text:
How should one address negative circumstances with past advisor in a Statement of Purpose?
I am referring to a situation described in a previous question of mine:
How to deal with an abusive advisor?
To summarize for those who don't want to read the lengthy story: I had a difficult relationship with my previous Master's advisor, who was psychologically abusive towards me. I was also dealing with (unrelated) clinical depression at the time, which affected my productivity.
Eventually I decided to switch to a different advisor in an unrelated field. I am happy with my new advisor, and am being more productive, and the split from the previous advisor was on decent terms (that is, he still had a bad impression of me as a student, but he supported the decision).
Due to the previous issues and the switch of field, my degree took twice the "standard" time to finish (4 years instead of 2, although at my university/in my country even the top students often don't finish in 2 years).
In addition, my previous advisor's name will appear on my graduate transcript (along with the period of time during which he was my advisor).
In my PhD application (specifically, the "Statement of Purpose") I will probably have no choice but to address this issue. Since there is no option for anonymity, the story is not just about me, it is an "accusation" against him, which means the committee might want to hear his side of the story, in which case it will of course not go in my favour. Also, while he is not very famous, he is friendly and popular with colleagues, so if someone knows him personally they might simply not believe me.
What should I do? Should I actually mention it? For those of you who are a part of admission committees, would something like that be a red flag? Would you investigate further, or take it as a reasonable explanation given positive letters of recommendation from other professors (and current advisor)?
Also, is past depression which caused lack of productivity considered as a red flag?

Congratulations on the switch, I'm so glad to hear your update.
There will be an ongoing need to heal from the trauma you underwent.  The SOP will be separate from that.
If you are concerned that an admissions committee might raise a red flag for the extra time you spent in your program, you may address that briefly in a cover letter.  For example, "You might notice that I spent longer than customary on my degree.  That was due to some health issues exacerbated by an uncomfortable advisor fit."  That's enough.
You might also alert your new advisor to your concern, so that s/he may choose to consider this when writing letter of recommendation.

Thanks! Regarding the second paragraph, I've noticed that many universities don't request a cover letter, and some don't appreciate documents other than what is requested.

How do you know they don't appreciate any extra documents?  Do they say something explicit?

I couldn't actually find the website which stated it explicitly, but many universities have specific requests regarding uploading documents ("upload your SOP here, upload your transcript here" etc.), so there is no room for additional files. Also, when there are hundreds of applications, will the committee actually bother reading my cover letter?

If you're applying to a school that tightly controls what you can upload, it would nevertheless by appropriate to add a cover page/letter to one of the  docs you upload, probably the transcript if that's where the effects of the poor fit show up most clearly

You could put a page title on this brief explanation, called, for example, "Explanation of Special Circumstances."

I would probably take one of two approaches.
To begin with, in my experience it's very hard for a student to complain about about a faculty member and not sound like they're making excuses, which a lot of faculty have an instinctive allergy to.  The legitimacy of your complaint has almost no bearing on this, unless the people reading it are familiar with the problems from another source.  There's just a perhaps understandable tendency to give other faculty the benefit of the doubt, I think.  I would instead either:

Don't mention the other advisor in your SOP at all, or
Mention the other advisor only in the context of your switch to a different field and your health issues

In general, I would suggest simply saying that you struggled with, and then overcame, health issues during your MA work.  Don't hide this part; you're far from the only graduate student to struggle with this, and the overcoming of it is an important positive.  This way you explain what they'll clearly see, that it took you 4 years instead of 2, while casting it in light of something you surmounted.
If you do choose to mention the other advisor, I suggest leaving out the mention of personality conflicts.  The reality is that we often have to overcome personality conflicts in life and work, and the committee likely has no way to empirically judge the truthfulness of your side of the story.  If they press you for more information about it, you can mention that your health issues exacerbated some personality conflicts, and you mutually agreed on switching advisors.
I think this feels like a safer approach than offering up an excuse unsolicited.  Especially when coupled with successful graduate work post-switch and a presumably positive LOR from your new advisor.
Regardless, glad you were able to improve your situation and be successful!

I went through something similar.  Like the other answers you've received so far imply, the key is avoid saying anything negative.  I would go further than the last answers and suggest that you don't even mention the health problems.  Instead just treat it as a previous research experience and then you moved on to do the next thing.  Here's how I did it:
During my first year as an M.A. student in Dr. XXXX’s laboratory, I tested the influence of AAA on BBB. One goal of this research was to test whether CCC. As part of that work we quantified predictions of competing hypotheses by instantiating them in a computational model. We found that DDD.
During this time I developed managerial and technical research skills. I learned how to write IRB proposals and prepare study protocol. I was responsible for managing a team of undergraduates and blah blah blah.
Subsequently, I joined Dr. YYYY’s laboratory and carried out my master’s thesis under his supervision. I continued pursuing my interest in QQQ, this time in the VVV domain, by examining ZZZ. ....
I didn't bring up the fact that Dr. XXXX was awful, and I didn't address the fact that my master's took longer than outlined by the program.  I just discussed the things that the reader cares about, which are:

Can this person write well?
What research skills do they have?

(Not in this paragraph, but they also want to know:

Why does this person want to come here?
Does this person want to work with me? Do they mention my name?)

In other words, minimize the drama.  Do not let it become a story with accusations and his side/your side.  Avoid all of that.  You worked in a lab; then you discovered your research interests were better aligned with a different lab and so you pursued that.  This is your story.  It’s about the science/scholarship and not about anything personal or any difficulties you had with Prof. Jerkface McGee.
I don’t mean to sound insensitive, I get that the drama you went through was a big deal.  It feels gigantic, and you feel like you’re wearing a Scarlett letter.  I assure you, that is hardly the case.  This happens more often than you may think, and plenty of very successful people have dealt with this same issue.  The key is to move on.  Your career goals are more important than some unsupportive advisor you worked with along the way.  I encourage you to completely take on this new narrative about that experience.  Not everyone, not even most people, will have the straightforward A to B to C path that you seem to have imagined or expected of yourself.   It takes time to know what specialization you want to pursue for your career and, for you, changing labs was part of figuring that out.
If it does come up during interviews you should discuss it to the extent that the research wasn’t a good fit for you and so you switched labs. Yes professors might sense that there is more to the story, but IMHO they will respect you more for not going there, for focusing on the work, and for doing what you had to do so that you could pursue the line of work that makes you happy.
Finally, I will mention that if you REALLY think there is something more that needs to be addressed, I highly recommend that you are not the one to address it.  You focus on being a rockstar, staying positive, loving your work, and being excited about the future.  What you can do is have a letter writer address it for you.  Hopefully someone who is writing you a letter of recommendation is someone you trust enough to talk to about this.  Discuss it with them.
I hope you will find this answer helpful.  While I do not serve on any admissions committees, I am a 2nd year Ph.D. student at a top ranked R1 institution.  I applied to 10 schools and received 5 interviews and 5 offers.  I did not mention any difficulties I had with Prof. Jerkface McGee (nor did it ever come up).
Best of luck!

Great answer.  There's nothing like advice from someone who's been in a similar boat.

I like Subsequently, I joined  ... so much that I wish I could give this answer +10.

Thank you! And just to clarify, the reason I felt I should address it is only because I was afraid the long study period would be a red flag, or that the committee would wonder why I didn't ask for a letter of recommendation from this person I've worked with for 3 years.

@Pandora If you have 3 great letters of rec, then it is very unlikely that anyone would notice.


text:
I am a bit confused about my research design. If anyone would be willing to give some feedback, I would be very appreciative
I'm currently writing my Bachelors thesis in communicational studies, but I am confused about the aspect of research design. I believe my paper has a bit of both qualitative and quantitative characteristics, and I'd love some feedback.
To outline my plan:

I am looking for two types of framing in tweets: a) framing of the problem, and b) framing of the action to solve the problem. While the specific content I am looking for is theory-based (theoretical framework says that this kind of framing will occur), the specific framing categories that emerge are not. In that regard, I am letting the categories and the overall answers to my research question emerge from the data. Can I confidently say that this is inductive research?

Next up, after having determined the framing categories present, I will put them in a table to find out the frequencies of each kind of framing. Now, while I think the first part of this was qualitative, as it was essentially a content analysis (?), looking at frequencies hints me towards a quantitative approach. And at the end of my paper, I am conducting a chi-square analysis of whether the variables of "framing of problem" and "framing of action" is related or independent. This is also very quantitative, correct?
So to recap: I seem to be doing a content analysis (looking into tweets for framing categories), but then I'm looking at the frequency and doing a chi-square analysis of the two variables. Would I be calling this a quantitative study then, or is it rather a mixed study?

Oh, and if I may ask a follow-up question - last one, I promise - is this type of approach compatible with social constructivism? - Which is the philosophy of science that I personally "believe in" and fits the whole topic of framing.
It got a bit long, sorry about that!
I appreciate any help that I may get. Thank you!

You should speak with your supervisor. This forum is for asking about general academia related questions, not discipline specific research question.

Ah, I see. Sorry about that. It's not possible to speak with my supervisor. She's not arranging anymore supervision hours, and I didn't initially expect to run into this problem, as I've changed my research design slightly since then. Anyway, I'll try to figure out something.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Difficult student would dispute every grade in the course and now wants letter of recommendation
I had a student in one of my courses that for every graded assignment would come to me and challenge the grade given, even though I provided a rubric to show exactly why the points where taken off.
For one of the last assignments, which was a class presentation, this student went off into another topic and for half of the presentation time essentially filled the time with an interesting topic, that unfortunately, although interesting, was not what the assignment for the presentation required. There were other problems with the presentation, which I outlined in the rubric, but twice the student came to me to challenge the grade, because they "worked so hard on the presentation," and that they "did cover what was required" and did not deserve a B (which in retrospect, should have been a C), I explained why again the student got the grade they deserved...and after a while the student saying that they did not agree, left.
But then on the following class, the student came to talk to me about their grade again and was even somewhat aggressive towards me, and very confrontational raising their tone of voice and won't give up on the point that s/he deserved an A. I said that I would be happy to grade the presentation again, but that I was often very lenient and that the grade could either improve/or decrease if I were to grade it again. The student then gave up, and said that s/he would focus then on the final paper and asked whether I give full points (100) in the final paper, to which I replied, "yes, if you exceed my expectations." (haven't graded this assignment yet).
Well, a week went by and then this student asks me for a letter of recommendation! Granted s/he currently have a A- in my course, but after the way the student spoke to me, with complete lack of respect, I was very surprised that s/he would ask for a letter.
...and at first the student did not want to waive their rights to the letter, claiming that we had to sign the page "together" whenever they would pick up the letter. I explained that the student could actually fill out the top part, if s/he wanted to waive the rights, and I would fill out the bottom part, include the form with the letter in a sealed envelope. But that if s/he did not want to waive the rights, that would be fine as well, and I would just sign the bottom part...then the student decided it would be best to waive their rights...
I am now in the process of writing the letter and was wondering if anyone was ever put in the same situation, and what did you do? This is a good student, however, clearly lacks respect for their professors. Any advice/guidance/help? How/Should I mentioned this in the letter?

It sounds like you've agreed to write a letter so I think you are committed unless the student releases you from your commitment.  (Personally, I'd have said no in the first place and explained if asked that, based on their behavior, I could not honestly give a favorable recommendation.  But that ship has sailed.)
But what you haven't agreed to yet, I hope, is a favorable letter.  What I would do in your situation is contact the student to explain that on reflection, you've become concerned that the only honest letter you can write will not be helpful.  You don't feel you can honestly ignore that the student is a difficult, argumentative, confrontational and disrespectful individual.  To be an honest appraisal, that has to go in there.  You cannot write an honest letter that only recites the good stuff.
At that point, you can ask, do they still want the letter?  I'm sure they'll be difficult and disrespectful once again but that's nothing new and if you stand your ground, I think they'll decide to go elsewhere.  Problem solved.  (And maybe they'll learn something from the experience, though, from what you describe, probably not.)

Also take into consideration timing, if you give the 'bad news' 2 days from a deadline it would be impractical for the student to find a replacement letter writer.

@FrankFYC  I agree, it would be helpful to know how much time has elapsed since the request and how much time remains before the deadline.  The OP reports just starting the letter and, assuming they haven't been procrastinating, it seems likely not much time has passed and the deadline may still be months away.

You can be sure that the student will dispute over your letter as s/he disputed over any grade.

I agree with the passed opportunity to refuse. But in such a situation, the student excepts a positive letter of recommendation, by definition ... so I don't believe that writing a negative description is any better - or different - than refusing to write it. Communicating to the student that, though you will write the letter as you agreed, someone else would write a more honestly positive description, would be the only good way I see.

@Neinstein  What they expect and what was promised are two different things.  A letter was promised.  There was no promise it would be strong.  Implicit in all promises of LORs is that you will write an honest letter.  I would not write a dishonest letter just because I thought a student expected it and neither should the OP.

@Pere  Unless I'm mistaken, the OP did not agree that the student would see the final letter.  So they don't have a chance to dispute the letter, only the take-it-or-leave it offer of a letter that tells both the good and the bad.  But, yes, as I said in my answer, I expect they will continue to be difficult when confronted with the choice.

@NicoleHamilton I agree on it shouldn't be dishonest; but speaking with the student face-to-face, instead giving him an unusable letter of "recommendation" still is a more honest way IMO. At the very least, you save both of your time with not having to write the letter. And if he won't get to see the letter - he at least deserves to know you didn't recoommend him that much. This letter may be important for his carrier.

@Neinstein So what part of my advice to the OP, suggesting he inform the student that, on reflection, an honest letter will include both the good and the bad and asking if he still wants the letter are you objecting to?

@NicoleHamilton Ugh, excuse me. I missed that part somehow, and read  your answer as talking with the student after writing the letter. So, my bad. My excuse is not being a native speaker.

" I'm sure they'll be difficult and disrespectful once again" nowhere in the OP's question was it mentioned that the student was disrespectful.

@Empischon Look for "but after the way the student spoke to me, with complete lack of respect, I was very surprised that s/he would ask for a letter" in the OP's question.

I stand corrected.

Is there perhaps a cultural element to this situation?
I was once in the reverse situation: I was studying mathematics at an Australian university, but my professor was Russian. He marked all students very harshly, and we all lost a lot of marks for not spelling out things that any other lecturer would have accepted as obvious. But if we took our assignments back to him and argued about the marking, and showed that we did understand what we were doing, he'd give the marks back again. We're talking a lot of marks here; it's been a long time and I don't remember exact numbers, but I'd estimate about 30% of my final grade came from arguing with him after he'd scored assignments, and it would've been similar for other students.
Effectively it turned written assignments into an oral examination, which is very unusual in Australian academia but much more common in Russia. I found the process quite daunting - my professor was a big guy who would stand quite close and talk very loudly when we were arguing results, and it took quite a while to figure out that he wasn't actually angry.
If your student comes from the same sort of academic culture as my old lecturer, it's possible that she has been taught by previous experience that she needs to argue with her results and will be severely disadvantaged if she doesn't, and she may not realise that it's coming across as rudeness.
If something like that is going on, it may be a kindness to talk to her about behavioural norms and remind her that they differ from one place to another.
Edit: per undercat's comment on this post, perhaps my experience was more about an individual lecturer than Russian academic culture in general. Either way, I think it shows why a student might believe that regularly challenging results is normal behaviour.

I once had an (American) professor who said that his policy was to always deny the student the benefit of a doubt, grade the student down, and let the student come to him to fight for more credit. I think it's more likely that the student in the OP's question is just used to getting their way and has learned that being aggressive pays off, but who knows.

it might be the way she talks if she's excited that she knows the answer, she might unwillingly raise her voice, I do, if you feel like she's disrespecting you, ignore her.

As a graduate of a Russian university I have to say that while oral examinations were an inherent part of the process, the only things that were argued about in there were theorem proofs and calculations. Any argument about the grade itself would generally get you nowhere, unless you had a very strong and valid case for it. I feel the latter point should hold across all countries, since under no circumstances should a bolder student get a better grade than a smarter or more diligent one.

@undercat Thanks, that's interesting to hear. Perhaps my lecturer was an outlier then. I certainly wasn't fond of his assessment methods (pity, because he was otherwise an excellent lecturer) but it wouldn't have been so bad if he'd been clear about them at the start of term instead of us having to figure them out for ourselves.

I'd happily write one!
Many "complicated" people are that complicated to us because they think so differently to how we do it. We tend to gather people around us who are alike. That's, by far, not always good.
I talk from my experiences in the corporate sector but these can surely also be applied to academia.
Those people causing us such trouble are a) very intelligent and b) very committed. We don't always understand their motives (like I said: different ways of thinking) but neither do they ours.
They will surely not be yea-sayers to every passing whim of ours. That makes them very valuable employees and co-workers. They will dare to stand up when all the others wouldn't. If you make a bad decision as a boss (be it in a business or in academia) 99% of the people won't even notice (they don't care enough) or won't dare to say anything. That's then when the "complicated" ones come into play. They might be wrong with their point of view as well - but sometimes the combination of the thoughts is better than what either of you thought on his own.
These peope are also very committed. The reason they do stand up way more often than really necessary is: they care! They don't want things to go wrong, they want the company to propser, they want the research project to succeed, etc.
They are surely no easy people to handle but once you learnt to get along with them (which will never be conflict-free, ever!), they are extremely valuable people to an institution.
By the way: The same also applies to reverse roles. If you have a boss of this type you just don't seem to get along, it might actually be a very fruitful collaboration, if both of you are willing to go that way.
Update
I would like to address some points brought up in the comments.
First I changed the wording in my second sentence: It's many people being complicated due to their intelligence, definitely not all
Secondly I'd like to address some points brought up in the comments:
Talking about the case of this very student the OP mentioned, we can see the actual intelligence, interest (in the topic) and commitment of the student by the way the presentation was delivered: More than expected, though, unfortunately, on the wrong topic. Here we have clearly much potential to make a great researcher! There is still some "shaping" needed when it comes to the character.
Many of these troublemakers don't lack the intelligence to realise that they are wrong - they lack the humility to admit so. They do know when they are wrong but they simply "can't be wrong", so they desperately try to find loopholes to be, at least, partially right.
There are also many people who had their intelligence denied either by being told the opposite or being hindered in using it when they were a child. This is especially for girls still the case in many places. So they don't argue about the actual problem. They feel threatened by somebody challenging their view as in: The other one challenges my view so he challenges my intelligence.
Dealing with such people is surely not easy. It requires great empathy and understanding on one hand and clarity (as in: transparency in grading, clear and understandable orders, etc.) and strictness on the other.
Very many of these people have a spledid future if they learn proper modesty - and the humility to admit being wrong when they are.

Wow, you are so positive!

Who can imagine what this student's motives are? But they are obviously very intelligent and we should let them mark their own exams! They know better.

A person who is willing to speak out is valuable—except when they are consistently WRONG.

There's no evidence that this student ever stood up for anything other than having their grade increased. The question mentions two occasions on which the student understood that pushing the issue might be to their personal disadvantage; the first time they "gave up" and the second time they "decided it would be best to waive their rights". I agree that there is great value in a person who isn't afraid to take a firm and principled stand. However, I see no indication that this is such a person.

A person can speak out without being aggressive. Here, the latter happens. 2) Although I don't agree with this answer, it provides a valuable perspective and outlines it clearly. +1.

I would totally +2 you if I could. Also, the student described by OP essentially gave a "double presentation" on a subject he could have just not said anything about. Now, true, that might not be what he was asked to do, but obviously he didn't do that in bad faith, and it seems he managed it quite well. So, it's just like you said - a sort of an "impedance mismatch", but quite a bit of talent and commitment.

And of course if said student oversteps bounds with his professors in the graduate environment said professors will handle it as they see fit.

This is an interesting perspective but it looks bit far-fetched for me. You can also see a "complicated" person to be a troublemaker, bully, provocateur etc.

Those people causing us such trouble are a) very intelligent and b) very committed — I agree with (b), but definitely not (a).  Some "troublemakers" are intelligent, but others are not.  I'd had plenty of students who were passionate and committed and eloquent and stubborn and relentless, but could not follow even the simplest logical argument, or were unwilling/unable to admit to even the most transparent mistake.  Some people are committed to winning arguments merely for the sake of winning.

@JeffE : I agree there are such cases but is it really "plenty"? I think many of them don't lack the intelligence to see that they're wrong but the humility to admit so. Also childhood can play a certain role in some people's lives. Especially girls are often withheld from making good use of their intelligence. They then compensate later with such behaviour out of fear to be held back again.

I agree there are such cases but is it really "plenty"? — Yes, it really is plenty. For example: the entire internet.

@JeffE : I wonder if the irony in your answer was intentional. However, since all people on the internet are also "real people" outside the internet I can hardly take this statement as an answer to my question. Especially on the internet you find exactly the type I was talking about: They do have the intelligence, simply not manners and modesty to accept failure from their own part. And the perceived anonymity of the internet is a perfect occasion to vent and compensate for the real world.

A letter of recommendation is usually a statement of how you feel about their work ethic and character. I feel they should only be done if you feel strongly positive about both that you would stake your own reputation if they get accepted. The fact that you're asking this question, let alone the stories and the tone of your post, gives the impression you are not enthusiastic to endorse this person.
Imagine you have a best friend who owns a company who hires this person based on your recommendation. Would you be excited to hear they got hired and are working for your best friend? Would you be like, "That's fantastic! My friend's in good company and hiring the right people. They'll do great things."
Or would you be worried about that person screwing up the work at your friend's company? Would you fear your friend might come back to you five months later with a story that they asked this person to add a new feature to their latest product and instead got a report about the effects of microwaving hamsters and when they were called out on it said that the instructions were unclear, but they worked really hard on that report and should get a raise and promotion.
If it's the latter, please don't write the letter of recommendation. Please don't reward belligerent and disrespectful people who think that a loud voice and talking over people makes them right. I don't want to work with people like that.

Actually no. A letter of recommendation is about how you feel about someone's academic skills and achievements, and accordingly potential academic success. It has not much to do with character.

@Dilworth: Per Wikipedia (covering both workplace references and letters of recommendation regarding "admission to institutions of higher education"): "The employment reference letter can cover topics such as... the employee's social attitude... the employee's power of rapport..." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recommendation_letter)

I don't know what is written on wikipedia. I know what effective letters I write (to top schools), and what kind of letters my colleagues and I get and care for. It is all about academic merit. There is a small scope also for other aspects, but usually they are insignificant and ignored, except in extreme cases.

Would you write a reference letter for him/her? To answer this, ask yourself whether it's your job (probably yes), and, if so, whether you are up to the particular task (probably also yes). Proceed only if you are sure about two "yes" answers.
Assuming you proceed, do a separation of concerns. A student being disrespectful is one topic, but his/her performance is a different topic. He/she is fighting, while lots of others with the same grades are not. So, simply feel free to do this separation of concerns in your letter.

When students ask me to write for them I tell them that although they may waive their right to see the letter, I haven't waived the right to show it to them, and that I will. If it's not likely to be a strong letter I tell them that in advance - they usually thank me and go elsewhere. I always write an honest letter, describing strengths and shortcomings (if any).
In this case you can say the student has earned an A-, and why. The argumentative part needn't be the most prominent part of your letter, unless you feel it should be.
If you do show the student a draft, s/he may ask you not to send it (if you offer her that option).

Thinking of a statement 'to whom it may concern', turn the letter of recommendation into a letter of evaluation in which you portray the situation as you see it, in suitable and neutral words. The student will evaluate on his/her own its fit with his/her own view of the whole going --- perhaps eventually deciding not to use such a letter with his/her prospects and adopt/review the strategies used with you. We are talking of people of age after all.
Minimally, you might offer the student your availability to pass your contact details to his/her prospect readers at the point of need. And write nothing.
If you want to stimulate/challenge the student's self-evaluation skills, you could also propose him/her to write down a draft. I was often told to do so after asking for testimonials for some professional assignments. In a spoken conversation my answer was in the guise of Thanks for helping me out; certainly I'll do it; would you please tell me on the fly what has been noteworthy in the time we worked together? I cannot decide this for you --- in a written exchange I listed aspects that I wished to be mentioned and left the choice of adjectives and adverbs to the writer. Beyond my anecdotes, you will sense how open the student is to self-reflection and feedback, or whether he/she is manipulating your sense of duty.
You are still free to accompany any of these and other strategies with a conversation on the weaknesses and strengths that you have noticed, which might be the home stretch in your mission as educator.
Show integrity and be informative; it's what I would expect from anything you write (once it falls under my eyeballs, which is up to the student, and not to you).

Interesting idea, asking the student to write a draft.

This is similar to the comment about culture differences but focused on the concept of different learning styles.
Some of the behaviors you describe are related to ADD such as.

Going off topic
Argumentative / Oppositional behavior
Fear of social rejection. Exhibited by their fear of you leaving a bad review.

Students with ADD are often have troubles with formal education due to these traits.
This student may hold great respect for you as a professor but showcase it by being extremely engaged and passionate about there impact in the class. This is in comparison to a student who may be very respectful but only due to a lack of interest or involvement.
From the information provided there is still a good chance your student is simply self interested and does not deserve a good review.
If you are still unsure I would meet with the student and conduct an interview with them. This can give you a deeper perspective into there motives for attending this class and asking for your recommendation.

I don’t agree that habitually challenging grades is characteristic of ADHD/ADD.

There's a reason psychiatry and psychology require professional registration, and that they're not performed online without discussion involving the patient...

Excellent comment in my opinion. I agree that the student has probably behavioural "problems", and it's not lack of respect that causes his or her behaviour.

@ElizabethHenning - That's not what Sophia said.

I support Ethan's approach (show letter to student); Xavier's idea sounds intriguing (ask student to draft letter).
Student has been argumentative about assignment grades.
I suggest you limit the amount of time you devote to listening to these efforts to change a grade.
Geoffrey's and Sophia's answers are interesting possible explanations of the arguing over grades.  Here's another: I had a student from China on a scholarship who would argue and argue about his homework grade if he had gotten a 99 instead of a 100.  He was anxious!  It was anxiety!  He was afraid those little -1's on some of his weekly homework assignments were going to stand in his way of remaining in the U.S. for his studies.  Sure, it drove me nuts, and he wasn't my favorite person, and he would have been a slightly better student if he weren't wasting energy on nitpicking his homework scores.
Student was aggressive and confrontational, raising their tone of voice.
Please see https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/99635/32436.

People like that shouldn’t get their way because they will continue their behavior. We had a classmate in a two semester course, exactly like that, an annoying person. The first semester he did not earn an A so he nagged our professor to make him alone another final so he got an A. I also knew that he had a private tutor who did his assignments!! The next semester he did poorly on the final AGAIN with no excuse and wanted another final!
You shouldn’t write the letter.

Tell them you'll mail the letter directly and then "forget" to mail the letter.  Don't even bother wasting your time.
Although, in this case, we see only what we're looking for.  You see the student's stubbornness and we could discern that you're a negative thinker.  A positive thinker would see the student's unwillingness to accept anything less than the best which is a good thing from an employer perspective.
Then again there are way too many variables involved.  It depends on the context of the situation and how the student channels that energy.  If they're constantly being confrontational with the team and their supervisors that isn't a good thing because this student would get in the way, slow the team down and likely prevent the team from achieving goals.
I'm sure this student would make a good negotiator though if placed in the right context.

I am not sure if I read your answer correctly, but do you suggest to outright lie to the student?

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


text:
Should I cite the latest edition of a book?
Before publication, if a new edition of a source is released, should I try and find the new edition or keep a citation based on the old?

Compare to citing web sources, e.g. Wikipedia -- you should always cite a permalinked version of the page.

Cite the edition of the book you used, as new editions may contain the same text, paragraph or example but on a different page.

More importantly, in a different section or under a different number. Pages should only be cited as a last resort.

@darijgrinberg well, Harvard referencing requires the pages used... See http://www.citethisforme.com/harvard-referencing : item 6 is pages used...

Not a good convention. Page numbers become meaningless if the text is converted to a mobile/reader-friendly format, or translated.

"Translated" - then you should be using the original anyway... How often are errors due to mistakes or the translators "view" ?

Not everyone has the luxury of reading the language of the original.

Still safer to work from the original and then get that translated by someone who can  - personal experience has shown me that those who may be "bi-lingual" cannot correctly translate very specific engineering texts for example as they have no knowledge of the detailed concepts.

Safer perhaps, but having the choice between original and translations beats just having the original.

@darijgrinberg: As Solar Mike says in his answer, the rule in academia is to cite that edition of the text that you used. If you use a translation, that's fine, but cite the translated edition, and use the page numbers from that if the referencing style requires page numbers. It's not acceptable to pretend that you used the untranslated text if you didn't. If you're using a translation that has not been published (e.g. a Google translation), you can't cite it in an academic context.

@Schmuddi: You're answering to a comment I didn't post :) What I was saying is that citing by some invariant labels (sections, theorem numbers, etc.) beats citing by page because it gives the reader the option to use a translation (at her own risk, in case the translation is bad) or kindle version or whatever else. I am not saying that the author should cite the wrong version.

@darij Certainly post chapter and section as well, but include the page number. Nothing more annoying than someone citing a paragraph from a 50 page long chapter and not being more specific.

You should cite the exact source of any information you use. If you are pulling your information from a 200-year-old Encyclopedia Britannica, you cite the 200-year-old Encyclopedia Britannica.
However, it is good practice to write based on the current state of knowledge. If the 2010 Encyclopedia Britannica has more up-to-date information, you should use that more recent information, which will drive you to cite the more recent edition. That doesn't mean you need to wait for a new Britannica to publish, but if a new one does appear before you go to print, you may want to spot check it for relevant updates.
(In most fields you probably shouldn't be basing any writing off an encyclopedia, but it's an easy example to think about).

I think this is the real answer.  The question says find a new edition, so I assume they realize it could have changed and the citation might need to be adjusted.  OP doesn't want to blindly cite the new edition just because newer.  I read the question as "Is there value in citing the most up to date version".

I mainly agree with the first answer by SolarMike, but be aware of the content/information that you cite in this old edition and how old your edition is. The state of the art might change due to new developments in your field and this will be included in the edition. If you, for example, then criticise the book for not including X or Y, but it is done in the most recent edition, this would have been an easy mistake to avoid.

Regarding the year of the edition, sometimes, valuable editings are made for the newest edition of a book. It might be interesting for you to check these - just that you are aware of. For instance, the author changes this specific argument that you use due to criticisms of the first edition (or puts in an extended chapter or so).

So, should you wait for the new edition to appear before you publish your paper "just in case the argument changes" and you re-write your paper or should you publish with what is current and effectively accepted at the moment?

I haven't said wait for the new edition (how should most of us know anyway, whether a new edition of book X will be published soon...), but if you know(!) that the cited version is out now in a new (revised) edition, then you can just check it (and that you know "what is current and effectively accepted at the moment")

As to how to know when a new version of a book will be available - most publishers will be able, and happy, to tell you - in fact, faculty often receive pre-published copies for review...

"I mainly agree with the former comment" What former comment? If you wish to refer to another comment or answer, please link it so that people know what you're talking about. (You can get a link to an answer by clicking the "share" link below it, and you can get a link to a comment by clicking on its timestamp.) If you are referring to a comment, you should quote it as well as linking to it, since comments are often deleted.

There are of course cases where you might want to deliberately cite an older edition. For example, if it contained information that has been removed from newer editions; or if you want cite erroneous information "Until recently it was widely believed that.... This belief appears to derive from ....". Or you might want to cite Fowler 1st ed as evidence of what was considered acceptable English usage at the time it was published. Or you might believe that earlier editors got something right and later editors got it wrong.
I can also imagine cases where you want to cite an earlier edition simply because it is much more widely available, or because you cannot get hold of a later edition despite best efforts.

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


text:
Is the weight of authorship valuable?
Some professors publish their papers alone or with a single postdoc/PhD student. In this case, he/she should spend lots of time as a sole or second author.
Some professors publish the same kind of paper by several postdoc/PhD students and international collaborations. He/she is one of say 10 authors who have contributed to the paper. Thus, he/she needs much less time for publishing a paper.
In the latter case, they can publish much more papers. On the other hand, the papers attract more attention as each of 10 authors promote the paper.
I wonder if there is any value/credit for the former scheme? Or it is waste of time, and all professors should adopt the latter scheme as much he/she can?

It's not that one chooses an authorship scheme on purpose, it's the type of work that decides the scheme. I have all multi-author papers, and those papers would never have been written as single-author papers because no one would have had the expertise, the time and the equipment to do the work alone.

@MassimoOrtolano while your point is correct to some extent, it is also a matter of personal preference. Some prefer to work with more people and some do not. In many papers, international collaborations are not vital. The experiments are usually done in one institution and the rest is just a consult. This can be well seen when a semi-retired eminent scientist appears in many papers. The papers benefit from a consult, but it is not necessary. Some like it some don't.

What do you mean by "value/credit"? Academia isn't a game where the goal is to be a coauthor on as many papers as possible. Somebody whose CV consists of 50 single-authored papers will be evaluated differently from somebody whose CV consists of 200 papers with 20 authors each, but you can't say that one is better than the other. It is also field-dependent.

It may be quicker with less co-authors.  For example, managing contributions to the paper and ensuring everybody is happy with the final text is much easier with 2 or 3 people at one institute, than with 10+ spread over several institutes.


text:
How to deal with my academic advisor who offered me a postdoc position and try to prevent me getting other offers?
I recently graduated and my co-chair offered me a postdoc position which I haven't started yet. I first thought he was trying to help me. Now I am getting other good offers from others.
I received a very good postdoc offer and was in a very good lab. I told my co-chair, that I will leave if I get that one. After the interview, the main PI told me that he will contact my references and will get back to me within one week. Later, he sent me an email saying he offered the job for someone else. Before the interview, he was writing me and even shared some confidential information even before they released them through the HR.
The way he handled my application gave me very high hopes on getting the job. Now I suspect that my co-chair who was known to my future PI changed the post-doc hiring committees view of me. He has given me very good reference letters in the past for other academic positions that I can start in several months if I was selected. I am now confused, and not sure how to handle this supervisor. Any help/advice greatly appreciated!

I really wonder in what country and in what field you are. (But don't share it if you don't feel so.) I wonder about it becuase where I'm now, it's strictly forbidden to become a postdoc or get a full-time position in a place form which you have your PhD. So the best the supervisor can do is promote you to another good place, because it increases his karma in some sense.

This is kind of confusing. Could you edit your question to clarify which people are at which institutions, and who made what offers? You could give names to the people and institutions (X, Y, etc).

To be honest, there's nothing in your question to suggest malicious behavior. It's possible that you misread signals from the person you were hoping to work with and overestimated the chances of getting an offer. It's also possible you're right ! I guess it's hard to say what to do about your situation when it's not clear to me that the situation is as described.

@tochez in which country do you reside. It is common to get a postdoc from the same institution as PhD in the US.
RWK, unfortunately, this sometimes happens and a recent PhD grad that left our lab experienced the same problem. He is a VERY bright researcher with high potential and was applying to a postdoc at a competing lab, and I believe our adviser wanted him to stay. I'm not sure how to deal with it, but it does happen.

The question that comes to my mind is: did the OP accept the postdoctoral position offered by his/her advisor? In this case, it seems a little strange to be fielding offers from other departments. It is possible the OP's advisor simply told the other department s/he already has a job.

This is a common reason why job references are normally asked from the former employers but not from the current employer. If the current employer would like to keep a specialist, adequate recommendations just cannot be provided because of the conflict of interest.
Try to get alternative recommendations. Maybe your work included cooperation with other laboratories, or maybe you had some more junior "intermediate" supervisor, or maybe you have worked along speciality at least part time? Suggest these people instead.
In the worst case, you may even ask for recommendation from another co-worker like you. Not very good yet better than nothing.

This doesn't seem applicable to academia. A recommendation from your PhD advisor is generally an absolute requirement for a postdoc, except in very unusual circumstances.

Do not remember anybody asking it for me, however, when applying. Even if I would have no difficulty to provide one.

Really?  When was this?  In what country?

This answer seems reasonable on the face of it and may be applicable to a wide range of jobs, but it is distinctly contrary to how academia actually works.  In academia, to apply for an academic job without a recommendation letter from anyone in your current institution is worrisome.  To apply for a postdoc without a letter from your doctoral supervisor is just about the reddest of red flags.


text:
How are "workshop style" lectures conducted?
Descriptions of graduate (and advanced undergrad) courses sometimes indicate that the lectures are going to be conducted in a "workshop style". I am unsure what a "workshop style" lecture entails and how it is usually conducted over a two hour span?
How does a workshop-style lecture differ from formal lectures?

@paulgarrett Can you please turn this into an answer so that I can vote for it?

@jakebeal, converted comment to answer...

In my experience, "workshop-style lecture" is an oxymoron.  A person leading a workshop might speak for a while, introducing a concept or process, but then the focus would shift to the students, who actually do something (write, brainstorm, etc.) and then discuss their experiences.  A student will leave a workshop having worked on something, either individually or with a group, rather than just having taken notes.

Workshop "lectures" are less logically formal, less detail-oriented (but usually with careful references). The idea of a workshop is more top-down, more action-oriented, intended to get people up-to-speed on the current state of a topic (rather than, cough-cough, compliance-oriented). Examples, heuristics, prototypes, thought-experiments... more of the things we actually do, rather than the formal narrative reporting on it later and not-as-though-it-were-live.


text:
Is it possible to obtain a Master's degree without Bachelor's degree?
I have worked as translator for more than seven years in the industry. I have a background in cuisine for more than ten years. Now I would like to add an graduate degree related to Tourism, Hotel and Event Management to my professional experience.
Can I enroll in such a masters program without first acquiring a Bachelors degree?

possible duplicate of Physics PhD without a masters

What country do you want to study in? And do you have any certifications?

You may be interested in: How to start an academic career after 5-6 years in industry, without an undergraduate degree?

@Enthusiastic while the norm in many fields/locations is that you do not need a MS for admission into a PhD program, the same is not necessarily true for admission into an MS without a BS. So the suggested question is not a duplicate.

I know people who have attended and graduated from master programs in Australia and the UK and I've seen people considering such programs in the US (though I don't remember the school in the US and it was about 10 years ago but I thought it was Carnegie Mellon). These schools were all reasonable, fully accredited schools.
The students in question all were missing their bachelor degree. One had no university at all while others had most of their undergraduate credits yet had not finished. They key is that, like you, they all had significant real-world experience which was seen as offsetting their lack of credentials.
So, the short version is, there are schools who will accept master-level students without an undergraduate degree and there are schools who will not accept them. You just need to do the leg work and see which schools will make that exception.
Good luck!

Johan Marais, a South African business owner and herpetologist, completed a master's degree through the University of Witwatersrand. He has no undergraduate degree. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascination_Books

I know at least one academic who has no degree other than his PhD, so it's possible, but tough.

Absolutely it is possible to obtain a Master's degree without a Bachelor's degree. I have a MSc from one of the top (#2 or #4 depending on which survey you choose) schools in the US. I had some (less than one full year) undergrad course over 20 years earlier.
I am not familiar with the specific field you mention or the accredited schools that offer degrees but you should approach the dean of the school directly and establish a relationship then have that person guide you through the admission process. You must present exceptional credentials to be accepted but top business schools quietly admit one or two per year each class.

I attained my master's degree without having fully completed my bachelor's. It was for an MFA however, and my portfolio was strong enough to earn admission. I think it would be more difficult for a master's in the sciences or in a business related field.

I know of someone who got into a graduate program without technically finishing his Bachelor's,  and then repeated that when getting admitted for PhD. However, this didn't save him much work; he still needed the earlier education and had to get top grades and demonstrate that he'd be a great researcher to be considered for these exceptions.
That isn't what you were asking about, but it does show that unusual admissions are possible if you can impress the fight people. For most of us that isn't practical.

Masters degree without a Bachelor at all, or Masters degree after having a Bachelor from an unrelated field?
I think the first one is strictly impossible. So far, I have never heard of someone getting a Master before having the Bachelor first.
I know there might be corner-cases for geniuses who do both at the same time, or get directly accepted to phd studies skipping everything. But that is highly unlikely in usual cases of regular people.
If you have such a goal, it will be a massive administrative obstacle to overcome. And I don't see how you could convince an established university to give up their requirements.
Maybe in 3rd world countries you can get any type of degree by throwing some money, but it does not seem to me as if that is your goal.
EDIT (after @Mad Jack's comment below): Yeah there are always corner-cases which may change the story. Given that your experience is worth more than a undegrad diploma, or the fact that you might hold different certificates might give you a chance. But, then again you will have to ask the admission office to make an exception for you. Tough, but not impossible as I learned something new!

I think the first one is strictly impossible. — The question I linked to above in the comments deals with  exactly this scenario.

but in the question you linked, the guy has some research experience and he has been exposed to the university environment beforehand. The current questions bears no such info/resemblance whatsoever.

This answer isn't correct - it's fairly common for universities to accept professionals (with several years' experience) on to a Master's degree program. For example: https://le.ac.uk/courses/advanced-computer-science-msc-dl

refrain the word "strictly impossible" everything is possible in the world we are living with

Absolutely. In the UK this is rather the norm. In Australia it is also common. I think other con tries are moving toward that direction as well, but for now I know that the UK and Australia would do it for sure.

Can you provide some sort of evidence, please?  This sounds contradictory to my experience.

It is possible in the UK to receive an masters degree without a bachelors, but this is only in the case of integrated degrees such as MMath which have the syllabus of a bachelors integrated. These take the same length of time to achieve as a bachelors and a masters (4 to 5 years).

Yes, it is absolutely possible.  But are there any degree-granting institutions that are so enlightened?
In my educated opinion, a Masters is for industrial and other trades, while a PhD or even a Bachelor's degree (Bachelor of Arts) are for transcendental ideals.   You don't need writing, a second language, a range of scientific and liberal courses for most fields.
So you can be a Master, if another Master declares such.

It seems like you're creating your own definitions for the degrees. There are popular terminal masters programs in some liberal arts fields, like East Asian Studies, that build entirely on bachelor's level courses.  And I'm confused by the statement, "So you can be a Master, if a Master declares such."--I could see that being true in apprenticeship or dojo models, but not in academia. (Otherwise, I might start selling Masters degrees of my own design, on my own authority. ;) )

Well, how to you believe such degrees began?

I believe they began as "magister" (teacher) degrees in medieval universities. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master%27s_degree In those contexts, it appears that universities were always the ones conferring degrees (not individual degree holders), and such degrees were used to say that someone should be accepted as a teacher by other universities.

You certainly could "sell" Master's degrees of your own design on your own authority, but if you are not a master yourself, you won't have much authority, will you?  One shouldn't rely on an institution for authority, because institutions are not conscious, much like you shouldn't rely on the law to make a lawful society, because no one's conceived a perfect law.

Having the expertise behind a degree is a necessary, but rarely sufficient, grounds for granting it to others, in my mind. (I say "rarely" because I'm partial to post-apocalyptic reconstruction of society stories. ;) )

@cactus_partner:  As the word "degree" implies "levels of intensity", then mastery would or should be enough.  However, perhaps the phrase "PhD degree" is inapt and inappropriate and should just be a Doctor of Philosophy.  In which case mastery of some field is certainly not sufficient.

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


text:
Authorship with Past and Nearly Absent Supervisor
Inspired by the following question: Co-authorship for not very involved supervisor
I have got to ask a slightly different question:  I have a past supervisor while I did my masters and she wasn't really involved or as active as I would have liked. Also, I received no funding from this professor. I did however receive a scholarship from the university to fund my masters; not sure if these facts change anything.  Naturally, this person would also like to believe she was involved, so had I finished the research while I did my masters there I would have listed this individual as a second author and even the author of correspondence.  But now I am pursuing a PhD and in fact in a  slightly different field at a different university.
While preparing for my qualifiers I came across some fresh new ideas and had a light bulb moment.  Consequently, I have made significant progress in my old project as of late.  I believe by the end of the summer I will have results ready for publication.  On the one hand, I feel I should notify my old professor of these results once they come in... I think it would be wrong or even unethical to let them find out through the grape-vine or just through reading to keep up with the field.  On the other hand, I fear this person will want authorship or even write the editor and demand it; this person is a Reader at a prestigious university while I'm just a little PhD student.  I feel it will be a case of he-said she-said with the Editor which will ultimately result in me losing (even though I completely believe I'm justified and the recent progress was 100% mine).
Maybe I'm over-reacting but I'm not sure what to do.  And I certainly don't want this person to "read over" my paper or attempt to "edit" it, because I think then they would have more grounds to put their name on the paper.  Any ideas?

Many journals allow you to specify a few authors you do not want to review your paper, for situations such as these. Given the option you should probably put your former supervisor on this list.

Also related to “Authorship determination for a paper in IEEE journal”

Department was chemistry.  Topic was quantum chemistry.  Currently doing maths.

First, should you include her as a co-author? Customs in this are journal- and field-dependent, so you should check with others in your field (you didn't tell us what it was) and also with the authorship policy of the journal you intend to submit. You may also want to check with the department where you did your Masters what their policy is on authorship and affiliation for students' papers. At the very least, if you're going to have someone be cross at you, know in advance where you stand!
I'll sum up my answer to another question on the site by stating that graduate students oftentimes dismiss too easily an advisor's role in the research. Selecting a problem/project for you to work on, even guiding you in the selection of a problem can be considered a big intellectual contribution to your research. Conception/design of research is an integral part of the research, and usually explicitly calls for authorship in resulting papers.
It's okay to be proud of your work, and to think your contribution in it was crucial, but be sure not to be biased against your supervisor when evaluating her contribution. One person who may help you do that is your current advisor!

Now, that being said, let's suppose you have made the decision not to have her as coauthor. How do you manage that? The guiding principle should be: be upfront and clearly state where you stand.

Including her name in the acknowledgements of the paper, specifically stating her contribution. (“SG thanks Dr. Jane Doe for initially pointing him to this challenging problem.”)
When the paper is published, be sure to send her a preprint, along with a nice email.
If you are worried about her reviewing the paper, list her in the list of potential reviewers to exclude (if the journal submission has space for that). But… having her in the acknowledgments may already be enough for the editor not to pick her.

This is a somewhat difficult situation, but I believe the most salient issue is the one that you originally mentioned in your comment: the master's advisor did not fund your research in any way. As a result of this, the demands placed on the advisor for authorship become even more stringent.
The criteria that becomes significant here is whether or not the advisor contributed materially to the development of the ideas you've carried out. If you decided upon the topic yourself, without assistance from your advisor, then it's appropriate not to give co-authorship.
However, there is also the issue of politics to consider. If, as you suggested, you are worried about the influence of your former advisor on spiking the paper, it may be worthwhile to consider the possibility of adding your advisor on at least the first paper; any future papers could be done without citing your advisor on the future papers (except as an acknowledgment, as F'x suggests).

I'm not so sure funding is a central point… most journals' authorship policy make absolutely no mention of funding

The funding issue is central because in many fields, the PI's securing of the grant means that she is "directing" the overall project, even when day-to-day supervision is not as close. This is the justification used in many engineering fields why the PI of the group is an author, even if they have not directly participated in the experiments or simulations.

Is chemistry one of those fields?

Yes. Chemistry students do not normally design their own projects, unless they have an external fellowship.

This isn't really "chemistry", this is quantum chemistry.  So really there was no lab equipment and only a basic computer sufficed.  Essentially, it was applied mathematics (optimization) where the system studied was chemical in nature.

@Squirtle: the issue is not experimental versus computational. The issue is who came up with the idea for your project. Also, who paid for any software licenses you may have used, and on whose computers did you run the code? If you ran it on your advisor's machines and software, or your advisor suggested the project, or both, then your advisor will likely expect co-authorship.

Free software was used for this particular project at the start, GAMESS... the rest in Fortran, ran on my computer.


text:
Mimeo, Technical report, Manuscript: what kind of creatures are they?
(I consider this question to be an extension and complement of this one).
My field is Economics. It is not uncommon for a published research paper to reference a (third-party) "technical report", or a "mimeo" or a "manuscript", usually accompanied by the name of a University only (apart of course from author and a year as date). I know the meaning of these words, and that they represent something different from a "working paper" - the latter is almost always part of an instituted series of publications by a research or academic institution.
My question asks help in clarifying how such documents come about as part of the activity of a professional academic, and why they are "left" at that "status" and not, say, "advance" to at least "working paper" status. After all, they are referenced because they contain research results.
I can imagine some situations: for example a "Technical Report" could be the very detailed presentation of a large-scale econometric or simulation study, that was then condensed to a working paper and then maybe to a published one. Or some very specialized theoretical/mathematical result which has value but it is too narrow to even be published as a "note" (and perhaps belongs to some future monograph or textbook). Or even, these are works that have been submitted and rejected, but their author thinks they nevertheless have value, and it so happens that he stops trying to publish them and decides to keep them public in his university and/or personal website, as proof that he is fulfilling his obligation to do research.
Am I off the mark? How publicly accessible and referenced scientific works (even from recent years) come to settle in a "manuscript/mimeo/Technical Report" status?

Most often I find that these are works in progress, unfinished or otherwise unsuitable for regular academic publication. I've written technical reports as an undergrad as part of an internal project for a non-research entity that simply described the progress we made on a project. There was little context for publication outside the organization itself, and not enough novelty to try to pull some context together. However, these documents were referred to internally to justify further work in the area due to the feasibility that we showed for the project. Sometimes, when they're not too proprietary, some organizations will put these kinds of reports up on their website to show the kinds of things they are working on. Maybe several will be combined at a later point as the foundational parts of a proposal or a "real" paper.
I haven't seen "mimeo" used ever in my life except in the context of the output of a Mimeograph machine which was an early way to duplicate documents. It's possible that mimeos of technical reports in the scientific report context used to get passed around the big national and industrial labs so that people could find out what was going on internally well before there'd be an internal website or wiki to browse for like-minded researchers. Otherwise, that's not really a common term that I encounter.

Technical reports are internal documents, often with some serial number to identify them. They go through at most a light check that they are on-topic for the institution, and (particularly for companies) don't divulge any secrets. Often technical reports are extended versions of later papers (including full detail, experimental data, ...), sometimes they are just reports of internal work. I believe I still have a technical report that was the user manual for a LISP system I used while studying. Companies used this to share results of internal reasearch more or less informally. They are usually published (before the Internet it used to be that you could write somebody asking to send you a copy of the document, today they are usually on the webpage). They don't suffer from the page limit of journal papers, and have a much faster turnaround (a week or so to get published instead of perhaps even years).
A manuscript is just something I wrote. I might share it with some close friends, keep it locked up in a drawer, or publish it widely. There is no more or less regular way to request a copy.
The last term, mimeo, might refer to mimeograph, an old (pre-photocopy) way of printing short runs of documents. The quality was poor, and required a lot of setup. It might refer to a manuscript that was reproduced in up to a hundred or at most a few hundred copies and handed out, e.g. at a conference.


text:
Does a publication in a predatory journal negatively impact admissions decisions?
I have published an original research paper in what was claimed by Beall's list to be a predatory journal. Considering the way they reviewed my paper, the corrections they gave me, and the many citations from typical research papers, I don't believe that it is predatory, especially since I don't think that the journal conforms with the criteria of Beall's list of predatory journals.
Nevertheless, I want to know what negative impact publishing in a predatory journal has on admissions chances.

Related (and possible duplicate): https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7908/value-of-light-to-none-peer-reviewed-pay-to-publish-articles

We should not presume that you had anything to do with any publications that list you as an author.  Some authors add others (without their knowledge) to the author list because they believe being a coauthor of a known person will increase their own prestige.  See the article I coauthored with Barack Obama on this very topic.  Seriously it has happened to me.  I discovered an article in an obscure journal that listed me as lead author.  It was pure gibberish.

If you are not proud of the paper, then do not list it in your application materials.  I doubt anyone is going to be scanning crappy journals for articles that might be authored by prospective students.

@emory that might not be a good idea: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21819/is-hiding-publications-in-cv-a-good-idea

I may be 'odd' as I generally do not care what journal an article comes from, if an article is good it will get seen and cited. However, there are a lot of more senior researcher that care about the impact factor of the journal (or reputation) more than the impact factor of the individual paper.

Beall's list contains both journals and publishers, and the publishers in that list tend to have a range of different journals. The inclusion of a publisher in the list indicates that some of the journals they publish are suspected of predatory behaviour, but I think it is inappropriate to leap to the conclusion that all the journals they publish are predatory based solely on Beall's listing. So: what does Beall list, your journal, or its publisher?

Beall's List sometimes overshoots, though it's a good starting point.
I wouldn't say publication there will automatically hurt your admission chances, as especially if you're very junior I'd actually assume you had been naive. What it likely won't do is help all that much - predatory or not, it's doubtful it's a particularly well regarded journal in the field.
I'd also be careful how I presented it. In your cover letter, if you mention your work being published in "such notable publications as the International Journal of Obviously a Scam..." then it's likely I'll convert my impression of you from naive to oblivious. And while I've never seen this done with a predatory journal, I've definitely seen some people tout papers in pretty low-ranked journals as if they were at the top of the field, and that's always a bad sign.
It's not a death sentence, but you should be aware of what that paper is, and isn't. And I'd be prepared to talk about your experience, and how they did provide useful feedback, etc. Journals can be sincerely trying to get out of the predatory pool (or sliding into it...).

Despite the downvotes, I actually feel that this is a relevant question that should be answered.  I have some experience with something similar - I've published in a journal that appeared on beall's list as well, unknowingly.  After my own investigation I feel that the journal doesn't really fit the definition of "predatory" - it was open access/pay to publish, but I was rejected the first time and made a second contribution that was accepted.   If I hadn't been rejected, I certainly would have been more concerned once I found out the journal was on Beall's list.
That being said, I feel that the answer to the question lies in two things:
a) What else have you done/published?  If this is your only publication, then I'd be very careful trying to convince people that it is high quality.
b) How are you presenting it?  For instance, I present the papers I had accepted by that journal as part of my list of publications, but I certainly don't overly emphasize them. In fact, I emphasize my top-tier journal articles far more, for obvious reasons.
Ultimately, I don't think that you're going to get rejected for having it on your resume, but if it's the only thing on your resume it certainly won't make your application stand out.


text:
Placement of period in sentence that ends with "et al." followed by reference number?
I have a citation that is at the end of a sentence with dual punctuation. What I mean is that I have a sentence of the following form:

Blah blah blah is mentioned by Author et al.

What is the proper way to include the citation in this case?

Blah blah blah is mentioned by Author et al[##].

Blah blah blah is mentioned by Author et al.[##]

Blah blah blah is mentioned by Author et al.[##].

Other

Related (on [english.se]): Can there be two consecutive dots at the end of the sentence? and When “etc.” is at the end of a phrase, do you place a period after it?

@EnthusiasticStudent I believe this is a grammar issue, not a style issue.

@ff524 different styles have different ways to cite such issue.

Whatever you do, put a space (ideally, a protected one) before “[##]”.

I'd use 3 (but with a space before [##] as @Wrzlprmft said).  The abbreviation "et al." deserves a period, and the end of the sentence deserves a period; as long as there's something between those two periods, I'd use them both.

Since "et al." is an abbreviation of the latin et alii meaning "and others" the period in "et al." should be treated as periods in any other abbreviation such as "cf.", "Op. Cit.", "conf.", "c.". In most cases of which I am aware periods are shown after abbreviations but I am not a stranger to styles where the period after abbreviations are ignored. So my bet is that "et al. [##]." or "et al. [##]", depending on where the preferred location of the numbered references are, in a majority of cases. If you are uncertain you need to consult the journal style sheet (if any exists) or simply check other recent papers published by the journal in order to see how they prefer to have things set.

Between "Author et al. proposed that sky is blue [4]." and "Author et al. [1] proposed that sky is blue.", which one is preferrable?

@MuhammadAshfaq A matter of style but having the number associated with the location of the names seems preferable. So your second example.

This really depends on the publisher's style guide. If the style calls for the use of periods after "et al." or other such expressions, then you should use them, independent of whether the reference forces an additional period. if the guidelines don't ask for one, don't use it.

Is there any style that doesn't use a period after et al.? I thought this is a matter of correctness, not style ("et al." stands for "et alia" - "al." is an abbreviation, so it gets a period)

@ff524 I think AMA does not use a period after "et al." for in text citations, but does use a period in the reference list.

@ff524: Journals published in the UK will also likely not use periods.

Blah blah blah is mentioned by Author et al. [##].
(Note the space before the brackets; whether there is "et al." or not makes no difference here.)

Other

Two other possibilities are the followings:
4a. "Blah blah blah is mentioned in [##]". This is ok since you are using numeric citations.
4b. "Blah blah blah is mentioned by Author et al. in [##]"

I didn't think you could use numeric citations as a noun, I thought the sentence had to be intelligible without the number.

@StrongBad: I've found the above usage fairly common, but I can't cite any reference supporting it (nor one against it, though). At least, no editor/reviewer ever corrected me on this :-) Yet another possibility is to rephrase completely the sentence as "As mentioned by Author et al. [##], blah blah blah."

That's an example of different conventions in different fields. In Math and some areas of CS, it's standard that references can act as objects in a sentence.

The IEEE referencing guide can be found  here for those seeking IEEE specific referencing instructions.

Another other:

Blah blah blah is mentioned in Ref. [##].

At least this is what is used by all journals using a numeric citation style that I am aware of.

Not all journals allow abbreviations like "Ref.", probably only those that allow abbreviations like Fig. or Tab. If I were to write for an IEEE journal I'd probably write "Blah blah blah is mentioned in Ref. [##]", but for some IOP journals "Blah blah blah is mentioned in [##]" seems more common.


text:
What is the difference between a "Professor" and an "FH-Professor" (German-speaking countries)
In German-speaking countries, what is the difference between a Professor and an FH-Professor?
I have come across both terms and FH-Professors seem to work at universities of applied sciences (FH=UAS; differences to universities see here) but I wonder what the difference in the formal qualification level of the professors is and what the formal requirements are to become one of the two?

Not a full answer, but more of a general hint: each of Germany's 16 federal states has its own local laws and regulations for higher education, and there are many commonalities but also differences between different states. In the case of FH professors, that might, for example, concern the required number of years in industry.

if you can choose between both types of professorships, I would rather think about what favors your life goals and personality, because we have enough teachers and professors in Ger which aimed for this career mostly because of public servant status. In future we cannot afford anymore such types of applicants and they will likely be much more out-selected. So the question among commitees will be is he the right person and not only qualified?

@user48953094: "we have enough [...] professors in Ger[many] which aimed for this career mostly because of public servant status." This seems very unlikely to me. One of the main advantages of working in public service in Germany - especially for "Beamte" - is the extremely high level of job security. But if one is mainly looking for high job security, a career in academia is probably one of the worst decisions one can make.

Situation in Austria:
TL;DR
FH-Professor have fewer scientific publications and they don't need to be in the most prestigious journals (as compared to university professors) but on the contrary management experience in industry is expected (e.g. managing multiple persons at the R&D department of a company for several years). Also the teaching qualification level is usually higher than for University Professors.
Long version:
The following criteria apply for a FH-Professor (FHStG):

Formal criteria

At least PhD but ideally Habilitation
Proof of full-time employment at the UAS for at least 2 years and teaching activities during this time

Quality Criteria

Scientific qualifications: Subject-specific publications, invited lectures, awards, memberships in (inter)national associations, editorial functions, grant, scientific and university management
Proof of professional qualification: Several years of industry experience, of which usually at least 2 years of non-university management experience. Optional additional qualifications such as e.g. patents
Proof of didactic qualification e.g. completion of relevant university didactic training seminars
Proof of international experience in teaching and/or research (e.g. research stay abroad)

The following criteria apply for a University Professor (UG):

Subject specific PhD or an equivalent foreign university degree (Habilitation is NOT a criterium anymore even though the below mentioned scientific qualifications usually need to exceed those of the Habilitation anyway)
Outstanding scientific qualification in the field
Successful and continuous acquisition of competitive third-party funds
Academic leadership and management experience, including gender and diversity competence
Educational and didactic qualification
International work experienc

To become a professor in Germany, you need sufficient academic qualification, that is at least a PhD and, in most cases, an additional habilitation, proof of relevant scientific activities trough publications and proof of capability of teaching through previous experience. If a habilitation is necessary is mostly dependent on the area of studies, in more "applied" university subjects like engineering it is sometimes/quite often waived.
To become a professor at the FH (university of applied sciences), you normally don't need a habilition. Until quite recently, you did not even (necessarily) have a docotorate if you had enough "applied knowledge", proven by relevant industry working experience. These days, after complaints from university professors that is is unfair that others can become professors without a PhD, they changed it in most places so that you DO need a doctorate on top of 3-5 years of relevant industry experience, teaching experience and publications.
If you do speak German, have a look at this list of types of professors in Germany.

Not sure if habilitation is still required "in most cases" to become professor - there's a trend in many fields to go away from habilitation (and instead asking for habilitation-equivalent merits). Otherwise good answer.

Practical differences:

A FH Professor has to teach much more. And he needs on average much
more applied knowledge and expertise and often worked some years after or
during his PhD in industry.
Professor is a title in Germany, no grade. You don't need under all
circumstances a PhD or Habilitation to become Professor, but at
Universities Habilitation or Junior-Professorship is mostly the
rule/required after PhD vs. FH.
FHs can be better equipped with hardware and infrastructure than universities in the same state for similar study courses. To make it more complicated Germany also has TU's (technical universities)
Fundamental research is not the goal of FHs and graduating PhDs, so if you have to decide to become Uni or FH-Professor for 20-30 years there are quite different and distinctive criterions to choose imho

In common:

Both are public servants and get around 2/3 of their salary after
retirement as a pension.

So much of the formal issues and legals duties and rights can vary by local state laws in Germany

He or she.... don't assume by default that professors are men.

And please do not assume that concise language equals discrimination...

@DeboraWeber-Wulff when reading this answer, I was actually thinking about a German professor friend of mine (to compare with France). The fact she is a woman did not even register, I was comparing professors to professors.

In German language it is a very short step from "Professor" to "he" because a female Professor would be called "Professorin". So the "he" in the text is fully understandable. But I agree, that all genders should be adressed :)

@Manziel I don't assume it equals discrimination; it clearly and on the face of it is discriminatory because it excludes women.  I accept btw that your intention is that "the masculine includes the feminine", but that is not how it is read by most people and just adding that disclaimer doesn't actually help.  Changing "He" to "They" only adds an additional two characters, so is not really much less concise.

Please go back to first grade and generic titles. A single person is never "they", that is a plural form. I feel pretty much annoyed by people who obviously have nothing better to do than pointing towards correct language as discriminatory. Even more so when it takes me not more than one minute on the university page of DWW to find various examples of so dicriminatory generic masculin... (to avoid further off-topic discussions this will be my last comment to this)

There are several differences:

An FH professor is considered to have a full-time teaching position and as such is required to teach 16-18 hours per work week (differs from state to state). In contrast, a university professor is only required to teach 8-9 hours per work week.
The flip side is that each university professor has a mandate to conduct research in his field ("Forschungsauftrag"). While there is no formal test whether a professor indeed conducts research during the work time that he's not teaching it will look bad if he doesn't. In contrast, in an FH the mandate to conduct research applies only to whole departments, not to individuals. Individual professors may or may not conduct research, and due to their teaching work load if they want to conduct research they often have to apply to to be temporarily released from (part of) their teaching requirements ("Forschungsfreisemester").
University professors usually have a permanent budget to employ zero to four (as negotiated in the professor's employment contract) full-time research assistants ("Haushaltsstellen"). For FH professors there's no such budget. Both can apply for third-party research grants to hire additional research assistants.
FH professors are always at the formal job grade W2. University professors start at either job grade W1 (while being employed as a junior professor) or W2 (when in possession of a venia legendi either through a prior successful junior professorship or through "habilitation") and can be "promoted" to W2 and finally W3 - with significant salary increases. Promotion is usually not a university-internal process though, but rather happens either by accepting a higher-grade professor position at a different university, or as a counter-offer ("Bleibeverhandlung") from the professor's current university after having received a binding offer from a different university.

Very thorough answer! Only two things don't seem accurate to me: 1. There is no "promotion" from W1 to W2 or W2 to W3. It has to be a new hire (in all cases I know of). 2. Change "two to four full time research assistants" to "zero to four". This is very field dependent and I know professors with zero Haushaltsstellen.

@Dirk Regarding 1: At least in some fields, tenure track models are getting more common these days. The most common is W1 to either W2 or W3, but I've also seen cases for W2-to-W3 tenure track.

@Dirk thanks for the feedback, I've updated the answer accordingly.

@lighthousekeeper That's true, but still, tenure track does not include promotion in the sense the you will just rise up to the next level. All cases I know worked like the university offered a new position that can be filled without public announcement of the position. But still, an application had to be written and a hiring committee had to make a decision (I even had to give a job interview and a lecture…)

Great answer. Minor addition: the difference between FHs and universities is currently very dynamic. Many FH Professors are doing a lot of research, starting to do more fundamental research, are getting the right to supervise PhD students, and start to have less teaching load. Details depend on the state, the FH, the department and the individual professor.

It's complicated. One should note that the W1/W2/W3 pay grades vary from state to state, as well as the "Zulagen", the money offered on top that may or may not be counted in as contributing to the retirement pay.


text:
What are some warning signs that a PhD project will fail?
Professors looking for PhD students will often have several ongoing research thrusts that students can work on. These may correspond to different three- or five-year grant awards, for example, or they may be different directions within the same grant.
In my cursory experience, watching various labs progress over a few years, I have found that some of these thrusts are very successful, resulting in high-quality publications, interest from the community, star students, and so on; whereas some (say, one out of every three thrusts) will fail, leaving the students who worked on that thrust discouraged and stagnant, and in many cases leading to them leaving the program, switching advisors, or (in the best case) switching to a different project.
My question is: as a prospective student, choosing a research project, are there any reliable warning signs or red flags to watch out for? What makes a project risky or safe?
There are many other factors to doing a successful PhD, in particular having a supportive advisor and a healthy department culture (see e.g. here). I'm not asking about those aspects, but rather the chance of research success of the project itself. This and this are related questions.

I could write a book on this one, but it would revive memories. Other things equal, pick a well-funded group and avoid groups where the PIs have short arms and low pockets.

Hmmm. If there were reliable indicators of failure up front, then there wouldn't be any failures. If you are tenured and secure then you can take on projects with no clear path to success.

@EdV Would love to read the book! Or just an extended answer :)

@Buffy That makes sense. But are there really no warning signs at all? There are projects with varying levels of riskiness (all worth pursuing) -- what distinguishes the more "risky" projects?

Probably both the projects that crash and burn and the projects that are very successful come from the same "high-risk" category, rather than different ones. Safer projects are more incremental and have both a low risk of "crash and burn" and a low ceiling. Ideally, advisors would not let their students fail merely because they spend some of their time on a high-risk project - other options include diversifying their work, starting on something more "sure" even if it isn't as flashy, etc.

Obviously it's a demanding restriction, and so can't always be done, but the best way for a student to handle this is to actually have a good knowledge of the relevant research area and quite possibly some concrete ideas on how could move the project forward going in. If someone's worried about setting themself up to succeed, the best thing they can do is great work as an undergraduate so they know to some extent if they have good ideas before they start.

First of all, there is no such thing as a completely safe research project, at least one that is worthy to award a PhD for. The only way to know whether a research plan works is to perform it. This is simply because research by its nature explores the unknown – if we already knew the outcome of some piece of research, we wouldn’t have to do it anymore.
That being said, there are more and less risky projects (and also more and less risky fields).
Usually, the more risky projects come with a higher reward if successful, while there is less or no reward for an unsuccessful project, even if done as diligently as possible.
This is partially a problem of the scientific community not rewarding negative results as much as it should (see publication bias), but also partially due to a PhD signifying that you can complete a research project, which you simply don’t learn by exploring a hundred dead ends.
Mind that another risk lies in how exciting the field finds your results and you won’t usually know that either before you tried to publish the research.
Some projects are obviously risky, e.g., consider a project with the following outline:

We have a great new idea how to measure X. We will try to implement this idea. If successful, we will investigate its performance and see whether it allows us to measure X better than established methods.

This project is obviously somewhat risky, because the new idea could spectacularly fail or perform badly because of something nobody has thought of yet.
However, most risks are only apparent to somebody with experience in the field.
Taking the above example again:
How would you know whether implementing the idea involves a lot of fiddling, finding the right components, or not?
Or whether nobody gives a damn about measuring X more accurately, but only more quickly or cheaply?
Or whether if you are in a field which does not appreciate methods unless you find something new and exciting with it?
Now, if you are looking for a PhD position, you are likely not very experienced in the field yet.
Thus, most of the times you have to rely on somebody else’s judgement, usually that of the prospective professor.
And of course the professor can be overly optimistic, dishonest, or completely oblivious to the above (because none of the projects that made their career failed and they never had to think about this).
So what can you do about this?

Look at the professor’s statistics of supervisee success and PhD duration. For an extreme example, if supervisees are either very successful or not at all, you clearly have somebody taking risks.

Ask senior or former members of the professor’s group: They should have an idea about how much risk their professor is entering and how aware and upfront they are about this.

Ask the professor. If they can only give a one-line answer on the risk level or contingency plans or are offended by the question, this is fishy. Mind that many funding organisations ask for a risk assessment or contingency plans nowadays, so if the position is third-party-funded, there is a good chance that they already had to thoroughly think about this. (Unfortunately, this can also mean that the professor has already trained how to sell a project as less risky than it actually is.) Mind that a good answer can also be something like: “If the project fails, we should know quickly. In this case, alternatives are available.”

In general, a third-party-funded project is safer because this usually means some peer reviewers in the field already assessed the risk. But mind that the assessment could also be ”very risky, but somebody should try it”. Also beware whether it was really your project that was assessed, not some larger scheme that includes your project. Ideally, you can get the grant application and evaluation up front.

Finally, I wish to clarify that there is nothing wrong about taking certain risks.
As elaborated above, some are inevitable to research.
However, I think everybody involved should know the risks they are entering.

If your research project has a predictable outcome, it is not good research.  Research projects should not be without a chance of failure.
Choose something that

Is plausibly important if it has the desired outcome.
Will allow you to try something else afterwards.