experiences to job criteria. Good writing can help me see that if its true, but it can't hide its absence.

While likely to improve in the future, I think your description as a "bullshit generator" is right on presently. I, along with many others, have spoken and written about how the use of LLM in a legal context can be very dangerous unless the LLM's output is carefully monitored and vetted by a qualified legal professional.

Most humans writing is also akin to a bullshit generator. Just compare the average Quora answer to the average StackExchange answer. The former often make no sense at all or don't actually answer the question.

"There is no need to filter out AI-generated statements of purpose."  For programs that get a lot of applicants, one of the reasons to require a statement of purpose is to reduce the number of applicants by increase the work required to apply.  If the statement of purpose can be "AI" generated, then the number of applicants might increase.  So, in some cases, there is a need impose some kind of burden that an "AI" cannot remove.

@JonathanReez That's my favorite laughter about LLM criticism. "They don't know what they are really talking about" is about the most common criticism of human writing as well...

@Peter-ReinstateMonica it's almost as if the LLM critics don't know what they're really talking about! :D

Additionally, how should institutions approach this issue ethically and practically, considering the rapid advancement of AI technology?

If an AI can do a great job for a given student output and in-person examination is not possible, the only feasible solution is to just drop them as a requirement altogether. Use other criteria to evaluate the candidates, as you can no longer rely on people's essay writing skills to be the deciding factor.
Some people have mentioned that current LLMs cannot output great essays and I agree they can't beat the best 10% of humans just yet, but new versions of AI software are coming out every year and it's reasonable to believe that by 2030 AI will be able to write better essays than 99% of all humans. You might as well put yourself ahead of the curve and stop grading people for work that's best delegated to a machine.

"but new versions of AI software are coming out every year" - MONTH, not year. " it's reasonable to believe that by 2030 AI will be able to write better essays than 99% of all humans." - make that 2025. 2024 if someone puts focus on that.

@TomTom eh, I'm a huge fan of ChatGPT but I think that the 90%->99% gap will take a long time to cross. The 99%->100% will take even longer.

Nah, see, humans are not really 100% on top - the best are, not others. Also, history shows that it does not take long and then humans are left in the dust. Plenty of AI research examples demonstrating that and now they are putting them into AI LLM's. Check the history of the AI GO players to see what is coming. Or the AI poker player research, or the AI Diplomacy research (that is a game, actually, heavy on negotiations). All demonstrated total AI dominance.

@TomTom Wanna bet $1000 on this not happening within the next 1 year? At what odds? Money talks, everything else walks ;)

What about a SENSIBLE bet? And stop toy money. Seroiusly, 1 year is irrelevant - we talk about career ending and you say "oh, tomorrow". What about 3-5 years? Still willing to put your money (and please, REAL money, not a tip) where your mouth is? Btw., if money talks - you are a mouse unheard, $1000 -  joke.


text:
What is the appropriate way to handle related work on preprint servers?
I’m preparing a journal article on a novel method. There are several related methods publicly described on preprint servers such as arXiv or bioRxiv.
Is it permitted to cite works that have not been peer reviewed and is it appropriate to acknowledge them? I wish to discuss and critique them as they are critical to the novelty of our work.

Also: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/162016/is-it-okay-to-cite-a-paper-from-arxiv

I consider it not only permitted to discuss and critique crucial related work in preprints, but obligatory. That it hasn't been peer-reviewed should mildly inform how sceptical we are when considering such work (only mildly, because we shouldn't blindly trust that peer-review would find all flaws).
If a journal has policies dictating otherwise, the journal is wrong in having them.

That's an interesting question.
It certainly is not forbidden, but as others have said, journal rules may apply. On the one hand, the contribution should be given, but on the other hand, there is no peer review and thus no independent evaluation. On numerous occasions, I had to remove such preprint citations because the work I cited was fundamentally flawed.
Thus, I tend to not cite work that is only published in preprint venues unless it has an immediate and obvious connection to my work.
I try to find a version that has been published and more often than not the paper has been submitted to some peer-reviewed workshop (or similar), that has no archival proceedings.

This may depend on the journal you're submitting to, or even on individual editors. I have seen journals in which preprints on such servers were cited, but I also once had a request by an editor to remove such a citation. The first thing to do is to see whether the policy of the journal has anything on the matter. If not, personally I'd include these works in my submission because the worst that can happen is that the editor asks to remove them. I cannot imagine that anyone would reject a paper because of this. (Note that in my field papers are hardly ever accepted as they are in the first go, so a request like this wouldn't lose you time; this may be different in some fields/journals.)


text:
Is It appropriate for students to express interest in becoming a non-funded TA for a specific course?
I am an undergraduate student and along with some of my peers, we are interested in the possibility of becoming teaching assistants (TAs) for a particular course taught by a professor in the US whom I work with remotely. However, we are unsure about the protocol and appropriateness of expressing this interest directly to the professor.
Is it generally acceptable for students to directly approach a professor to express interest in a non-funded TA position for their course?

What would the alternative be?

Why do you want to be a TA for free?

Are you at the same university at the professor/course?

A major issue with unpaid work is that the professor then has no reason to trust your reliability, as you could just drop out at any point not losing anything. But they need TAs they can trust.

No, I am not. @Dawn

You would be better off seeking some research experience, I think. I agree with the answers here that this as ethical (negative) elements.

I think some of the commenters and answerers may not be familiar with educational undergraduate TA positions. These are very different from graduate student TAs and are designed as learning opportunities for talented students; they are typically enrolled in the same course that they are TAing. Though it's also possible OP isn't familiar with these, either.

If you want to get experience as TA for CV's build up: not worth the efforts.
If you want to get experience for your CV: ask to be a Research Assistant for free, not a teaching assistant.

@BryanKrause the OP is not a student at the university of the course in question. They are a student elsewhere.

I think this is an appropriate question here, so I question the downvotes. I think those are meant to say "bad idea" (which it is). But that should be an answer, not a critique of the question.

@Dawn Yeah, that's an important caveat but isn't central to the responses commenting that this arrangement should be avoided. A reader with a different situation might get the wrong idea.

This is not a fruitful line of inquiry. The professor would have a very difficult time accepting this proposition for several reasons:

reliably of volunteers is not great
accepting volunteers for positions that really should be paid causes ethical concerns
logistical challenges of having a TA from another university

I would not hire a TA under this circumstance because I think it would take coordination and would be unlikely to improve the course.

In addition, at my university, we almost never hire TAs that have not taken the course previously in our department. I like my TAs to have been my students in a previous year. When I look back, my bad TAs are those that took the class from someone else previously.

If you're qualified to TA the course you should be paid
If you're not qualified to TA the course you are likely to be a burden to the professor, and they are better off to not take you on as an unpaid TA.

In any case, I wouldn't approach them without making explicitly clear why you're interested. Wanting to do it for free could have ulterior motives (e.g. helping another student cheat) and is rather unconventional.

It is not appropriate.
Reasons:
Anyone involved in handling student information needs to be Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) trained. Having this information released to a foreign entity will raise a shocking amount of red flags.
A foreign volunteer position that takes away opportunities from an American citizen/resident/resident alien, etc... presents many ethical issues.
The sheer amount of headaches involved in getting you on-boarded is not worth it, even if it is somehow possible.

tl;dr: No, it is immoral.
A "non-funded" TA is like a "non-funded employee": A person volunteering to do work which others, typically junior researchers, do for pay, to make a living. TA wages are typically rather meager, with this part of their work often not being extricable from their research, so that another employment option is not academically useful or logistically viable (or allowed); and with graduate employee unions being either missing, fledgling or weak.
In the struggle to depress junior researcher wages for teaching, universities employ various tactics which I will not go into here; but one of the tactics they use is finding TAs who would work for even less, such as later-year undergraduates. A similar phenomenon occurs with teaching courses proper, i.e. giving lectures and administering a course: Universities sometimes try to put later-year M.Sc./ Ph.D. candidates in those positions instead of untenured researchers or teachers who "just" work for the university and cost more.
Now, if it were the case that such teaching were to be undertaken with an extra-ordinary conferment of relevant status, and full pay and benefits (or perhaps - a little higher in recognition of an exceptional record of the person in question) - that would be... well, fine, I suppose. But what happens in practice is that this is used to "juniorize" teaching more widely, with much reduced pay. And that also means lower teaching quality - on average and speaking in rough terms.
Now, if undergraduate students were to somehow be made willing to teach for free, and the university could get away with that legally (which it might not by the way) - managements would have a field day.
So, please do not undermine graduate teachers/researchers' livelihood. If you're interesting in TAing - inquire about doing it for pay. Otherwise, if consider initiatives such as:

Extra-curricular extra-practice sessions, e.g. organized via the student union, if the course is particularly tricky to get through.
Investing in creating some video content to help students with some of the tougher concepts in a particular subject


text:
Why do national libraries not seem to invest in good computer facilities for visitors?
It seems like city/county libraries are very much concerned with giving quality computer resources to library patrons, as are university libraries.
In Sweden and Germany, I’ve noticed the national libraries have computers but it seems like an afterthought. They are older and of a bit poorer quality. It seems like the national library is more concerned with archiving texts rather than being a center for patrons to study or read comfortably. It also seems the interior and the architecture is less maintained and more old-fashioned. This isn’t the case for the Black Diamond library of Copenhagen, with beautiful modern design but I don’t remember how the computer facilities there were.
So is it just a given that national libraries don’t prioritize usability for their user base in the way other libraries do?
What’s their primary function in that case?

Not an answer, as I don't have any concrete knowledge/evidence - but I would imagine the national library targets a different segment of the population compared to local/university libraries. Most people who need resources only available in a national library are going to be professional researchers who typically have laptops etc.

What's the relevance to academia?

I can't really answer, but guess that most national libraries are meant to serve other libraries and not the public directly. I'd also guess that most interactions are via correspondence, once literal, now virtual.

Why and how national libraries are funded and for what policies and goals is not really a question for this SE.  The answers will also be many and varied and likely involve politics and funding.

It's been a while since I visited one, so I don't have any up-to-date impressions of computer facilities at national libraries. That said, they often are in historical buildings, as you say, and I also suspect they often prioritize access and visitors' comfort less than university or local libraries.
The primary function of national libraries is typically to archive and preserve information, especially information published within the country. For this reason, national libraries usually have very large collections compared to regular-sized libraries. Along this line, the National Library of Sweden (Kungliga Biblioteket) describe their mission as [translated]:

KB's mission is to collect, preserve and make available everything that is published in Sweden.

This is related to the concept of legal deposit, which goes back to 1661 in Sweden. Similarly, the German National Library (Deutsche National Bibliothek) focus on the archival aspect in their online description of their activities.

So is it just a given that national libraries don’t prioritize usability for their user base in the way other libraries do?

If they have a primarily archival role (as is commonly the case), I think it's clear they should/will prioritize that role first. The national libraries I have visited have done a lot in terms of usability for visitors interested in those archives - large preservation efforts to make manuscripts last for centuries, digitization, making available metadata, providing gloves etc.


text:
Why is accreditation based on time as opposed to knowledge so universally (or is it)?
I have never seen a degree program that is purely examination based. Even if class attendance is not required, as it is in some European university programs, the program is still structured around a semester’s pacing in which you would enroll at one point, study a syllabus over a certain period, and then conclude with some assignments or an exam.
In theory, I don’t see why someone who has a certain level of knowledge - for whatever reason, talent, personal study, work experience - should not be able to just sit an exam (or many) and prove a level of competence they have in something for a degree, at any time that exam is being offered.
As far as I know this is not an option anywhere and I am wondering if there is a deeper reason for this than just happenstance in that most universities just happen to offer courses structured in this way since it caters to most people’s needs.
Is there some principle by which degrees are designed, stating that it is not desirable to allow someone to obtain a degree just by demonstrating knowledge (and possibly work experience)?
Or is there a way to obtain a degree in that way?

Why do you suggest it is based on "time'. The examinations are important. But note that examinations are generally a partial solution for determining knowledge. Oral exams do a bit better than written ones, but few exams really cover everything. Instead an assumption is made that if you know "these things" then you probably know the rest. I assume you mean an accredited degree (otherwise I'll sell you a diploma). And accrediting agencies want more than the absolute minimum.

Note that many (most?) universities will let you "pass out" of some courses by examination. This is usually for lower level courses, but need not be. If you want credit in such a situation, talk to the department head who might arrange an exam.

Also related: Why not offer credit by exam to students who have failed a course?

For a U.S. perspective (so not European), my classes (both taken and taught) involved much more than the final exam. Even for mathematics, there were several major tests throughout the semester, some minor quizzes, and homework (which sometimes, especially for advanced courses, was the most significant part of the course in terms of time involved and learning). As for other subjects (which even in mathematics I still had to take as electives), course work/grades involved lab work, class presentations, numerous multi-page essays (i.e. term papers), field work, group projects, etc.

If you take the idealistic point of view that getting the knowledge and work experience is equivalent to spending the time to get a degree, then why do you need a degree at all? In such an ideal world, that knowledge and work experience should then get you the same recognition and job offers as the actual degree.
And if you say that we are not living in an ideal world, then I agree with you. However, preparing and giving an exam takes time, so they tend to get scheduled at the end of each semester after the classes, when most people would want to take them. They are also known to be less than ideal as a tool for checking for knowledge, so they are often supplemented with things like homework assignments, which are again scheduled for the majority of people.
At least in the university systems I have been part of, this schedule is the only thing stopping you from obtaining a degree by taking all the exams in a row. And even with this schedule you could take all available classes each semester and possibly finish in a year or two. If you make a compelling point, even things like homework assignments or formal prerequisites could be (partially) dropped. Things like this happen all the time, e.g. in case of prolonged illnesses.
However that being said, also coming from practical experience in a non-ideal world, my faith in people who say "I already know all of this, let me pass with less work" is rather thin. A vast majority of them greatly overestimates their skills, while the few that truly know their stuff often have have no problem in just passing the classes according to schedule anyway.

There are some exceptions being made, but that is very rare indeed. Besides other things, being a student can be a relatively cushy position, so there's rarely a motivation to be done ASAP in the first place...


text:
Graduate Career Advice - Re-applying to Stronger Programs Next Cycle After Initial Acceptances
I am a senior undergrad going into a Ph.D. this fall in the field of polymers/chemical engineering, and while I have already gotten accepted into strong programs in that field, I have this lingering regret that I should have applied to higher-ranked programs during my initial application cycle. I only applied to a few select schools (including my undergrad institution), and gotten into strong programs for polymers/soft matter.
However, I severely undercut myself due to self-doubt about my application strength when I applied; I had suffered a hit in my coursework grades during my junior year due to extenuating medical circumstances, but all other semesters were absolutely unblemished (everything was also explained in my application).
Furthermore, I believe that other areas of my application were relatively strong, including extensive semester and summer research, multiple semesters of TA experience, pertinent industry internships, as well as positive encouragement and guidance from all of my professors to pursue graduate school.
Unfortunately, my train of thought while applying was that the admissions committees for "top programs" in the field would see my junior year grades and cut me then and there without even taking a look at the rest of my application.
I suppose that this logic, in hindsight, did not make any sense, as I've been accepted into strong programs, however, I sort of wish that I applied to more "reach" programs, and just aimed one tiny step higher than I had in my original list of schools. The regret of not even attempting to apply for those higher programs is more stressful than getting rejected by all of them (because I at least tried), there's always that "what-if" question mark that periodically comes around when I think about the future.
Would it be worth it to apply for those higher programs this fall again, or should I just move on from this thought and attend my current choices? Note that my rationale behind another round of applications, but to the top-ranked programs in this field (University of Minnesota, Delaware, UT Austin), is that these universities have far larger resources, alumni networks, and more professors working in my specific subfields of interest.

I will go ahead and say no, don't apply again! Starting a Ph.D. is more about your work and mentor than the program's prestige. Achievements, research quality, and the guidance of your advisor will outweigh the university's rank in the long run. Your success depends on conducting significant research, publishing, and engaging in academia, not just on the institution's name.
Reapplying to other programs could unnecessarily delay your academic journey. Utilize the resources and opportunities of the programs you've been accepted to. Complete the coursework, pass all required examinations, and keep moving forward! The impact of your research and the mentors you choose are more critical to your future in academia or industry than the program's prestige. Focus on making the most of your current opportunities and setting a strong foundation for your career rather than wasting another year of your life, time, and resources (financial, mental, etc.) in reapplying!

Excellent answer. There are excellent advisors almost everywhere. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


text:
My professor gave me a bad grade and wouldn't discuss it further, I think some prejudice may be involved. How should a student proceed?
Background:  I was a senior at a very prestigious, high-ranking university in the US.  At the time my GPA was around a 3.9 and had never had any issues with professors (and actually socialized with a few outside of class).
Fall semester I ended up getting pinned taking two classes from a female professor that had a reputation for being an extreme feminist.  I only mention the "feminist" part because this reputation preceded her around campus.  My adviser who was female, basically said "sorry about this" but I have to put you in her classes.  I also mention it because the department head (later in story) is very quick to pull me from her class with little discussion.  I am not anti-feminist nor did I care.  If anything it made me act more cautious around her.
Both of the classes were very basic so I figured, whatever.  Well I get my first few papers back and there is little feedback other than very minor sentence rewording.  "C"s.  No notes.
I ask her about her office hours (after class) so I can talk about the issues on the papers.  She simply told me she finds me intimidating and that she would rather talk to me in class with other people around.  This was my first direct interaction with her, and I was standing beside a few friends.
So I ask her what I need to do to not get a "C".  She says that she doesn't feel comfortable talking to me because she feels threatened—again I have two or three female friends standing a few feet from me.  That's it.  She wouldn't talk to me because I was a big male.  (At the time I was boxing professionally but I really doubt she knew this. As a 6'3" 200-pound white male, she just would not talk to me based on how I looked.)
Next step was going to the department chair.  Basically he looked at a few of my papers and we went around in circles over the grades.  But that didn't matter.  The professor basically told him exactly what she told me.  And she told him that it was the first time I had ever talked to her.
He offered to grade the rest of my papers and give me grades for the classes.  I opted out of that because basically I would have started off with a 70% in each class (he could not change my grades, I was told).  So he offered pass/fail. I took that option.  Didn't go to class.  Turned in a bunch of papers and passed both classes.
My question is did I handle this correctly?  Should I have paid for those two classes?  What would be the norm in this situation from a student's perspective?

Is there a bit missing? As it's written, it seems that she told you the circumstances you could talk to her ... then the next thing, you're going over her head to the department chair. How did things go when you did talk to her in the class as she specified?

@EnergyNumbers: He asked to speak in office hours, was rebuffed. He asked her on the spot, and apparently was also rebuffed: So I ask her what I need to do to not get a "C". She says that she doesn't feel comfortable talking to me because she feels threatened—again I have two or three female friends standing a few feet from me. That's it.

Personally I think it would be reasonable to take this further. If a professor is not able to explain the grades they have given that is a fairly serious issue. Not sure what the correct route is though. I guess its a case of whether the grades you were given were fair (just a rubbish lecturer with some people issues) or not (a far more serious problem).

There is one thing I am unclear about - why did the OP need to ask the instructor her office hour? Should it be in the syllabus or somewhere? I am a male. If my student asks me my office hour and it is actually in the syllabus, I would feel uncomfortable and threatened if the student is a 6'3" 200lb male. I vote to leave it closed because the OP did not explain why he deserves a better than C mark.

@scaaahu The OP does not know why he got a C. That's the entire point of this question. I agree with StrongBad that the Q has a an anti-feminist tone to it, but I think after deleting the sentence about "extreme feminist", this is totally OK for re-opening.

We all know that appearances influence perception. The same way that an vastly overweight person is regarded lazy by some or a very beautiful woman might be considered superficial by others, the same way a six foot+ guy with a bodybuilder look might be considered a superficial jock unable to perform well in classes. But all these are forms of racism and that is why this is an interesting question and should be reopened.

@scaaahu: Many instructors make their office hours "by appointment."

The fact that the student socialized with staff members outside of class means that he would almost certainly have had a reputation inside the department, and this might well explain his professor seeming to be intimidated by him for no reason. The issue is almost certainly more complicated than the political position taken by the professor. All sorts of things get said amongst staff that might have made this particular professor wary of this particular student, justifiably or otherwise.

@StrongBad - I put in her being a feminist because it is what I heard before going to her class.  Maybe it has little to do with the question.  My adviser was the first person to warn me (my adviser was a female).  I am not anti-feminist nor do I care.  I thought it might give more context to both my story and the university's idea of her.

@Cugel - I should have explained better.  The professors I socialized with where generally in a completely different department (different world at this university).  I doubt I would have had a reputation with her.  I was just illustrating that in general I got along with my professors very good.

I have started a meta question for discussion.

Given that there is now a meta discussion for this post, I am going to clean up comments related to whether this post should be closed. Further discussion of this should be taken to the meta post.

@BenCrowell - As mentioned the department head heard both sides and he told me that hers did not differ from mine.  I am not sure that is he said she said...

@Alexandros actually, by definition, none of your examples are of racism...

Was it an option/ Did you ever try emailing her?  No way she can be threatened, your not there and if something threatening is said there is a record of it.  Why did you need 2 or 3 female friends around?  I have never heard of a student bringing friends with them to see a teacher.  I have been around and talked to 100's of teachers, and no other student has brought friends with them.

We (and the department) need to ignore any and all issues of appearance and ostensible political leanings.  the OP (no matter how he looks), if he pays tuition (which partially pays the professor's salary) has a right to some explanation of the grade.  If the professor made no notes on the paper about content (not just style or usage, which if not flagrantly bad, should affect the grade only a little), then the student has a right to hear from the professor what, in the content, she was looking for and was missing in the paper.  Alternatively, the professor should convey what was included in the paper that was "wrong" in some sense, either factually incorrect or irrelevant.
This professor should have office hours.  If they all conflict with other classes or academic commitments, the student has a right to request some time by appointment.  If the professor agrees, make the appointment.  You should not need to bring "witnesses".  The professor should just do her job.
If the professor continues to stonewall (using her fear of you as an excuse), try getting either your adviser or the department head to stand with you as you ask her again for time to substantively discuss what she is expecting in the work from each student in your class, and specifically where your work came short in her professional opinion.  Come prepared about the facts and content in the work that she's grading so poorly.
Perhaps your poor grade is appropriate and you can learn something.  Perhaps it was not appropriate and she can learn something.  Either way, you have a right to specific information for how your paper falls short, and what she expects of you for a better grade.  You might not like the information, but she has no right (since she is partially paid by the tuition you pay) to deny her services, as a professor and teacher, to you.

+1 I liked your answer, but all your points are still valid, even if the student is not paying tuition. Even for public universities with no tuition, the professor's salary is still paid by taxes, i.e., again indirectly by the student or its parents.

fully agree.  then maybe the student (let's say he's in-state, which will get his tuition subsidized by the state) can make a point and rope his state legislator to come with him when he asks this professor to simply to her job that she is paid to do.

Third paragraph is especially important: either document everything or have a witness for everything. In situations where things may escalate, you do not want it to become, in the end, a situation of your word against hers.

I voted this down. If the professor feels threatened they have a right to request a third party or witness. This is for the safety of both the student and the professor. The student may also request a third party. In some cases, a faculty member to support staff, and a student advisor to support the student may be present.

@awsoci, apparently you didn't read the original post and have a fondness for strawmen.

@robertbristow-johnson I did read the post and I do agree that the student was in the right/should have had the opportunity to discuss their grade. However, a professor can and should request a third party if they feel threatened or uneasy by a student. There are plenty of options and services available for both the student and the professor to have a neutral, mediated discussion. She was wrong in not offering him this option, but she isn't wrong in feeling threatened if that is how she perceived the situation.

@awsoci, it's still a strawman: "If the professor continues to stonewall (using her fear of you as an excuse), try getting either your adviser or the department head to stand with you as you ask her again for time to substantively discuss what she is expecting in the work from each student in your class..."

@robertbristow-johnson You are actually the one using a straw man by writing she is "using her fear as an excuse" to stonewall the student. You have no way of knowing it's an "excuse" and not an actual fear—perhaps even based on some past trauma. Who the heck knows?! Not me and certainly not you. The student has rights and this is a bad situation, but you're off base.

Generally speaking, humans - even professors with a bad reputation - behave the way they do in a way that is sensible in at least some context, even if that context is only in their own mind. Without knowing the situation, this behavior could be anywhere from an indefensible prejudice to a "reasonable person" response that one simply fails to understand or have sufficient information to interpret.
So, let's walk through a couple of reasonable interpretations.
Honest Interpretation
In the first interpretation, the professor responded honestly - she felt fear or discomfort in meeting with you privately. "Why" she felt that way cannot be determined from a simple reading of the narrative presented. She could have a disability (panic/anxiety disorder, post traumatic stress), she could have been threatened in the past, she could have believed you were affiliated with people who had threatened her or wished her ill, or she could have interpreted your tone or body language as being angry or...well, intimidating, and surely other reasons I cannot so easily imagine.
People have a right to feel safe, and to insist they not be put in a position where they are made to be in perceived or real danger. When one can un-self-consciously walk down a dark street alone without fear because of one's skin color, size, gender, or physical training, it is easy to be unaware of the fear that others who are not so fortunate must live in continually - often for all too real reasons. As I have two daughters, I can attest that this is a rather disgusting realization to have to come to - but it is an important one in understanding our place in the world and our relationships to others.
Legally and ethically, the University is almost universally required to provide reasonable accommodations to this end for both students and faculty - both you and your professor.
In all this, this does not require that you did anything wrong, nor that you should receive adverse treatment. If the professor was hard of hearing she could require all advisement to be by email, and this would be a reasonable accommodation. To request an appointment with a chaperon might feel silly when you don't see the need, but it can be a reasonable accommodation none the less.
Unfair Treatment Interpretation
Interpretation Two: you were singled out for unfair treatment. In this interpretation, you were treated explicitly unfairly and the professors attitude and actions culminated in adverse, unwarranted treatment.
As a student and "paying customer", you have the right to receive services you paid for, comparably valued substitute services, or a refund. The University makes certain guarantees of service, and they are obligated to make good on their contract.
The University, along with applicable law, usually provides for how complaints should be handled. Generally, the head/chair of the department is involved, and at times special departments (like an Ombudsman or Student Services) can also seek to find a reasonable resolution.
There is not, however, always a guarantee that a class will be offered by a professor who likes you, or whom you like, or who is even in any way helpful or beyond vaguely useful. It's hard to bar passive-aggressive behavior that's shielded by unethical but hard to disprove veils of personal boundaries or safety.
From your writing, it seems a member of administration offered a number of remedies. You likely had the right to complain to administration, be given an administrative (no cost/fault) withdrawal from the class with potential return of related fees, receive 3rd party grading to remove questions of improper marks, a pass/fail opportunity for credit, etc. While none of these are ideal resolutions, there are often no perfect fixes for problems like this.
Part of this is often what is really sought in remedy is not possible or not stated. If you felt insulted and discriminated against, you might have wanted the professor penalized or to apologize to you - which might have been objectively inappropriate or just impossible. You might have wanted your paper regraded as stated, but there may have been insufficient grounds for this is as it is simply an extraordinary request. If a 3rd party can look at your paper and say "it is not beyond reason that a professor, even if they would be very harsh, would have given this paper a C" then it's just a no go there, too.
So, administration has a duty to find a way to make the best of a bad situation. From the sounds of it, they offered pretty much all the recourse they had to offer to you. You could take it or leave it, but by staying in the class and taking the pass/fail offer and receiving credit (and choosing not to attend lecture - which was certainly understandable but not strictly demanded by the situation) the University upheld their end of the bargain - albeit in a not very satisfying way.
A Word on Feminism
One note of issue: the problem with how this is stated in the post is that feminism isn't actually related. If someone is known to have a militant or unkind attitude, behave in a way that discriminates against certain genders or types of people, or just has a reputation for being a terrible teacher or nasty person, say so.
The problem is when words are used as code words for something else entirely. If the administration was unwilling to give a refund it would be appropriate to say they were playing hard ball or being stingy or greedy - not to say they were known to be of a certain ethnicity renowned for thrift (to be time-insensitive, I am presently aware of three entirely different sets of people who have this notion assigned to them).
So, if a professor has a reputation of being nasty or terrible or discriminatory, please just say so outright. To say "feminist" or "extreme feminist" to imply being a man-hating shrew does a dis-service to yourself, your question, to feminists, to man-hating shrews, and to society as a whole.

That is a really good answer.  I have been treated different though out my life and I understand that women need to feel safe.  That is why I was so careful around her (and having two classes).  One of the classes was so basic that I could have received an "A" without ever showing up.  Now when you get grades back on junior high quality assignments and they are all poor while girls in your class all receive "A"s with markup... well at some point you take the C or you say something.  I decided to bring a few friends with me and talk as nice as possible...  obviously didn't work.

Your notes on feminism are good too.  I did not call her a feminist.  It is simply the "code language" used to describe her by others.  You are right.  She is not a feminist, she is just sexist.  Maybe her dad was a big guy and beat her up, maybe she had some other trauma, I don't know.  I know that it was so awkward I felt bad for her.  But knowing I never said anything to her, it was really me dealing with her problems and paying for it.

She's a misandrist!

People have a right to be safe, but when it comes to feeling safe that's something else. In many cases both are related, but when a professor is not able to discuss grading because she feels threatened (for no reason) -- there's something seriously wrong with this professor. A student -- who needs feedback to improve -- shouldn't be disadvantaged because the professor seems to have psychological or ideological issues. The question here would be how other students, e.g., women and smaller men, are treated.

+1 misandry is NOT feminism, as much as the misandrists and misogynists both insist that it is.

@DanielWessel I disagree. You say there's no reason but as others have said, there may very well be a reason in which she reads the situation as threatening. To suggest that there is no reason is to disregard her narrative of the situation.

This is a good answer. I was confused while reading the question about what the professor's feminism had to do with anything, but after reading the discussion I see that the OP was using it to mean "anti-male," which frankly never even occurred to me.

@awsoci Ah please, don't come with "narrative of the situation". Just because a person does not feel safe (and I don't deny that she feels this way) does not mean that this a) is founded in reality, and b) that this person has the right to discard her/his duties. Feelings do not evidence make -- and it's a confession of failure if this professor is going by her feelings. Even if scared the professional thing would be to have another person in the office. But this behavior is extremely unprofessional.

@DanielWessel never said she didn't have a right to her duties. She should have offered an alternative, such as a mediated discussion option which I offered below in my response to this question. If a person feels threatened they are not obliged to meet with a student one-on-one but are obliged to meet them in other settings, such as in a mediated setting or in public with impartial mediators, such as someone else from the faculty or a student adviser to support the student's interests. This is what she should have offered.

@awsoci What exactly does "never said she didn't have a right to her duties" mean? You don't have a right to duties, these are your duties. I totally agree with the rest of your comment, and it's something I have suggested as well. But confusing one's emotions with evidence of a threat ... that has no place in a professional setting. And what was the OPs "threat"? Being male and having a strong body? Pitiful how the prof reacted (even a public setting didn't work) -- her personal insecurities shouldn't invade a professional setting.

@DanielWessel It's a professors duty to discuss grades with a student, but it is NOT their duty to do so in a setting that is perceived as threatening. All your comment suggests is that we should 'ignore our feelings' if something or someone makes us uneasy. She perceived him as a threat, because his body is coded as threatening regardless of whether he intended this or not. You are dismissing her emotions as something as trivial which they are not. If I felt uncomfortable around a student, I would deny a private sitting and instead offer a mediated discussion with other witnesses involved.

@DanielWessel your comment is also suggestive of how generally, women who report threats or perceive behaviour as hostile and threatening are dismissed or ignored, or rendered 'hysterical' or lack control of their emotions. And yet at the same time, it's our fault if we do not report threats or 'take a stand for ourselves.'

@awsoci I see no reason to excuse bad behavior with sex/gender, and expect more from profs, male or female. OP did not threaten her and she didn't even want to discuss with other students nearby. Looks like personal problem. You seem to think that all feelings of threat are equally valid and that errors in judgment never happen. There are differences and humans can err, which harms innocent and damages academia. Putting this case in one category with people who actually receive threats lacks differentiation and isn't helpful -- not for her and not for her students.

"the problem with how this is stated in the post is that feminism isn't actually related" - Disagreed, third wave feminism has produced a sizeable proportion of feminists who are actively sexist. The modern forms of feminism are not merely a benign "women are denied rights", it comes with all kinds of ideological constructs beyond that.

I once had a comparative politics professor that was a short, older Latina. She included attendance and tardiness in the course grade. I recall once a rather big fellow once tried to get her to not mark him tardy by physically intimidating her.
She didn't back down and she told him to have a seat - and he did.
However, I could see someone else having a very different response, and I was watching carefully to intervene if he became belligerent.
What's going on in her mind may or may not reflect an objective view of reality, but being a boxer, it strikes me that your gauge of your aggressiveness when you confronted her about your grade could be off.
I'd like to present you with a specific principle that might help in future situations:

Assume Positive Intent

No one shows up at work telling themselves they're going to be evil today. (Except maybe Dr. Evil.)
In this case, you might have been careful to cooperate with her, and credit her with innocent (if misguided) fearfulness, which would have allowed you to further test your hypothesis, and you would have either won her over (possible, but unlikely, given most professors' fondness for acknowledging a misgrade) or had more evidence for the department chair.
Nevertheless, you ask:

Did I handle this correctly?"

You did the best you knew how, and a "Pass" beats a C (for an A student) any day.

It is very hard to deal with people treating you different when you don't fall into the obvious categories of discrimination.  Let me tell you that I get looks from people and my wife notices it.  She laughs actually.  What is funny is if I have my two little ones with me these same people will act totally different.  I try not to think about it and really don't care.  However I maybe let her get in my head (having to see her 5-6 times a week) and knowing her reactions to me.

My opinion is that you handled this difficult situation appropriately, assuming what you have described is accurate and forthcoming.  The only suggestion I could make is this:  When she said that "she wouldn't talk to you because you were a big male", you might have suggested that she send you an email with the explanation.  She may or may not have done it, but at least you'd be giving her a path of communication that didn't involve you being present with her.
In the end, the "pass" result was probably as good as you could expect.

What I didn't mention because it is more opinion was her look of disgust that I was even talking with her.  My friends were in such shock that they were laughing.  So I really didn't feel like giving her an out.  I understood that this isn't a "normal prejudice" so I felt anything that helped was good enough at the time.  I was just fortunate that I had witnesses around and that she was cocky enough to basically tell the head of the department the truth.

This hasn't been said yet so I'd like to draw your attention to a couple of situations with students that I've experienced. But first....
Coded Body Language/Image
First, you mentioned that you are a white, 200+ pound male training to be a boxer. Western culture has coded muscular bodies in two ways, the first, as 'healthy' (a completely different discussion) and the second, as 'powerful' 'aggressive' and 'hostile'. So while you may not have meant to appear threatening, she may have read your body language and attitude as threatening just by the way you look. Is this discrimination? Yes BUT bear with me.
After all, if we constantly receive messages through various mediums that men with muscular bodies are meant to be aggressive and violent (sports, action movies, body building etc) than it is not all that surprising that she reads you as threatening even if this was not your intention. There are also socio-cultural and historical contexts here at play. As a white male you do have access to levels of privilege (depending on other factors, such as class, ability etc) and combining this with a hard body, it is very well that she may have perceived you as a threat despite what your intentions may have been.
As a female, she has also been taught that men are threatening. Through various forms of mediums, women are constantly told that men are threatening, that they can't behave themselves, that women risk provoking men, women are victims of men and often deserve it and so on. So again, the socio-historical-context here is that she has been taught to perceive men as a threat.
This isn't to excuse her behaviour, it's just a more nuanced explanation. Combining the historical context of what women are told, and the coded messages around a hard, male muscular body you may have come across as threatening.
You also mentioned that her face had a look of 'disgust' but just as YOU felt you weren't in a body position of hostility/aggression, perhaps her look was not disgust but actually fear. How you receive a message is not necessarily how people give them. To be honest, as a young female with a severe knee injury, if I perceived you as highly threatening, I might also be wary of meeting with you privately...
Options She Should Have Offered
If she felt threatened, a more appropriate response from her would have been to arrange a meeting in which a neutral third (and perhaps fourth party) could be involved to mediate the discussion. She does have the right to turn you away from a private one-on-one discussion if she genuinely feels threatened. However, offering an option in which perhaps a faculty member, and a student rep like an adviser to sit in on the discussion would have been a more tactful way of handling the situation, giving you a fair chance to discuss where you went wrong (if you did go wrong).
This should have been offered for you, especially as this was a first time request for office hours. It does not sound as though you had repeatedly harassed her in any way. This is what I would have offered. I'm aware that this may come across as insulting or offensive, but this would not be my intention. It would be to protect myself and offer you a fair chance for discussion.
I know there's that hashtag #notallmen; however, I would say that enough men engage in violence and threatening behaviour to warrant some caution around those we do not know. Which is very unfortunate, I disagree living in a world where I have to constantly be cautious as the result of my gender, but this is where we are at.
My Experience as a Female Lecturer
I have been threatened and been in hostile situations with students on a few occasions. Surprisingly though, I have never had a situation with a male student, only female. However, a number of my colleagues have been in situations where their male students have harassed them, threatened them, have been physically violent with them and so on. So it is unfortunately, not an uncommon experience.
My worst experience was last year, where a student was taking my class but couldn't handle the controversial content of the material, or the setting of the classroom. They wanted me to change my entire curriculum and change how I was lecturing completely (including changing rooms, changing light settings, not using slides and so on). During and after class they would berate me about how I was not being accommodating despite trying to work with them and their disability case worker. On numerous occasions it was suggested that if they couldn't handle the content they should drop the class, but they refused. It got to the point that all interactions with this student had to be mediated with another member from my department, a member from safer communities unit and their disability caseworker. That's 5 people including myself for ONE student.
To be fair, this student was really struggling mentally, and trying to get into a psychiatric ward for fear for themselves but the medical system was screwing them around. So while I was being harassed and threatened, I also know that this was not so much the student hating me, but rather, venting all of their frustrations and current mental illness onto me. I became a target.
Did You Handle This Correctly?
I think you did the best you could considering the circumstances. I'm surprised a third party option was not offered for you and as others have suggested, perhaps a pass is better than a C. Maybe in future if a professor indicates they feel threatened, you could offer some alternatives to help them feel secure. While they may be in positions of authority, this does not mean they are flawless, or do not have their own concerns and fears.

In addition to third party grading, if she did not feel comfortable meeting him in private why not do so in public? Most colleges have numerous public areas where a professor and a student could meet with dozens of people within shouting distance.

@PatriciaShanahan Agreed. Though I think a response could be (as others have said in responding to this question) "I shouldn't have to discuss my grade/academic standing in front of other people" which a public space might facilitate...hence why I mentioned a more formal approach that involves mediators.

Whether this female teacher actually had a bad experience with an intimidating student or it was just all in her head, is an irrelevant point. If your interactions with her were just as you stated (and no subtle context was left out, like you standing with your "guns" across your chest, or worse), then you were blatantly discriminated against. The reason that I say her past experience is irrelevant is because had she had a bad experience with a school athlete or body builder, she is still basing her opinion of you on that experience, which is prejudicial, also known as discrimination.
I think that if a professor told me they would rather talk in class, my response would be that you do not discuss other peoples academic status in front of others, so, either 1, you allow me to bring a friend in to the meeting whom I feel comfortable with, or 2 you have another professor or a student aid present, or 3 you call campus security and have them present at the meeting ...
And, actually, this is the best possible scenario, especially if she already has preconceived notions, because it would protect you from false accusations, and other lies, like when she claimed you never approached her before. I dont know how or why she was able to get away with this lie, when you stated you were with friends at the time you approached her about your grade.

I disagree with your approach in paragraph 2.  That sounds like he would be bullying her into discussing things on his own terms.  A better approach would be saying something like: "I'd rather not discuss my grades in front of other students.  Could we discuss it another professor present?"  The main thing is tone.  The OP brought along a gang to meet the professor so he was already trying to dominate the situation.  In another comment he mentioned that his friends laughed at the professor during the meeting.  As a man, I would have been uncomfortable too.

She probably didn't get away with the lie, just not called on it yet. A few similar incidents and her reputation will be known to the dean.

I disagree with this comment. I have had a number of situations in which I've had to get a third party involved to speak with a student due to continuous harassment or feelings of threat/hostility. While we did not speak in class, we did effectively, speak in front of others for my own safety in a more private setting.

Most universities have a academic coordinator, or something like that, who you can address with issues like these.
If that fails, I've heard of people who have successfully sued the professor, because if the do something unfair and produce a damage in the finances of people, they can get compensation. That is what laws are for.

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


text:
Can reviewing papers help increase your credibility as a researcher?
I was wondering if reviewing papers for established journals was a way to increase ones credibility as a researcher?
My question is related to the fact that the journal editors, that are (frequently) known scientists in your domain, will read the review you made.
I was wondering if we can therefore assume that they will, to some degree, evaluate your reviewing work, and therefore yourself as a scientist, based on your review? Lets imagine I know the editor, and I might want to have a position in his/her lab, then my reviewing work might weight in my evaluation?

A reasonable speculation, but I think ... no, this won't have significant impact. It's a good thing to do, nevertheless.

Just a comment, but I have a colleague who is probably as famous for his referee work as for his published work. So yes, at least in some cases, it can happen.

@Olivier, I'm curious, how does your colleague know that he's famous for his referee work? Is it not anonymous?

@gammapoint I'm not sure he knows (I think he might because he once was invited to a prestigious conference unrelated to his direct work but on the topic of a manuscript he had recently reviewed), but I do, and that's because several times I was asked if I knew X, said yes, and then heard a comment like "what would we have done with manuscript Y without him?" or "before his review, manuscript Z was really great but completely sketchy on the details and he really set things straight."

Just to add to the other answers with some other points to think about in terms of profile:

Reviewers for conferences are often made explicit as Programme Committee members. People who do good work in the PC eventually become Senior Programme Committee members, then Track Chairs, then Programme Chairs, then General Chairs, etc. Even PC membership for good conferences helps your academic profile, where higher-up positions help even more.
Journals work a little differently since reviews are solicited directly and are typically not noted anywhere public (with the exception of some journals employing a transparent peer-review model). But in my case, I was invited to the Editorial Board of a new journal in my area on the basis of my reviewing work for them. If you do good reviews, editors will notice. (Of course, this might not always result in an EB membership, but ...)
Conferences and journals (at least in CS) sometimes award "Best Reviewer" awards. I've picked up a couple of these and they look good in CVs.

Of course, reviewing in a community is an excellent way of keeping your finger on the pulse of not only what are the hot topics, but how papers in the area are evaluated (this is esp. true for serving in committees of conferences where seeing how the sausages are made is an enlightening experience).
(And on a more philosophical note: I always saw reviewing a bit like seeding in Bittorrent. Submitting lots of papers for review but never doing reviews is plain greedy. Complaining about the quality of the reviews you get and then doing crappy reviews is hypocritical. ... not so related to the question, but it's good to vent now and again.)

Yes, it helps in more than one way.  Community service is a relevant part on an academic CV.  Although reviewers for individual papers are normally secret, it does not need to be secret that you have reviewed articles for journal X.  You can write that you have done so on your CV, and if needed (but I don't think it should be), a journal editor can confirm.
It works the other way around too: being asked to review a paper is an independent confirmation of your credibility as a researcher.  The first times it happened to me, it was really an ego boost.  Wow, someone else than my supervisor thinks I know something about something!  Great!

Possibly, although many peer-reviewed journals use a double-blind review system, so identities of reviewers can get buried -- and your "reputation" as such won't get enhanced.
However, I think reviewing papers -- and books, and other items of scholarship -- is a really valuable activity for a number of reasons. First, it gives you exposure to what active scholarship looks like and to other people's research and writing styles. Second, it's a way of contributing to the community of researchers in your field, a way of giving back to the system we all want to work well. Third, if you're in a tenure-track position this is an example of service to the profession that most TT profs are expected to contribute.

Blind or double blind, certainly the editors now who referees which paper...

I was once asked to referee a paper for a well-known journal and accepted because I was flattered that someone took a chance on me. I must have done a pretty good job because I ended up doing more than a dozen for this particular editor. I don't think my service, which I did willingly and took seriously, increased my reputation as a researcher. I do think it enhanced my reputation as far as knowledge of the field and professional judgement in it. It was a good feeling to have someone value my opinion, and it felt good to give something back to the discipline.

I suspect that it indeed has an impact. Although reviewers are often anonymous, they are not for the editor and the editorial boards. There are important, influential and well connected people on editorial boards and if you provide useful reviews they will notice you. First, this news may spread by gossip and this will for sure be helpful. Second, people on editorial boards are often the same people that will be asked for reports and evaluation (e.g. in Germany, one collects expert opinions to fill positions) and if they know you through your referee reports this may be of great help.
I have no data how large of an effect these two points really make but there is some anecdotal evidence: I remember that I once heard a conference chair introducing the next speaker by saying that he always asks her with the toughest papers he gets submitted as an editor. At least to me that made some impression…

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


text:
Advantages of second marking
In the UK a portion, and in some cases all, work is "second marked" where an independent marker also marks the work. In cases where the 1st and 2nd marker disagree, a 3rd marker may be used. Finally, the entire work of each student over the course of his/her studies is evaluated by an exam board with (sometimes) 2 additional independent markers. These exam board markers tend to only consider cases that are on the border of different degree classifications.
From my understanding of statistics, having all of these different markers will regress marks towards the mean. As I am currently faced with the daunting task of 2nd marking a large stack of off topic papers, I am curious what are the advantages of second marking?

What understanding of statistics suggests it will regress to the mean of the population? See literature on reliability and classical test theory. If you consider the outcome scoring of the test to be a function of the true score plus random error, having multiple raters will provide an estimate of the true score, with more graders providing a more reliable estimate.

To keep academics off the streets.

@DanielE.Shub You already know you're second marking the papers. What if you did not know that and think you're the first marker?

@AndyW presumably because the noise at the high and low ends is not zero mean. If markers will not/cannot give a mark higher than an A, A work will sometimes, because of noise be marked as A-, but never marked as A+ (since the A+ mark doesn't exist). Similarly, F work will sometimes be marked as D- but never as F- (again assuming F is the lowest mark). Meaning that with enough markers no one will get an A or an F, which seems like regression towards the mean to me.

@scaaahu apart from marking fatigue, I don't think it matters since you often you split the stack in half with someone else and then swap after you have both "1st marked".

@DanielE.Shub, that is reasonable, although presumes a negative correlation between the rating and the true score (which would violate the assumptions of classical test theory). It is not the same as regression to the mean, and like I said the literature on classical test theory would be of interest.

Double marking has many roles, but mostly it is to ensure accuracy and fairness. The main way of achieving this, and avoiding the statistical anomalies alluded to in the comments is to produce an effective marking scheme, so that academics with sufficient background can grade the exam and produce virtually the same grades. Easier said than done.
More details can be found on the Internet, for example, on Swansea University's website.

Like the other answers, I don't think it is an issue of regression to the mean (in the sense that the mean is the mean of all the students in the module). It is an issue of finding the true quality of the student's work.
In my current university we do sampling in that one marker will check maybe 1/3 of another marker's work. The point here is clearly not to catch every mistake a marker might make but rather to check for signs of abuse of power. Because everyone marking knows that some of their marks will be checked by another is supposed to keep the original marker from giving inappropriately high or low grades to any students, since the marker does not know which of the marks will be checked (admins actually do the selection of the sample).
I've worked at other universities where all work is double marked and in this case my experience is similar to Peter Jansson's.
Again, as I see it, the purpose of double marking (whether full or sampling) is to simply make sure that the student is getting marked fairly. Unfair marks can happen with intent (bad marker) or on accident (marker interpreting an ambiguous question differently from the student).

I will provide some little experience I have had. I am sure details will differ depending on how the system of two graders are set up.
In the system I experienced it is a custom to have the course responsible plus someone external (in my case even from a different country) do the grading. The grading was completed by having a discussion between the two graders about possible deviations. In the system grades are given as a number between one and six in steps of 0.1, so very detailed.
My experience was actually quite remarkable; it concerned a masters/PhD level course. We were most often within 0.2 of each other except in one case (answer) where one had given a 1 and the other a 6. In that case it turned out the question was ambiguous and could be interpreted in different ways. The grades were basically calculated as the average of both but only after we had discussed the problems/deviations. This is, for example, how we discovered the ambiguous question formulation.
From this, albeit miniscule, experience, I felt that the benefit of having two persons grading is that ambiguities in terms of questions and answers can be sorted out. It is also possible to discuss the apropriateness of the interpretations of answers given by students. The method also provides what I can call "legal certainty" since the grades will be based on two persons view rather than one. Of course the degree to which it is certian depends on the transparency of the process and to what extent the two gradings become official. The point in "my" case is that both graders have to agree so it is not signed by just one person.
As a grader I also appreciated the possibility to discuss the grading and the corrections jointly made were fair and made the process worth while. I would personally like ot see the system used more, but fear it will be difficult from a financial point of view in many universities (-y systems).


text:
How to word request to undertake a project as a research intern rather than as a thesis, without offending potential supervisor?
Competitive STEM program and for our final thesis  many of the potential advisors have multiple applicants per project.
After being rejected for one project (initially seemed to be the top choice but someone with two strong conference papers applied), I decided to reach out to multiple advisors - figured it’s best to protect my downside.
I got my first choice but prior to this I had agreed to do a literature review for another project that I roughly drew up with a  professor. I really want to work on this project but not as my msc thesis as there’s more uncertainty (at least from where I stand) as to whether or not it will result in a paper and requires more setup time (e.g. the literature and defining the problem). I would like to ask to do this 2nd project as a research intern after I graduate as it’s an interesting problem and the professor seems great but I don’t want to somehow offend him when I state that I have decided to do a different project for my thesis. I’ve noticed quite a few senior academics can be easily offended - not saying he is but I’d like to minimize this possibility.
I am autistic and sometimes accidentally come across as rude. How should I phrase my email?

I am confused by your post. Can you clarify?


text:
Is it possible to leave the US yet stay connected to US Academia (collaborations, journals, conferences, etc.)?
I'm an international student finishing a PhD in Business in the US. I have attended the major conferences in my field regularly and would love to continue doing so. My top choice outside of the US is a business school in Mexico and I believe it would allow me to continue collaborating with US colleagues and regularly attending conferences. What do you think, does anyone have or know anyone with a similar experience?
I know of PhD graduates who moved back to China and then struggled to remain connected. However, China is much further away from the US than Mexico - Latin America in general. Nevertheless, if it was much easier it would be more common... and at least in my field, I have no reference of it. Most international academics that come to the conferences are Europeans, not from Latin America, but in most cases it seems like it can be traced out to someone that went back.

There are many top quality researchers who maintain active relation with the US academia after leaving the US - via collaborative work, regular visits, participating in conferences, and publishing in top research journals (which are mostly US, UK and Europe-based.) So I'd say it is more of a rule than an exception... but one needs to do a sufficiently high quality research, which is not the case for many PhD graduates (whether they come from outside of the US or not doesn't matter.) So the problem is not so much being outside of the US, as being appreciated in the one's field.

It is of course also a question of having the resources to continue attending international conferences. Flight + hotel + conference registration these days adds up pretty quickly to $3000 or more.

@WolfgangBangerth True. Though, in some cases collaborating with the US is actually a way of getting one's trips paid and even additional salary (typically for people from less economically developed countries, but with high scientific level - notably former Soviet Bloc.) As far as more "western world" is concerned - they may be spending a whole conference/summer season in the US, or taking a sabbatical year.

Thank you both, that's very instructive. So it is indeed possible, a rule more than an exception for academics seeking to do high quality research, but being able to seek that does require resources / institutional support; which again is easier to justify if indeed doing HQ research and collaborating with the academic community in the US.


text:
Differences in Contributions Between Case Study Papers and Full Papers in Human-computer Interaction
I am currently trying to understand the nuances of different types of publications within the Human-computer Interaction (HCI) field. Specifically, I am interested in the differences between case study papers and full research papers in terms of their contributions to the field.
What are the key differences in the nature and scale of contributions made by a case study paper compared to a full research paper in HCI?

Do you have any reason to think that HCI is special in this regard? You've mentioned the field, but haven't said anything about why, other than you are interested in it.