text:
Just missed grad school application deadline..what can I do?
update: My application has already been accepted! Thanks to everyone who has provided me valuable suggestions. I really appreciate your help! This is an important lesson to me: "Don't leave your work until the last minute"
I just missed the my grad school application deadline....... This is the biggest and most serious mistake I ever made in my life...
This university locates in the Central timezone so I assumed its application deadline was 11:59pm CST. Before I submitted my application, I rechecked everything out of a habit. Then I clicked to submit my application at 11:10pm CST but found that it couldn't be submitted because I was unable to choose the term of enrolment. I first thought it was an internet or technical problem so I restarted my search engine a few times but it still didn't work. At that time, I realized that the deadline might be in EST! (confirmed, as I could still choose term of enrollment for my application to another department in the same university whose deadline is at a later time).
I already sent the department with screenshot of my application with time displayed on the side, along with my application materials. I will also be calling the department first thing in the morning tomorrow to make an appeal. Taking the advice provided by the folks who responded to my question, I am also going to contact my prospective advisor for help.
Is there anything else I can do?

Do you have confirmation that this really was a time zone issue?  Setting a deadline in a different, earlier time zone seems odd, as does not communicating the time zone clearly if it's a strict deadline.  Not that odd things can't happen, but I wonder whether there's another explanation.

@Anonymous Mathematician, thanks for your reply. The department I'm applying to only states that December 1st is the application deadline, with no additional information on the specific time nor time zone. Therefore, I assumed it's 11:59pm in their time zone.....I initially thought it was a technical problem. However, being able to choose the term of enrolment for my application to another department in the same university, I confirmed that missing the deadline is the reason.....:( I agree with you that they should take time zone into consideration

I realized that the deadline might be in EST: "might be" is not the same as "is"; do the instructions say anywhere that the deadline is in EST? This is important, since if the instructions don't say this (or if they do say it, but only in in some deeply-buried place that is easily missed), then you would have a very strong case to insist that the department accept your application despite your technically missing the deadline. Of course, even if the timezone was stated clearly, I still think you have a reasonably good case, but in any case it's worth checking what information was provided.

@Dan Romik. Thank you!!!!!!! yes, the department didn't provide any information on the specific time nor time zone for the application deadline. That's why I assumed they either use their time zone (CT) or the user's local time zone (mine is PST).

Great! By the way, I think you're being too hard on yourself. You did not make a mistake, and you did not "assume" anything. You simply followed the instructions. Not being able to read someone else's mind and guess that they meant something totally unexpected that they didn't say and that no reasonable person would think about is not the same as "assuming". Anyway, good luck, I hope they come to their senses and consider your application (and of course that they accept you).

@DanRomik thanks for your comments and blessing!! I feel so much better now!

Graduate programs vary I'm sure, but in my experience as both an advisor and a graduate director at a big R1 school, application deadlines can always be worked around. This happens to the best of us. Just contact your prospective advisor and try not to stress in the meantime.

You're making several mistakes ... interpreting a deadline as midnight (could be when the office closed) ... assuming timezones/daylight saving on some online gateway will be correct ... leaving it until the absolute last minute to make a submission ... and now over-focusing on EST v CST when you should be on the phone asking how you can still get your application in (there'll probably be a way).

Thanks again, @DanRomik. my application has been accepted already!

Thanks @Corvus. My application has been accepted already!

@TheMathemagician yes, you're right! That's why I beat myself up yesterday because usually I don't leave things until the last minute and make those unreliable assumptions...Thankfully the department has responded to my email quickly and already accepted my application. Thank you for your comment!

@aprilceng glad to hear it. This story reminds me of the saying "experience is the best teacher, but she charges a high tuition." In this case the tuition wasn't too high, and you still learned a great lesson. Consider yourself lucky!

@DanRomik haha I'm also lucky in a sense that I received so much support from you guys :) thanks!

Purely anecdotal, but my roommate failed out of his PhD program, then drove up to another major university 3 months after its application deadline, talked to somebody I assume was important, applied, and was admitted with the incoming class. When he told me this I thought he was nuts, but I guess I dont understand academia.

Bit late to the party here, but... I wouldn't have an MIT PhD now if I hadn't emailed the Chem Eng admissions officer to ask if the application website could be reopened for me, after I mistakenly thought the due date was 15-Jan, instead of 4-Jan.  I'm really glad I asked!!

@Brian wow! Belated congrats to your smart decision ;). I'm so grateful that grad schools are flexible about late applications.

Not leaving things until the last minute is the most important lesson to draw from this story, but there's another good one: As long as you're polite about it, it doesn't hurt to ask!

@MarkMeckes agree!

@Brian that's a cool story and I'm really glad things worked out for you, but, for the sake of future students reading this, it's worth pointing out that very probably there are many stories of people who made a similar mistake to you and their stories did not have such a happy ending.

I just missed the my grad school application deadline....... This is the biggest and most serious mistake I even made in my life...

If that's really true, then what a great life you've had.  You'll bounce back from this and be back to sunshine and roses sooner or later.

[D]oes anyone of you know if the department would accept my late application in this instance?

Of course not [i.e., we don't know], because you haven't told us what department you've applied to.

Is there anything else I can do?  I am even too shamed to contact my prospective advisor regarding this situation.

Taking you at your word, letting shame prevent you from talking to your prospective advisor is the biggest and most serious mistake you've ever made in your life.  Don't do that.  Talk to your prospective advisor as soon as possible.  (There is no need to write about it in a panicked or alarmed tone.  If this really all just happened in the last two hours, it is quite likely that you'll hear from the admissions personnel as well.  But calmly informing your prospective advisor of the situation will be helpful.  If she tells the department that it was not your fault that your application was not submitted on time, it can only help your case.)  If it's very soon, there's at least a reasonable shot that this can be straightened out.  The worst case scenario is that you may have to apply elsewhere or up to one year later.  This is suboptimal and you should do what you can to avoid it, but it would not ruin your life.  Really.

Thank you very much @Pete L. Clark. I agree with you on your suggestion to talk to my prospective advisor! Sooner or later, he will know that I failed to submit my application. In addition, what's more important is my application, instead of my impression to him...I will contact him first thing tomorrow morning. Thanks again!

why does "she" need to be emphasized?

@Ooker: I assume the emphasis was added to distinguish between the applicant telling the department, and the (potential) advisor telling the department. The latter case is more beneficial to the applicant.

I would add that the lesson here is the typical 'don't leave your work until the last second' story. Chances are your application could have been ready a day earlier, or at least a couple hours, and that would have saved you all this headache.

@DavidGrinberg totally agree! I shouldn't have left everything until the last second...this is what beat me up when i found that i missed the deadline...thanks :)

Thanks to Pete L. Clark and @DavidGrinberg, my application has been accepted already!

@april: I'm glad.  To be honest, based on my experience I thought it was very unlikely that your application would not be considered, but I couldn't speak for some other unknown department and I didn't want to say something that would turn out to be disappointing to you.

@PeteL.Clark thanks for being so supportive and considerate! :)

You should certainly get in touch with both the department and your prospective advisor, but I would recommend against emphasizing the time zone issue.  Without some explicit confirmation, I'm skeptical that it is the real explanation, since it would be strange to set a strict deadline based on a different and earlier time zone from the one the university is in.  Instead, I would guess that the deadline was substantially earlier than 11:59pm.  For example, Harvard has strict graduate application deadlines at 5pm Eastern time, and I think this is not uncommon.  (One plausible interpretation of a December 1 deadline is "during business hours on December 1", although I'd bet that 11:59pm is a more common interpretation.)
If you emphasize the time zone issue, there's a risk they will simply tell you that you weren't close enough to the deadline for the time zone to matter.  Instead, I'd recommend focusing on the ambiguity: if they didn't specify the precise time for the deadline, then any reasonable interpretation of "December 1" should be accepted, and 11:59pm CT is a reasonable interpretation.
If they never specified the exact deadline time anywhere, then they screwed up and I think you have a strong case to submit your application slightly late.  However, they may well have stated the time in some obscure webpage, and just not have communicated it clearly.  Then the situation becomes much murkier, if you could in principle have found the precise deadline time but couldn't reasonably have been expected to find it.  If that's the case, then having faculty members at this university on your side may make a big difference (so getting your prospective advisor on board will be a key step).

Thanks!! I'll take your advice to argue for the ambiguity of "December 1st" as well as contact my prospective advisor for help. Thanks again for your time!

@aprilceng Don't argue. Do a mea culpa, tell them it's your mistake that you wanted to apply at the last minute (since you were nervous, wanted to be sure you had everything in order, etc), and that you apologize for the extra work you're causing them. But whatever you do, don't spam them with emails.

Thanks Anonymous Mathematicia and @Peter, my application has been accepted already!

@aprilceng Congratulations


text:
Can the GRE Sub in Psychology compensate for my low GPA?
I am a psychology student. My GPA is quite low: 3.6 for first 3 years but 2.8 for last 3 years ( I spent 6 years in undergrad because I transferred and lost 2 years of credits). However, I will have a publication in psychology and strong letters of recommendation from professors. The low GPA is my major weakness... I am wondering if a good score in GRE sub (like 95 percentile and above) would compensate for my GPA?
Thanks in advance!

Almost certainly not. Although I'm not in psychology, I'm in the social sciences and we generally do not consider the GRE subject exams to have much probative value in regards to the ability to do doctoral work in a field.
Remember that the admission committee is not trying to evaluate whether or not you score well in standardized tests, but rather whether you are capable of rigorous coursework followed by independent research. Our best way of ascertaining that is from your letters of reference and your statement of purpose (and to a lesser extent, your undergraduate grades).

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to collaborate with unmotivated postdocs
As a PhD student in a multidisciplinary subject, I am grouped with a postdoc by my supervisor. In our lab, the usual rule is student do the theory and coding, and postdoc do the experiment.
My collaborator postdoc is highly unmotivated: he badly performed the experimental tasks that I told him to do (most of the time, the experiments was unqualified), and delayed our project progress.
I am much younger than him, and he refused to follow my instructions, and instead fed me with unreliable “ideas” and asked me to do his job... My supervisor knows the situation, but does nothing and just watches. Each weekly meeting I am the only guy having progress.
At end I had to do the experimental part myself. It was tough but finally the project was accepted to a top journal. I have done 95%+ works, but have to add the postdoc as a coauthor (he didn’t even take part in writing the paper)
I anticipate similar course of action in future projects. I can’t change the group.
How can I properly motivate my postdoc to get him work for me?
Edits:
The question has been revived and let me summarize some of comments. It helps to clarify some statements:

"get him work for me" simply means "do his duty as a collaborator".
The postdoc received authorship; but I am actually the guy doing all the works.
The whole story is, I gave up pushing on him, did the bio training myself, and finished the data acquisition myself.
In this question I am humbly asking how to avoid similar situations from happening again.
I am not being harsh from the very first beginning. I was polite to the postdoc, even after wasting months.
Technician is not a negative word. If you are familar with bio labs, you will know most postdocs are no more than a "technician", most of them cannot get a decent faculty position (e.g. top 100 US universities). I am a technician too, but just in coding. The only scientist is the professor.

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

How can I properly motivate my postdoc to get him work for me?

You don't. Changing anyone's behavior is difficult; changing your "superior's" behavior will be even less successful and will lead to conflict.
I would start by trying to figure out how long the post-doc is planning to be around. It may be that he is on his way out; this would explain both his lack of focus and the professor's apathy.
In any case, I agree with the discussion in the comments -- the situation as you describe it is inexcusable. But as a PhD student, your options are very limited. I would suggest asking the professor for a private meeting. In the meeting, I suggest making the following points.

You successfully published a paper in a top journal
The post-doc contributed virtually nothing to this work, and in fact delayed progress
You feel it "may have been inappropriate" to even list the post-doc as an author of the paper
Based on this experience, you think it would be more fruitful to work independently from the post-doc on future efforts.

The professor will likely not be receptive to this, and will make some vague promise about speaking to the post-doc. So, the real question you should be asking (yourself) is:

Should I finish my PhD with this advisor or find another group?

If you are willing to leave (and you are sure!), you can mention this to your advisor if his initial reaction is not satisfactory. This may change the calculation for him -- or he may be more candid with you (e.g., telling you that he is about to fire the post-doc). Or he may let you go.
If you are close to graduation, then it's probably worth sticking this out. Adding people as authors when they didn't contribute much does not really rise to the level of serious academic misconduct, so I would simply avoid relying on the post-doc as much as possible.

Thanks for the suggestions. Even worse I am in the middle (2.5 years) of my phd and my professor is one big man (10k+ citations) in this area. There will be no way to find another phd position if I am pissing him off. Yes I now do all the stuff myself. Each weekly meeting the postdoc says nothing and just watch me reporting, like a boss. I felt like I am a slave to the postdoc, not a collaborator. —It was my mistake to do a phd in a CS lab while doing bio for real. Sad.

Have you confronted the postdoc directly? "Why do you expect me to do all the work?"

@OlegLobachev Yes I did. He said "I have done the task, but you are being too mean for the data so I will not do it again". His data is useless and suffer from motion blur and defocus blur. These are just lab issues that can be properly handled with enough patience. Whenever I asked him to do the job, he just fed me with gabage data. After wasting weeks I have to do it on my own.

What does "too mean for the data" mean?  I feel like a couple of things are being mistranslated in that sentence and I'm having trouble intuiting what you meant there.

@aparente001 It means, as a student, I am requiring too much/ too picky for the data; he thinks the data is good enough for the post-processing. However it turns out not. To me, those are unqualified data.

Let's see if I understood right.  The postdoc said, "You are being too picky about this data; the data I took for you is good enough" -- is that about right? (You might want to check the meaning of "too mean.")

@aparente001 Exactly. This is what I really mean.

To motivate someone, or at least not demotivate them, you should make them feel valued and taken seriously. Everything you are saying points in the direction of that not happening.
For example, your postdoc isn't working for you; he is working with you. Or at least, that's how the situation should be if you want him to be motivated. You are also saying he has to follow your instructions, and do experiments you tell him to do. You describe him as a technician. If I were the experimentator in such a collaboration I'd be very unwilling to put in any effort.
Obviously, making someone feel valued and taken seriously will not turn them into a better experimentator. So in some collaborations being respectful towards your collaborator will be very effective, and in some collaborations it won't be. But the way I see it, you have nothing to lose.

As a postdoc who is often unmotivated, I will try to help you out.
Clearly you are not in ideal academic ambiance for high-quality intellectual output. Your supervisor looks parasitic in relying on others to work on their own albeit in his behalf, and this postdoc is relying on you to do the hard work. Providing the worst quality results for a demanding mate is the oldest recipe for not being asked to do anything. (Like breaking some expensive piece when pushed to wash the dishes).
In that case you're stuck and I don't see anyway around it. However parasites have a lot to lose, in fact more than their host.
I suggest you be bold and do the unexpected: tell your postdoc and boss you're fed up and leaving. My guess is that they'll make concessions to keep you. Do not expect them to change this game: you will just get something this time, for a while. In any case, should you leave anyway, I don't think you will be doing a bad business.
In most cases dropping a bad PhD is way better that swallowing it whole, and still much better than not having had the experience. Reconsider this logic if you must return funding/salary (see your contract conditions).
Shake these mites off you and get on with your life.

What's in it for this postdoc?
I would suggest that you sit in on some courses where you would learn what you need to know to be able to take the data comfortably, without stress, more autonomously.

Thanks for the suggestion. Yes I have now finished the training and be able to do the experiments myself. And what do you mean by “what’s in it?”

You did the training overnight? // "What's in it for the postdoc?" means "What would X gain from doing your grunt work for you?"  See https://english.stackexchange.com/q/443051/112436.

See my previous comments in the question. I did the training before the submission deadline and finally did the lab work myself. And I see your question. He is one collaborator of the project, and received authorship in the end. So, he has to do the job. No free lunch, right?

The question at ELU is for documentation -- I explained here what I meant by that idiom. // If you've done the training and are now comfortable taking the data you need for your theoretical work, with no more need to beg the uncooperative postdoc to take data for you, then what's the problem?

The problem is, we just finished one project. And there will be follow-up projects where I am still grouped within the same postdoc. I need to avoid such situations from happening again.

I'm suggesting that you do your own lab work. // Now, if you want to learn more about this type of lab work from this postdoc, then perhaps you could make yourself useful around the lab, and build a positive relationship with this person.

Thanks for the advice. Yes I am kind of a lab guy now. The sad truth is I am in a CS lab but getting bio training. From other answers it suggests that I probably have to do the lab works by myself. It is hard to change others' behavior.

Right, especially if there is no benefit for the other person. // If you want to do applied math or applied computer science, it behooves you to learn as much as you can about the area of application. // Your question and comments, up until the last one, came across and imperious and likely to make you quite unpopular in a bio lab.  As you continue your research work, I suggest you keep in mind that you are a guest in someone else's lab. // Glad you're starting to think in terms of being more autonomous.  Best of luck as you continue your studies.

Clearly the postdoc gets salary, authorships, and perhaps later a recommendation letter with next to no effort.

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

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


text:
Extra question for specific students on test/quiz
While this may seem unfair intuitively, I want to know whether if it is fair for a professor to have an extra question for specific students in the class.
A little background: In a calculus class, 3 out of a 16 ish students have taken calculus before at their high school, but the university requires them to take a similar class as per the university's rules. The professor knew that they had calculus, and so, during a quiz, he assigned them an extra question, and everyone else didn't have that question on their paper.
Now, it wasn't an extra credit problem, yet, it was graded as a normal problem.
So my question is, can the professor exclude those specific group of students and assign them an extra problem on a test or a quiz?

the rules are at fault - they should be given an exemption.

The goal of any kind of assessment in teaching is to check if each student has met the learning objectives of the teaching activity, and the test should therefore have essentially the same questions of the same level of difficulty for all students. Otherwise, we would ask more of certain students in order for them to have met the learning objectives.

The questions in the setting that you mention were randomly generated and of the same level of difficulty; this is not a problem. However, here we speaking of different questions having another level of difficulty aimed at specific students.

I am of course of the opinion that the questions should be essentially the same; indeed, trivial variations of parameters and re-ordering of questions can be simple and useful safeguards against cheating, and I have indeed used these measures in my own teaching. In the case of an oral exam, we of course cannot ask the exact same questions to each and every student, but we can and should ask essentially the same questions.

@StellaBiderman Please note that the OP is saying "to have an extra question for specific students in the class.".

@scaaahu Again, I am not saying that Hans's position is wrong, merely that his original justification for it on the grounds that the test should contain the same questions for every student is wrong. I agree with the answer and general and upvoted it after he reworded it.

Whether is it ethical or not is completely dependent on certain university rules. Probably a discussion with the Dean (Instruction or Academic Studies) should help to clarify this fact.
There are few points to take care. If a few students had an advantage because they already had calculus in their high school, and now they are being tested on (probably) harder problems than what others are getting is "not fair".
Did they agree to be tested on the extra set of problems? How did the professor know about their previous high school course? What if few students didn't disclose the fact that they already had the course earlier.

Yes, I think a discussion with the Dean will clarify my question. They didn't agree to be tested on the extra set of problems, as a matter of fact, they didn't know about it until after the test. The professor asked them if they had calculus before, and they answered him. And for the latter question, he probably would not have included the extra question. Thanks for your answer.


text:
Is it correct to call oneself "Doctor/Scientist/Mathemathician" simply because one has a PhD in that field?
If I use the word "Doctor" amongst laypeople, they will think I actually work as a doctor, treating people or advancing medicinal research on a daily basis.
If I use the word "Mathematician", they will think I work at a university where I spend some of my time lecturing students and some of my time doing research into complicated math problems.
If I use the word "Scientist", they will think I work in some laboratory where I am pivotal in the advancement of some cutting-edge research that will make the world a better place.
However, one can denote oneself using above terms by merely graduating and/or acquiring a PhD, even if one then left the field entirely, either out of choice or due to a failure to succeed.
My question is thus, is it wrong to call oneself a Doctor/Mathematician/Scientist if one is actually not working as one such, but merely acquired the appropiate degrees? Since clearly one is knowingly deceiving others*? If this question is too opinionated, I shall then ask: how many academics do actually use their degrees and doctorates to label themselves even if they actually are not working in those fields?

*To provide an example of such deceit, I had thought for a long time that Sam Harris, who writes many pieces on political, religious and scientific affairs, actually was a neuroscientist, as he claims. That sounded massively impressive to me the first time I heard it,  and added much merit to anything he had to say about science. I recently however found out that all he has done as a "neuroscientist" is get a PhD in it, and his thesis has been heavily criticized.

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

It's not the individual word that matters. Calling oneself a scientist is not unethical, no more than it is unethical to call oneself a musician without being in the Top100 charts. What is unethical is deliberately representing yourself in a way that causes people to assign you an authority that you do not have.
This is an incredibly gray area because it is entirely dependent on context. As an example, answering "I'm a doctor" to the question "so, what do you do?" would be misrepresenting yourself if you are in fact a mathematics PhD who now works in insurance. However, answering "I'm a doctor" to the question "how well-educated are you?" is perfectly reasonable.
The difference in understanding of a topic between someone who left a field a few years ago and someone who is currently still researching in it is probably not too huge, when it comes to science popularisation efforts. I'd also take issue with your characterization of "just" a PhD - PhDs are the frontline researchers of science, the further along you get in your career the less time you have to actually put your hands on the science. Professor is mostly a management job.
That said, you shouldn't be so impressed with someone that you defer uncritically to their opinion based on just a title. Every field has its marginal cranks, even actively currently practicing ones.

+1. though answering "how well educated are you" type questions with a doctors would be unnatural phrasing (not unethical just unnatural), something like "I have a doctorate" or "I have a PhD" would be more natural I think.

Thanks for letting me know! English isn't my first language so it didn't sound off to me. What other similar example could I use?

I have a hard time coming up with a question to which a natural answer would be "I am a doctor" actually.

Maybe one of the other examples in the post? "I'm a mathematician" could be the answer to... "how do you know that 2+2=4?", I guess?

@LyndonWhite Responding to "What is your highest formal level of education?" with "I am a doctor" sounds completely natural to me. I am from northeast U.S., and it is normal to say it that way here.

I'd argue that "I'm a doctor" is a misleading thing to say unless you're either (a) a medical doctor or (b) discussing the title that should be used to refer to you. In all other situations that I can think of, "I have a PhD/doctorate" is the thing to say, and that works even in case (b).

@nengel For "Doctor", an example I'd use is: Someone asks John Smith "How should I refer to you when introducing you?" John Smith says "Call me Doctor Smith."

"Professor is mostly a management job." - perhaps where you're from, but not at all universities.

@OrangeDog some countries have more "grade inflation" in job titles in others. Country X might call you a "professor" while country Y would (more accurately) call you a "lecturer" and reserve "professor" for people who have already spent 20+ years following a distinguished academic career path.

Most of the medical professionals I know prefer to be called "Al" or "John"  or "Sue" or whatever their name actually is. That way people don't pester them for free medical advice.

A doctorate or PhD is a degree you have obtained. If you have obtained this degree, it is never incorrect to refer to yourself as dr. X, or X, PhD. However, in normal conversation, one would usually say "I have a doctorate", rather than "I am a doctor". This is because "doctor" is also used to indicate a profession.
Mathematician and scientist are, on the other hand, professions. If you work in retail, you are neither, even if you happen to have a PhD in mathematics. You could, however, say that you are trained as a mathematician. Compare this to how having a teaching licence does not make you a teacher.
As for the ethical considerations, it will mostly depend on the context and the intent with which the words are used. Similarly to nengel I would consider it unethical if you use these terms to deliberately misrepresent yourself.

I would add to that neither "mathematician" nor "scientist" implies you work at a university or have a PhD (see OP's second line).

If you work in retail, you are neither, even if you happen to have a PhD in mathematics — I strongly disagree!  Someone who works in retail Monday through Friday but does mathematics for fun on the weekends is a mathematician, just as someone who gardens on the weekend for fun is a gardener.  Even if they don't have a PhD in gardening.

@JeffE, at best you would be an amateur mathematician, or a hobbyist. I've never heard someone who enjoys working in their garden refer to themselves as a gardener, only as someone who enjoys gardening.

@Jordi, if memory serves, Chauncey Gardiner referred to himself as a "gardener".

@Kimball, true, but there is a very strong connotation. A mathematician working in a non-academic setting would usually refer to themselves by a more specific title, e.g. quant, statistician, etc.

@JordiVermeulen People are described as being "a keen gardener" all the time: it means their hobby is gardening and they're enthusiastic about it, and isn't taken as an implication that they're a professional gardener.

@DavidRicherby, yes, but that changes the context: if you leave out the "keen", suddenly you seem to imply that they tend gardens for a living.

@JordiVermeulen, Fermat was a lawyer by profession, and worked on mathematics in his free time, would you say he was not a mathematician?

@JordiVermeulen An amateur mathematician is a type of mathematician.

You all seem to be missing the point. What I'm saying is that in general, when someone says "I am a mathematician", without any further qualification, it is implied that you do it professionally.

@JordiVermeulen Probably context-dependent rather than absolute.  Though Einstein was a patent office clerk for 7 years, it'd seem reasonable for him to have identified as a "physicist" during that time, however I can see how even that could've been taken as misleading if he'd said it in response to someone asking him what he did for a living.

I agree with @JeffE and further, etymology aside, you don't have to do something as a profession to be a professional at it.  Likewise, not everyone in a profession is professional.  Example: many self-taught programmers who work in other fields are yet more professional than some people who pound corporate keyboards for a living.

@Akavall Well, a mathematician is somebody who writes proofs so... ;-)

I'd consider an university degree to give you the title of "mathematician". My degree in physics gives me a particular perspective on the world, and determines how I tackle problems, even if they don't have anything to do with physics. Hence, I regularly say I am a physicist, even though I work on a related field.

First point, check the Laws
They obviously vary in each country, i.e. in mine you cannot legally use the title of Engineer if you have not passed the related Bar exam. You can call yourself a Master Laureate in engineering or Laureate in engineering (the latter if you have "only" a bachelor degree) but, except obviously for the conversational situation, it is an offense to claim you are an engineer if you haven`t passed the Bar exams. The same goes for the title of Lawyer.
De facto this distinction applies only when using title in formal settings, but it is worth to know it.
Only real danger is confusion with Medical Doctors
This is probably the only real-life situation where a real problem may arise: if you are in a confined situation (i.e. small cruise ship) and by misunderstanding on the title of "doctor" officials are led to believe you are a medical doctor (and thus a very useful person in an emergency) when you are not other people may end up in danger because of this.
"Hey, passenger in 36C fall unconscious!" "No worries, I`ll get the doctor in 42B" "Me? CPR? Wait a sec, I have a phd in math.." :)
"Scientist"
Did you bring interesting and notable contribution to your field thru systematic research? If yes, no matter if BA of PHD, then you are a scientist!

The concern that a PhD would be confused with an MD tends to be greatly exaggerated.

Really depends on languages - In Italy "Dottore", at least in spoken language, is historically associated with a MD in common speech, if someone tells you he is a "Dottore" 99% of the people will assume he is a MD.

True, but I'm also talking in the context of the situation itself coming up. Passenger manifests usually don't include titles and nothing says that an MD is going to use the title (or be licensed to practice for that matter...) so they aren't a reliable way of finding someone with a medical background. Plus, generally you want to stabilize the patient so you can transport then to a facility for greater care so anyone with up to date medical experience (e.g., EMT, RN, MD, etc.) may be helpful in the situation.

fair point on the manifest thing, now most of the booking systems where you specifiy your title have enough options not to leave space for doubts :)

Booking systems tend to capture a lot more data then what is actually transferred to a manifest.

I always choose "Ms" or "Her Royal Highness" on booking forms that insist on titles.

@Caterpillaraoz What's even worse, in Italy Dottore is the standard title for someone with a bachelor's degree (laurea)...

@Denis Nardin 3 years to be called Dottore... That is just adorable!

From a talk by Crystal Bailey, who is the "Career Programs Manager" for one of America's major scientific societies:

Who is a Physicist?
Anyone with a Physics degree: BS, BA, MS, PhD, etc.
Why?

Definition
  is
  consistent
  with
  other
  disciplines
  (e.g.
  Chemistry)
Defines
  a
  common
  set
  of
  experiences
  (and
  texts)
Inclusive
  view
  is
  better
  for
  survival
  of
  discipline

What makes them Physicists?
Share experiences create familiarity—not only with the same Physics concepts, but also with the culture of the discipline.
However,
  most
  importantly,
  even
  a
  basic
  Physics
  training
  imparts
  essential
  problem
  solving
  skills—“how
  to
  think”—which
  is
  the
  hallmark
  of
  a
  physicist.
Where do Physicists Work?
Not where you think! ... [Only about] 14% of Physics Degree holders will actually become Physics PhDs—and by extension "traditional physicists."

I've never agreed with this, even though it does seem to be the official position of e.g. the APS. I'd imagine they have an interest in promoting as inclusive a definition of "physicist" as possible.

authors: Bob Jarvis - Слава Україні


text:
Social media vs. academic career
After an incident where a complaint has been submitted against my private social media profile by students (with whom I had no interaction, nor were my posts directed towards) I felt attacked in a way I didn't feel before. Since my research is the most valuable thing to me in my life, I decided that my reaction will be to shut down all of my social media interactions and kept quiet for the past half a year. I am considering the cons of reopening my social media accounts and would love some input.
When closing my accounts, what scared me the most was the idea that a part of my life that has nothing to do with research, would interrupt my academic reputation, which is hard enough to build on its own as you all know. Weighing out the different possible outcomes, I felt like I prefer focusing on my research than being the Rosa Parks of crazy posting online.
Things became most awkward when at some point, I felt like I was forced to explain myself to faculty who come from a different generation, with different perception of the nuances of social behavior now days, which is already a stereotypical issue in the field I come from to begin with. This made me very frustrated. I found it very uncomfortable when I tried to explain the situation to some professor whom these students approached in order to file an official complaint against me, and this Professor didn't even want to hear me out. Although our relationship has normalized since, I figured out that the more provocative social media interaction I take part in, the more I would find myself in the position of needing to explain myself to people without some necessary background or motivation to understand where I am coming from. This has led me to stop all of my social media interactions immediately after "the incident".
My advisor, which I absolutely adore, both as a researcher and as a human being, has advised me strongly against engaging in social media in any form since. He told me that time and time again he has seen people suffering from negative effects on their careers, and that it is not worth it. However, I do not feel like he necessarily knows all of the aspects in which I gain value out of participating in social media interaction, and besides, I should have the right to live my own private life outside the academia. My advisor says that as a T.A. in a university I am "half a public figure" and this forces me to some unspoken social code of behavior. However, I am not sure I am very fond of that unspoken social code. I understand why it is absolutely important to be sensitive and politically correct within the confines of the classroom, and when interacting with peers, students and superiors, but where is it said that choosing a research career implies that I must be PG13 within the confines of my own social life? Would you feel like you would personally want to opt out of having research interactions with someone that has a provocative YouTube channel or Twitter accounts? Do you feel that it is necessary for me to suppress my desire to express myself creatively online in favor of an academic career?
It should be mentioned that the faculty has revoked the complaint against me and has told me that their official response is that it is not anybody else's business what I do online. However, I do feel like there is room for extra care in such a gray area topic. I am curious to hear your thoughts on this quite personal contemplation.

Where in the world are you?

Some small country in Europe, if that helps.

A bit, though Europe is quite diverse in conditions and social norms. I'll make some assumptions and hopefully they'll apply to your case.

There is no question here. This isn't a social commentary site, actually.

Please don't post requests for opinions.

What is your question?

Can you clarify if your posts are public or private?

What was the incident about? What "content" do you post online? Is it at all relevant to research? Can your social media and academic profiles be linked? Without this information, the question can't be answered. (I don't think it's "opinion based", however. It's just unclear.).

I'm a bit (well, more than a bit) concerned about your phrase "Rosa Parks of crazy posting". Whatever do you mean by that. Rosa Parks was a heroine who put her life on the line for a principle. Do you intend an insult? Curious!

A number of people have very publicly ruined their career by posting something controversial on social media. Whether you think this is unreasonable or unfair or whatever doesn't really matter. The simple fact is that it happens and you already know the type of things you post can get you in trouble. Ultimately it's your choice how you continue, because you need to live with the consequences. But plenty of people have social lives despite not using social media, plenty of people don't post things controversial enough to cause problems and you're free to use an alias (on some sites).

Often, people confuse the protections of the freedom of expression in various forms as protection from judgment by others rather than protections from government (and sometimes employer) sanction. In a free society, you have the right to express the things you want to express on social media (with a few key exceptions), but you do not have the right for that expression to not influence the opinions others have of you.
It seems like you've run into conflicts based on not knowing the boundaries of this principle. Therefore, stepping back from social media seems like good advice from an academic perspective.
You'll have to weigh for yourself whether this advice is too stifling on your personal expression. Some types of expression may be too valuable. However, if you make that choice you have to understand that it comes with consequences.
Social media is not a venue through which you get to have a pulpit without taking a risk. You can reduce the risk through anonymous accounts or by sharing among friends rather than the general public, but things you post on Twitter are no different in principle from things you stand and shout on the street outside your university buildings.
I personally am not opposed to working with people who speak their mind publicly, but there are certain things, such as those that are racist or sexist, those that are homophobic or transphobic, those defending or supporting certain types of crimes, etc, that for the sake of my own expression I will not tolerate. Just as some will choose to use their freedoms to express those opinions, I will use mine to avoid working with them as long as I'm within the law.

I appreciate your comment, and feel like you've touched on several key notes. I do want to maintain noise free academic interactions, and do view the online world as one that is parallel to the "real one". These are indeed tensions you pinpointed between the way I view the world and the way others do. To me, I think the answer should be somewhere in the middle, because I do think that some channels of self expression are too valuable to give up on.

My favourite mottos on the topic are: "As you holler into the internet, the internet will holler back at you." and "They used to say, on the internet nobody knows you are a dog. It's not true. On the contrary: on the internet, everybody knows you are a dog. What's worse, on the internet everybody also has the pockets full of rocks. And some have cudgels."

"such as those that are racist or sexist, those that are homophobic or transphobic" - even that is not so easy to decide. Some would say nothing except inciting violence against homosexuals is homophobic, others might say that simply not wanting to celebrate pride week is homophobic. Similarly, disagreeing with affirmative action and racial quotas are regarded as racist by some, while agreeing with it is regarded as racist by others. Social media, and the tendency of extreme opinions being louder, makes this even more chaotic.

While I stay away from social networks myself, I have a bunch of friends in academia who are very vocal on certain issues which attract the attention of all sorts of people, many of whom are idiots or really nasty human beings who try to interfere with my friends' lives and academic careers.
So far, they are doing quite fine despite all the noise. If you decide to stay on social media, here is some advice based on their success:
Learn about privacy settings and use them
Many social networks have detailed privacy settings which allow the user to keep good control over who sees what. The default behavior is usually to share with everyone because it brings ad revenue to the social network's owners. You can keep nosy strangers out of your social circle by restricting their access.
Use a pseudonym on your social networks
While unusual these days, it's still a good idea to use a nickname while on social media. Your friends and family will get used to seeing a nickname and if you do not post too many photos of yourself, you will stay under the radar of strangers.
Learn to argue your point
If you say controversial things on social media, be ready for a confrontation. If your arguments are watertight, you do not need to fear being questioned about what you said. In academic context, it's good to have them supported by research.
When later questioned about your statements, do not go into defensive mode immediately. For example, if somebody tells you "People have been complaining about your statement X on social media.", do not start with "But it's true!", but rather "What did I say that they have problems with?" to make sure that you are on the same page. If it's something crazy (as it often is when some social justice warrior accuses you of wrongdoing), you can respond with "That's not what I said at all, I said that [include your reasonable statement here]".
Be a decent human being in general
Resist the urge to be nasty to people on social media. If your posts are calm and reasonable, people will generally not have reasons to complain and if they do, they will look like idiots. It is possible to say even controversial things in a way that makes it hard for anyone to accuse you of anything.
In the end though, it is up to you alone to decide whether the additional stress, effort and potentially occasional drama is worth your presence on social networks.

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


text:
Trying to get into undergraduate research, is it discouraged to contact both the PhD students and the professor?
I attend a university with a fairly large undergraduate computer science program - our introduction to programming course was ~1400 students during the last fall semester and many of the upper division courses have 400-500 students.
I am interested in doing research to gain experience and to get to know a few professors, but it is difficult to get in contact with said professors because of the course sizes.
Given this situation, I am thinking about skipping the step of trying to get in contact with the professor I am interested in researching with and directly contact the PhD students with interesting projects.
On the other hand, it seems that contacting a professor may expose me to more interesting projects that I didn't know he/she is involved in.
Is it discouraged to contact both the PhD students and the professor?

What year you are in? Are you an undergraduate student? What abilities you have in computer science both in theory or practice? How many hours per week you have free to dedicate to research?

@DaveRose, I am a rising undergraduate Junior.  As for your next question, I am not certain how to respond - the only measure of capability I would be able to use is GPA (>3.7 for technical), which is a poor indicator, but is some form of a ruler.  Hours are flexible - I would be willing to lighten my course load to accommodate more hours to research.

I would think a professor would have office hours posted.  However, if not, or if they are not convenient, email and ask for an appointment.  "Dear Prof. So-and-So, I took your Intro to Modern Physics course in the spring semester.  I would like an appointment to come in and speak with you about how to get involved in physics research.  I am on campus on Tuesdays and Thursdays all day, and Monday and Wednesday afternoons."  Something like that.

I'd say you should not contact PhD students. In the best case a PhD student would relay your request to their supervisor.

Some universities and faculty are more interested in getting undergraduates involved in research than others. I've had quite a few undergraduate students do research with me with great success (publications even). I've never taught at a university with a PhD in CS though - my institutions encouraged undergraduate research and often even provided funding for it.
I would recommend against approaching PhD students to work on their research unless directed to do so by their advisor - they are focusing their time and energy on finishing their degrees as well as any research/teaching duties assigned by the university. You can ask graduate students for advice on which professors are interested in working with undergraduates - they usually know the faculty pretty well.
As far as professors, there are a few different approaches. Your department should have research seminars - probably more than one - have you been attending? They are usually open to anyone who is interested and it's a good way to hear about interesting research. If the faculty member you are interested in working with has a research group with a seminar series then sitting in on that is also a good way to show that you're serious about doing research with them (but ask if that's ok!). Figure out a specific faculty member or research group you're interested in - you're more likely to get a positive response if you can demonstrate knowledge of what they are doing and genuine interest (in the research - not just in getting a recommendation letter!).
Does your department have programs for undergraduate research? Many have summer scholar programs that partner students with faculty or with research labs. Faculty who have grant money can often get extra funding to pay an undergraduate to work with them.
The other thing you can do is to look into Research Experience for Undergraduate programs - summer programs where you'd go to another university to do research. They are competitive to get into though so it's another situation where you'll need a letter of reference. This can be from someone whose class you've taken (I've written them for my students).

J, thanks for your response.  It was insightful to know how PhD students would feel about being contacted.

Welcome to SE J! This was a very insightful answer. Doing research at a undergraduate level is something the universities I went to didn't even talk about but it would have helped a lot during my Masters if I had had more research experience.

J, just wanted to say thanks again for your response. Through your inquiry about whether my department has a program for undergraduate research I stumbled upon our Honors program which is exactly what you described, and is what I have been looking for!


text:
Is it rude for me to ask professors for assignments in advance of the class starting?
I will be starting my first semester of an online graduate program in ~20 days. Because of my full-time position, I am expecting things to be quite chaotic over the next month or so and I have considered asking the professors whose classes I will be taking for homework assignments (not exams or lecture notes) in advance, prior to the courses starting, so that I can finish them as soon as possible.
The material in this program is not new to me; judging by the textbook, I am very familiar with a lot of the material and would rather spend the time teaching myself what I don't know now before the courses begin, if possible.
Would making such a request be considered rude, and if not, how would you suggest wording such a request?

Not rude, but many instructors do not have the assignments finalized until a few minutes before they hand them out.

It's not rude, but as the teacher I might want you to have done or heard some things in class before you write a paper.  Doing the assignments before you take the class suggests that the in-class stuff is pretty useless.  Why not spend the time reading the parts of the book you don't know?

You might also ask if it's possible to take a proficiency exam, instead of taking a class on material you already know well.

Even if the professor has not yet written the homeworks, h/she has probably more or less decided what sections of the textbook will be covered, and would be likely very happy (if emailed and asked) to give you guidelines on how to get started before the term begins.

In my case my calculus teacher made the final exam count for 70% of entire semester grade and that was botched so I had to retake the entire class and the next time I didn't make it to the exam. I've never been able to retake the exam, test out of the class, appeal for withdrawal, transfer, etc. Do what they tell you.

I am not sure if they should be giving you the assignments before the normal handout time. Here, assignments are designed to be finished in a specific amount of time and you most commonly have to hand them in exactly one or two weeks after they were handed out. Getting them early would present a problem as you are then having more time to finish them than you fellow students.

@skymningen: Indeed, and getting them early with the specific condition of having to submit them earlier would still present the possible problem of the other classmates learning about the assignments before they should (i.e. the same reason why you wouldn't be allowed to take the exam earlier).

When I did TAing of a class the chief TA handed out the proposed exercises to us a week before they were handed out to the students and we had to solve them. The exercises were done in a final form only a few days before they were handed out to the students. Sometimes the prof did not cover all that he wanted, so we had to adjust them again. It is therefore highly probable, as StrongBad says, that the exercises are not even thought of yet.

In high school, I had one teacher that, every Monday, would hand out a "calendar" of the week, listing on which days homework would be assigned, and when each of those assignments would be due. I found this extremely helpful in managing my time between that class and others - if I knew an assignment would be given on Wednesday, but I had no homework on Tuesday, I could start on it. Or if I knew that Thursday's assignment wouldn't be due until the next Tuesday, I could prioritize the homework from some other class for that weekend.

@DanHenderson How did you manage to begin on Tuesday an assignment only given out on Wednesday?

@cfr Well the calendar might say on Wed "HW: page 65, questions 1-12, due Fri" in which case on Tuesday I could read pages 60-65 in the book and perhaps complete questions 1-3, for example.

That weekly calendar also listed labs and heavy discussion days (it was a chem class).

It's not rude, but the professor might want to adjust the assignments later on, in which case he/she won't be able to satisfy your request. So go ahead making the request simply being honest in the wordings, but be prepared to be denied.

Elaborating further on previous answers:
You can certainly ask, phrasing your request using usual conventions of courtesy:

Dear Professor Rodriguez,
My name is Clarinetist, and I am taking your XYZZ 123 course this semester.  Because of [state your reasons here], I would like to start working through the assignments before the semester starts, or at least as early as possible.  If this is something that would be possible for this course, would you be able to give me the assignments in advance?
If this is not possible, I understand.
If you have any other advice for a student in my situation, that would be helpful as well.
Sincerely,
Clarinetist

Note the line "If this is not possible, I understand".  You should not only say this but also mean it - if the professor declines your request, respect that decision.  Don't argue about it, and don't assume she has just refused in order to spite you.
Now.  There are a number of possible problems with trying to do the assignments ahead.  There is a risk that you could have  to redo assignments, or finding out that the time you spent doing them ahead was wasted.  You should only proceed if you are willing to accept those risks - do not blame the professor, and do not expect that she will: explicitly warn you about them, accept the work you did do, or offer you due date extensions.  (One possible reason for the professor to decline to give you the assignments ahead is to avoid hard feelings that could result if/when you find yourself frustrated by these issues.)

She may not have decided yet what the assignments will be.  This is very common, especially when a professor is teaching a course for the first time - many professors find it much easier to "play it by ear", and be able to adapt assignments to how the course goes, than to plan out the entire semester in advance.
She may change the assignments before they are given out to the class at large.  You might complete an assignment and then find it is no longer  assigned at all, and that what's actually due is something completely different.  I repeat: if you are asking for access to assignments before the rest of the class, then this is your responsibility to deal with, and you shouldn't expect assignment adjustments, due date extensions, etc.
The assignments might depend on material that is only covered in lecture, and not discussed in the textbook.  Maybe you can find this material somewhere else, maybe not.

Or it might appear that you can do them based on the textbook, but perhaps the lecture will explain that the textbook has an error, or use alternative definitions for words, or generally interpret the assignment in a different way than you thought.  You may thus have to redo it.
Or there could be "dynamic" assignments that require information that doesn't even exist until after the lecture.  "Analyze the data we collected in class on Tuesday."  "Write an essay, incorporating points made by other students in Wednesday's class discussion."

Maybe it is possible to do the assignment based on the textbook and your previous knowledge, but after hearing the lecture you realize that you did it wrong, or could do it better.  Then you have to redo it.

So in conclusion, even if the professor agrees, your plan may not be as successful as you hope, and may even take more of your time overall.  As such, you may want to pay more attention to any "other advice for a student in my situation" that the professor may offer.

Great list of possible difficulties, maybe one additional point to consider: When doing the homeworks at the regular time, the student may be pointed to a general issue with their solutions (it can be related to the material, or just something formal, ...), so they can improve that aspect of their solutions starting with the next assignment. However, when doing the assignments ahead of time, the student can hardly expect to also get feedback ahead of time, which means they will not get informed about such general issues before completing all assignments.

You can ask. However, from my experience, few professors prepare all the homeworks before the course starts.  For the courses that I teach, I know how many homeworks I will give. However, I will generally just prepare them a few days before I will give them to the students. For courses, where there is a single project to do instead of homeworks, it may be different. Or if a professor is always teaching the same course every year, he may have different verions of the homeworks that he could give you. Besides, if you have a good reason, perhaps that the professor will agree to give you the homeworks or even give you something different if the homeworks are not ready.

You might also make it clear that you are only seeking the assignments that do not contribute to the final mark. You do not specify the course, but often homework assignments get marked and might make up 30% of your grade or similar. It would be unreasonable to expect these in advance as you would have more time than other students.

It's generally not considered "rude", but it may well not be practical, since in addition to not being available early, the professors may well not want them to be leaked since that can give rise to plagiarism/honor-code violations, which is a growing headache these days esp. in CS or EE courses.
So if they make special arrangements for you, in general don't broadcast to classmates that you got a sneak preview on the assignments, and don't discuss the assignment with others before it's released, unless you are explicitly told that's ok and encouraged.
Alternatively the professors may have to incur extra work to come up with a different assignment for you, to prevent the above, but now you might not get the shared learning benefit of working on the same task as the others, or reviewing each other's code after the assignment is finished and graded.
So, it depends on what is allowed and what they consider reasonable.

To expand on other answers: no, it's not rude or inappropriate to ask, but there are any number of good reasons for the professor to refuse this request.
What you might have some more success with, is to ask for old practice exams in advance.  If as you say, you already have some proficiency with the material, then these would let you determine any precise areas where you need more study.  I don't know what program you're taking, but I would guess that you would be able to quickly complete any assignments that cover material you are already proficient with.  Assuming that's true, then getting a head start on those assignments might actually be less benefit than tailoring your independent study to your own weak areas anyway.

I really can't improve on the excellent answers give above.  On the other hand, I would think that a professor might be more amenable to your request if you didn't frame it in absolutes.
It might be equally valuable to you to get a "head start" on the material by getting a "general idea" of what will be covered, so that you can "target your preparation" to areas of particular importance.  For example, perhaps the professor is going to skip certain sections in the course material or cover some in more detail than others.
If you have in mind the goal of being able to do the assignments more quickly at the point that they are due, rather than to get them all done before the course begins, that might be a good compromise between the concerns raised by the other posters and your needs.


text:
Are there general guidelines for order of front and back matter sections in a thesis?
I am writing my PhD thesis (physics in a European university) and wonder how to order the "meta-data" chapters.
My university gives very few formal regulations and my adviser wasn't sure.
What I have come up with till now is:
Frontmatter

Titlepage (position fixed by University)
Statement page that I wrote this (position fixed by University)
Disclaimer that part of this work is subject to publication
Acknowledgements
Abstract
Table of content
Table of figures

Mainmatter

The "meat" - the real work

Backmatter

Appendix
Glossary
Bibliography

I know this question might come off as opinion based but I believe there are reasons for certain orderings which are based on facts.

This answer to Where in a thesis should a glossary be positioned? covers similar ground.

@ff524. Yes I also based my question partly on that answer, but I was wondering if this is a general rule to follow.

There are always general style guides, but the recommendation certain depends on language and local customs. If there are no hard rules from the University, then it is not possible to run afoul of them. So your best bets are: (a) what look aesthetically pleasing to you and (b) look through previous PhD theses published in your university to see what other people do. Personally I prefer my glossary and indices to be after the bibliography.

Also, frequently "numbered" appendices are considered part of the main matter, and not the back matter. A good place to read about (one view of) book design is the guide that grew out of the manual for the LaTeX memoir class.

One of the wonderful things about your thesis is that it is one of the few documents that there is very little constraint on how you are allowed to arrange it.  Once you have satisfied the university's formal requirements (of which there are often few), it is up to you (with, of course, the consent of your advisor).  So arrange things however you feel makes the most clear and accessible presentation, and it will be OK.


text:
How to stay active in research when my faculty job involves mostly teaching and administrative duties?
I recently completed a PhD in a research university in U.S. and came back to my home country in South America. I have a position as a faculty member in a state college. However, the position focuses on teaching and academic administration duties. Without a lab and funding, it has been very difficult to continue the research or even to continue a reciprocal correspondence with my research collaborators.
I was wondering if I can ask for suggestions about how to continue pursuing my career path as scientist.

Welcome Jessica! This is a good question. The question about doing a postdoc remotely is an independent question, so I have removed it from this post - please ask it separately in its own post.

Where do you expect the funding to come from? In my experience, in UK and other European countries, the research funding comes from successful proposals to the relevant funding bodies. There are research centres that were established and keep going only because the staff there constantly submits project proposals (somebody told me that the success rate is 1 out of 5 or maybe even lower).
You are on your own, so your best bet is to find out what funding bodies can sponsor research in you location. Then you have to come with an idea about a project but keep in mind that most often than not the funding bodies have priorities, which change on regular basis, e.g. every year, and it is VITAL that your proposal fits their priorities.
Whether you personally will have time for research is another matter. If your college is not very interested in research, you might have a heavy teaching workload and would be able to spend time on research during the breaks between the academic terms. You might have enough funding for one or more PhD students, who would do the majority of the work while you supervise them.
There is another option, which might be not applicable in your research field as you mentioned you need a lab but maybe part of the research could be done this way – find undergrad students, who are enthusiastic about your research ideas and would be happy to do some work for free (or as a part of their assessment – coursework, final year project, etc.). That is how I started my research career many years ago (as a 2-nd year student) – one of our professors invited several bright students from the courses he was teaching to take part in a very innovative research. We had the first results after a couple of months, which allowed the professor to secure funding for several further projects. Then we could buy more equipment, attend conferences, there were several PhD grants as well.

Jessica, you are certainly in a tough position, because your current incentive structure gives most weight to teaching and administration.  Thus, it will be difficult to maintain a strong program of research.  The evidence on productivity among faculty shows that smaller more frequent blocks of time leads to more output than binge- or marathon-writing sessions.  Try to make collaborations a priority, as this will help minimize your isolation.

This answer is a bit of sympathy mixed with some general good advice, but it doesn't seem like it really addresses the OP's specific dilemma in a helpful way.

@ff524 Her options are limited.  If she remains in her position, she has to figure out how to be productive despite her heavy teaching load.  Beyond that, the options are limited, with the exception of going back on the job market to find a more research intensive job.


text:
How much background detail should go in the introduction section in a paper?
I have been trying to write a paper. Reading the introduction part I am getting different behaviours from different papers.
Some papers cover themselves more than 50% with introduction content as if they are the only source of information present anywhere while some give it very briefly expecting user to be well aware.
As a reader I never expected to learn the concept from paper intro part itself but from books and then read papers. I rather think that introduction section shall be used to provide very brief intro and references for further understanding. Repeating an algorithm that's present in 500 books makes no sense.
I need some tips on writing introduction part that its just about enough or is it mandatory to repeat info to make it somewhat complete in itself ?

Just a quick remark -- sometimes introducing a well-known concept is useful to introduce and set the notation that you are going to use, or to make sure that the definition is clear and unique among different existing variants (extreme examples from my field: are your stochastic matrices column-stochastic or row-stochastic? Does your definition of "prime number" include 1 and/or negative primes?). It might be obvious, but surely there are books using both conventions, and the "literature standard" might change in ten years from now.

To add to Federico's points, giving a detailed background can offer the reader a valid, convincing reason why the rest of your paper is of importance.

@FedericoPoloni : I think I quite agree with your suggestion. Its better than maintaining notations separately.

@JonathanLandrum : I am not really interested in convincing anyone. I think I found something and I just want to share it.I feel its unimportant to decorate research. Sorry but I differ on this. :)

@Rorschach if you discovered a way to increase the milk production of spherical cows in a frictionless vacuum, no mater how cool your maths are, you will need to convince the reader that it is actually important or relevant for something. It may be obvious for you, that have been working on it for months, but maybe not so much for someone else.

@Davidmh : I think I will continue improving my techniques and leave it to others to correct/criticize me.Correctness finds its way.

How much detail to provide in the introduction depends on the circumstances.  The minimum requirement is to give enough context and references that a diligent reader could fill in any missing background, at the cost of some extra work.  However, that's a pretty undemanding requirement; a few papers fail to do this, but they generally fail by not even trying.  It's often valuable to do more to make life easier for the reader.  How much more depends on who you expect will read the paper, and on what you believe they want or need from the introduction.  (Some papers are read only by impatient experts, while others attract a broad audience.)  What's considered appropriate may vary between fields or even subfields, but here are a few general principles:

Targeting an audience for your papers can be a self-fulfilling prophecy.  If you aim at a very specialized audience, it becomes much less likely that anyone else will read your papers.  Attracting a broader audience is on the whole a good thing, both for scientific progress and for your own career, so it's best not to limit your audience unnecessarily.  If modest changes will make your writing much more accessible, then they are probably a good idea.
It's easy to overestimate how much readers really know.  In an ideal world, every researcher would remember all the details of everything they ever studied, but life doesn't work that way.  Of course you can't re-teach things from scratch (and shouldn't even try), but sometimes a brief reminder can be really helpful.  This is particularly true when the details matter: if the reader really needs to know exactly how a certain algorithm works to understand your paper, then restating the algorithm can be worthwhile even if you suspect most readers will already be somewhat familiar with it.  Those who already know the details can easily skim just enough to convince themselves that their version is the same as yours, while those who don't can read more carefully.
The introduction plays a crucial role in describing the context and explaining why you did these things and what the consequences are.  It may not be the part of the paper that most excites you, but it will almost certainly be the most-read section (not counting the abstract).  The purpose of your paper is to communicate your discoveries, and making the introduction more accessible is sometimes the best way to achieve this.

+1 as I agree here, though I'd like to add that frequently (well, depending on the field maybe), total paper length is the primary factor that decides about how extensively any detail will be covered in the paper. It is likely that for many of the papers that had a short introduction, the authors had to decide whether to include an additional explanation about a fact or detail of their contribution, or elaborate on existing knowledge in the introduction section, and thus obviously opted for giving the new information a higher priority.

The general guideline is "just enough." However, the "enough" differs audience to audience, even the article is on the same topic.
Knowing who are going to read it would decide how broad and deep the introduction should be. Say we are writing about Olestra. In a more general publication like a magazine or a blog the introduction may need to include what it is, how it is being used, its chemical properties, its impacts on health, and perhaps some controversies surrounding the compound. In public health or nutrition journals, it may just merit a parenthetical explanation. However, in a food industry journal, the name itself is sufficient.
When in doubt, err on telling more. A well-structured but slightly longer introduction is far less offensive than a cluster of very well selected but illogically laid out arguments.
Another point worth mentioning is that length is perhaps a proxy of the breadth and depth of the introduction, but I think the overall structure of the arguments surpasses length. Generally, I'd focus on an engaging opening that summarizes what is known. Use proper languages here to hint the level of the article. Then, discuss the problems or challenges. Afterwards, how would your work act to address the aforementioned problems and challenges. And lastly, how would your work resolve the suggested problems.
As a reviewer, I'd look for the interconnections between all these components rather than focusing on the length.


text:
What is the proper protocol for addressing one's title and position in an email signature?
I am creating an email signature and I am not sure what the protocol should be.
Should it say

Dr. Locc
Department of Social and Consumer Sciences.

or should my position within the dept. be referenced??

Dr. Locc
Social and Consumers Science Department Chairman

What's a dual department head?  Also, it is better to write your question in such a way that the title and the body each stand alone.  As it is, the title doesn't convey your question, and the body is missing important context.

Sorry this is my first time with this site,  I am the new department head for the Social Science Department as well as the Consumer and Family Science Dept.

You can use the "Edit" button to clarify your question.

How about : Dr. Locc Department of Social and Consumer Sciences (Chairperson) ?

What does your institution's style guide say?

There is no formal protocol for a "signature block." You can put as much or as little as you would ike. If you know the recipient well, for instance, the block is unnecessary. For more formal occasions, however, I would include as much of your affiliation as is appropriate:

I. M. Professor
  My Job Title
  My Department
  My University
  Other contact information

If you are chair, I'd indicate that specifically. Instead of the second and third lines, those could be combined as:

Chair, Department of X

Are the blank lines intentional or a formatting artefact ...

@StrongBad I supposed a formatting one. For further cases, you can make the quote formatted as I did if you put <br> at the end of each line ;)

Yes, it was a formatting issue with the Markdown coding.

My signatures are usually of the form:
Name
Title
Official Department Name
University X


text:
How should I describe my country's volatile situation in a letter for a scholarship application?
I'm writing a letter of motivation to apply for a master degree scholarship. However, my marks in final years of study weren't the highest possible due to the effect of the ongoing crisis in my country, Syria, on me.
In this question, I asked whether I should mention this in my letter, and the answer was that I should.
Now I want to know, what is the best way to mention this in my letter? Is one paragraph about it too much?

Something along the lines that you persisted and managed to graduate despite that the life as you know it was being destroyed in a war-torn county. The hardships of war, hunger, constant fear for safety (or whatever you feel like sharing) gave priority to the survival. As the result your grades in the final years suffered. You are eager to continue your education in the safety of whereever you are applying, and ready to give it your all without the distractions of the war.
The point you want to make is that you graduated during the whole crisis, which is truly impressive. Congratulations on that. It shows the character and persistence. Grades you can fix.