text:
When writing a literature review, more specifically writing a summary for a source, is the use of quotes frowned upon versus paraphrasing?
Whereas I normally paraphrase information when I use a source for my literature review, I occasionally insert quotes (not to emphasize the information within the quote). All the reviews I've looked at so far tend to use quotations as little as possible. My question is whether it is discouraged or encouraged to present information through a variety of ways (ie. paraphrase, quotes, etc.)?
For instance:
In looking at the relationship between immigrants in the Netherlands and the Dutch economy, Rootenberg et al. (2003) drew upon findings comparable to that of previous research results found in Sweden: while the impact varied across different immigrant groups, the average impact was inconsequential. Among the groups that produced a net gain were immigrants who arrived at a young age and those coming from a western society; all other groups represented a burden to the public sector. Hansen et al. (2015) and Gerdes et al. obtain similar results for Denmark. Their findings are summarized as follows: “Immigrants from richer countries have a positive fiscal impact, while immigrants from poorer countries have a large negative one. The negative effect is caused by both a weak labour market performance and early retirement in combination with the universal Danish welfare schemes" (Hansen et al. 2005).

In general, paraphrasing authors is better than quoting unless they say something truly unique and their exact words are needed to convey their ideas. In a literature review, you may find yourself needing to quote more often because of this reason (for example, historian Gary Dickson coined the term "Mythhistory," which is not something I have heard other scholars use).
Many times in undergraduate writing, students will use several quotes in order to make their word count higher. In higher levels of academic writing (like journal articles or books), some publishers will not print your work if you include too many quotes. (A former professor of mine had to write a letter to his publisher to justify adding a total of two block quotes in his 80,000+ word book.)
I think the most important thing about using quotes is to explain them. To say that so-and-so said "important thing" isn't enough; your interpretation and justification of the quote is needed. I personally think your example in the question would be better paraphrased rather than quoted because the way the authors worded their finding is not too unique. If there is some specific wording from this that you would like to interpret, then I would say quoting is better.
I would suggest not arbitrarily quoting. If you can strongly justify using a quote then I would do so, otherwise paraphrasing is generally better.

I have used quotes at times.  A quote is actually on of the strongest form of a reference.  I would use them to effect.  Obviously not to pad.  And vary them with just points/observations (paraphrases).  But done right, quotes are great!


text:
When summarizing my sources methodology for my literature review, must I add a citation?
My professor told me to critically summarize and evaluate each work (for its premise, methodology, and conclusion) I am including in my Literature Review. I understand that I should provide in-text citations when mentioning the source; however, I'm not sure that I should write an in-text citation for every sentence describing how the study was conducted.
Ex: A study by Lina Aldén and Mats Hammarstedt examined cohorts of refugees who migrated to Sweden between the years 2005 and 2007, tracking them longitudinally up until 2012. Data used in the study was obtained from the LISA database at Statistics Sweden, which included information about refugees national origin, age, gender, educational attainment, number of children, employment status, and taxable income, all of which are influential in determining migrants economic contribution. The results from their analyses reveal that the average refugee had public sector net costs of SEK 142,250 (13,714€) during the first year of residency (Citation). After seven years, this cost was halved (Citation).
I added citations to the last two sentences where I mention the results of the study, but I am confused as to whether I need to add citations following each sentence describing the study. This will be in MLA if that's relevant to the question.

The answer to the question in the title is "yes, always". In your example text I would simplify to

Aldén and Hammarstedt (2008) examined ...

This only works in the author-year notation though, not the numerical or footnote-style. In those cases (I have no experience writing in those) I would probably say

A study by Lina Aldén and Mats Hammarstedt (Citation) examined ...

and then use a full paragraph to set off this part from the rest of the text. This implies that there is a connecting topic in the paragraph and the early citation makes it clear what the topic is.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Do some or most universities allow retiring faculty to retain their faculty email accounts?
Upon retiring after decades with the same university and rank of full professor I did not realize that I would lose my faculty email account until it was too late to save years of correspondence including correspondence concerning a paper currently being refereed for publication. Are there any recommended policies on this issue for faculty retiring from colleges and universities?

As I understand it this is one of those policies that vary a lot from place to place. If you're on good (or even goodish) terms with the IT staff see them in person. They may be able to get you a dump of the most important stuff on the side even if the policy is not so forgiving.

I have also similar question on mind, let's see what type of questions comes up.

Having worked at schools that are less research-intensive, I can easily imagine some departments or schools where there would be little expectation for faculty to continue working on research or any other professional business after retiring.  At the same time I know of at least two researchers in my area of math, both from well respected research universities, who switched to using gmail accounts around the time they retired.   The safest option (although hindsight is 20/20) is to make a personal archive of your email before retiring.

There are a couple of answers already, so I'll just mention my datapoint. In my university, every graduate and every retiring faculty is allowed to apply to keep the email account.

@MartinArgerami Ditto...here's another data point. At my university even undergraduate alumni get to keep their university email account for their lifetime if they graduate.

In line with @OswaldVeblen's comment about archiving, I forward my university email to gmail (while still using my university email) so I have a 3rd party backup.  This has come in handy when there were issues with the university mail server, or when moving institutions, and saves me the effort of personally archiving my emails.

I would not recommend this as a first solution, but if other solutions fail and your institution is covered, you can FOIA your old emails.

...backups, anyone?

You should have downloaded your emails with POP3 or IMAP (using an open source email client like Thunderbird), but destruction of faculty archives is a common problem in this era, which is mentioned in David Lankes' books various times. You may want to talk with your university's librarians, as well.

I'd say contact the IT department right now, the university I studied at had a not widely spoken about backup, for cases like yours. When you find out your account is no longer available, but you need access to your correspondence. My particular uni kept inactive accounts for three months after discontinuation.

In my experience, most institutions do allow retired faculty to keep their email accounts.
The American Association of University Professors has issued a Statement of Principles on Academic Retirement and Insurance Plans which includes:

Each institution should help retired faculty members and administrators remain a part of the academic community, and facilitate timely retirement, by providing, where possible, such amenities as a mail address, library privileges, office space, faculty club membership, the institution’s publications, secretarial help, administration of grants, research facilities, faculty dining and parking privileges, and participation in convocations and academic processions.

Although "email account" isn't specifically mentioned on that list, it would seem to clearly be in the same spirit.
Of course, your institution has the power to make whatever policies they see fit.
As to your correspondence, I'd suggest asking whether it can be restored from a backup.  They might be able to give you the data even if they won't mantain the account.  Your department chair might be able to support you in this, particularly if your correspondence included other department business that may be relevant to current faculty.
Another request you could make is whether your institution could set up a forwarding address, so that when your correspondents send mail to jbales@yourschool.edu, it gets forwarded on to your own personal email account.  That saves the institution the trouble of having to maintain your account and store your mail, but you still get the benefit of being reachable through that address.

I have a friend who retired from Swarthmore who said "emeritus means forever" in response to my assumption that his e-mail would expire. Whether or not that's technically accurate, his e-mail persists.
Policy from Columbia:
http://faculty-retirement.columbia.edu/post-retirement/faq-post-retirement#email%20address%20internet
Policy from Indiana:
https://kb.iu.edu/d/dddx#email

I have similar experience.   However, not every retired member of the faculty is awarded the "Emeritus" designation.  At Ohio State it is worth going through the steps, if possible: then you get not only your email address, but something far more valuable: football tickets!

I just retired from a private, liberal arts college. I may keep my e-mail account on the condition that I use it at least once each year, a pretty nominal requirement in my opinion.

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


text:
Should I participate in a contest even If I don't want the prize
I've been preparing this week for a Physics contest a local university is organizing. The prize is a full scholarship for a Physics degree (100% during the 5 years term).
I believe I can win, but the problem is that I do not want to study physics, I want to study Computer Science, yet I want to participate in the contest to achieve a personal win (perhaps for my ego :P).
I'm aware that if I win and decline the prize, it will be given to the 2nd place.
Now, I've been having some problems with my relatives. They say it's time lost for me, that there's no point participating if even if I win I'll decline the prize, etc. Yet I still want to.
What am I doing is wrong, shall I listen to them and not participate?
I'd like to know everyone's opinion because I've been doubting recently whether I should participate or not.
Thanks a lot!

Please note that this site is for academia at the graduate level or higher.  It sounds like you are either an undergraduate or a pre-university student.  Could you confirm this?  In this particular case, I think the question loses most of its relevance if you try to transpose it to the graduate level: there are very few contests which result in graduate scholarships, but if there is one and you want to take it -- fine, do so.  Moreover, most university students are adults, so it's not clear why relatives' opinions would be problematic: e.g. just don't tell them you're taking the contest.

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


text:
Is a pre-doctoral licentiate degree worth anything?
There exists a degree title called the licentiate in Finland and Sweden which is a graduate title beneath a full PhD title; I've heard it called, among other things, a "half PhD", a "PhD lite" or a "PhD for those already working". However, what formal or practical benefits can/does such a title actually confer, especially since being awarded a licentiate degree entails having a postgraduate degree anyway (a Master's degree, which very much could have entailed doing research itself)?

Can the formal qualification and/or work done for it contribute towards a proper PhD at another institution, either immediately after or after some interim period?
Is it accepted as proof of any kind of practical research experience in larger institutions outside of Finland and Sweden? From what I've gathered, it seems that research-oriented jobs are very strictly categorized as either "jobs for people with PhDs" or "jobs for everyone else", which suggests that a "not-quite-PhD" degree wouldn't actually open any doors and maybe even close some (due to e.g. being perceived as overqualified, as having "quit" a PhD program or as being "not able" to secure a proper PhD candidate position).

Here is some experience from Sweden:
First of all, the licentiate isn't really a degree that you can study towards per se, at least not in our institution. Much more, it is an optional, but highly recommended, midterm step in doing a PhD. I guess there has to be some theoretical way of formally studying only towards a licentiate, but I do not know any such case and I would not really see a reason why you would want to do it.

Is it accepted as proof of any kind of practical research experience in larger institutions outside of Finland and Sweden?

Presumably not. Even in Sweden the concept isn't well-known at all outside of academic circles. In practice there are more advantages to having a licentiate within academia than outside - for instance, post-lic PhD students in my department get a little higher salary and some small additional rights, such as being able to act as official primary supervisors for master students. However, mainly the licentiate is considered to be a semi-formal "half-time" exam for the PhD, and used as a test drive for the actual thesis defense.
One small additional thing:

being awarded a licentiate degree entails having a postgraduate degree anyway (a Master's degree, which very much could have entailed doing research itself)?

In Sweden, and more generally in most of Europe, a master's degree isn't generally considered a "postgraduate" degree in the same sense as it is in the US. Our master programmes are primarily by-coursework with a one-semester thesis project at the end, and while the master programme should get students in touch with research, I don't think most people would consider the average master graduate to be a researcher in any definition of the word. Also, many (most?) of our bachelor graduates continue on into one of our master programmes. This is very different to the licentiate / PhD track, that only a small minority of students chooses.


text:
Job offer for UK Reader
I'm currently an assistant professor at a US university, three years away from coming up for tenure. Recently, a former colleague of mine who is a professor at a university in the UK approached me about joining their institution, as they were advertising a search in my area for all ranks (Lecturer-Professor).
Even though the interview didn't go particularly well in my opinion, I just got a job offer for Reader. However, their offer would effectively require me to take a 40% salary cut. When I applied, there was a form that asked me about my current salary. After asking about this, they replied that my current salary was not taken into account as it would create a "salary anomaly" with respect to what other Readers are being paid and that the salary isn't negotiable. Note that their job ad only stated a very broad salary range (for all ranks) and hence I did not anticipate this before applying.

Is this the usual experience when applying for academic jobs in the UK? Or, does this perhaps indicate that my application wasn't perceived to be particularly good after all?
They also stated that Reader is a "leadership position" in contrast to my current position and hence it would be a promotion. However, it's not exactly clear to me what this means in practice: Apart from the obvious advantage of not having to go through the tenure process, what other benefits does a Reader position provide over Assistant Professor?

Of possible interest: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/93009/20058 https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/32289/20058

It's simple. Pluviphiles take the job. Pluviphobes don't.

Can't edit the post, but you shouldn't use blockquotes if you're not quoting someone (or something).

Is there any option to try this as a placement, job exchange, or swap ?  That way you could try for a year for The Experience before you commit.

I think the answers below are already great, just a few things to add: a) put the university's ranking into consideration: this impacts the opportunities you will get (e.g., attracting good students, connections, etc.). b) The salaries in UK unis should be available online; Google "salary pay scale [university name]" and then negotiate for a higher salary within your Grade, and c) moving to a new academic system will cost you some time to get used to things. I suggest you check the professorial promotion criteria (google it or ask their HR) and assess it in comparison to your current pathway

Yes, UK salaries are currently significantly lower than US salaries at most ranks, and don't have much room for negotiation outside of a standard range.  The only exception to this is "professor" in the UK (which is often closer to distinguished professor in the US) where there's more latitude for higher salaries.
One major reason for the salary gap is that as recently as Summer 2015 the pound was worth nearly 1.6 US dollars.  If it comes back up then their offer would be more competitive, while if it goes down further then the offer will look even worse.
The only meaningful advantages I can see of a Reader over a US Assistant professor as a position is that there's more job security.  But presumably if you're a strong candidate for a Readership you shouldn't be too worried about tenure, and at many US schools this offer would get you tenure this year in a retention package.  (There are lots of advantages and disadvantages of UK vs. US which I won't get into, I'm only talking about the rank comparison.)

The other meaningful difference between Assistant Prof and Reader is that you're considerably higher up the academic tree, which is likely to translate into (a) more opportunities to shape the department's overall direction in research & teaching, and (b) more invitations to participate in strategic projects (multi-institution grant applications etc). You may or may not see these as advantages.

I’m not sure if this is a UK/US difference or if my department is unusually inclusive of assistant professors, but I felt like I had a good amount of say in my department as an assistant professor and it hasn’t increased noticeably as an associate.  I guess the main difference was that I am now able to serve on the hiring committee, which is a meaningful perk.  I think multi-institution grants may be rarer in the US?  I don’t know a meaningful number of people who have them at any rank.

Is some of the disconnect here that in the UK teaching is more standardized and so dept level decisions are more important relative to the US where most decisions about teaching are made by the professor for each individual class?  Enough of the UK people on this thread are disagreeing with me to make me think I’m missing something, but most of what they’re saying doesn’t seem to me to map onto the Assistant/Associate difference in the US.

In addition to salary compensation, other factors should be considered as well (ie: benefits, pension, the lack of need for health insurance, etc) when coming up with the full value proposition.

In my view it is completely misleading to compare salaries at all as you are ignoring the cost of living and other differences. You seem to be equating a UK salary with seniority based on a strict conversion to USD and seeing where that fits in the salary scale. This position is definitely a promotion.
The best way that I know of to compare salaries is to find the average (pre-tax) salary for both locations and compare the salary based on what multiple it is of the average. This gives a relative 'well-offness' rating.
However, UK academic salaries have the oddity that they are essentially the same wherever you are working. Really a lecturer salary in London is unliveable but is very good in say Northern England. Even a reader salary would be a struggle to live on in London if you were trying to support a family. So you definitely need to consider the cost of living in your comparison. Use a property rental site to get an idea as housing would be the biggest expense.

And even that will exclude employer contributions to social security. In France, the cost to my employer is roughly 50% higher than my pre-tax salary due to employer contributions. I think in Germany the rate is similar (if not higher), I don't know about the UK - PhDs never came with a payslip.
I would also be careful to say "very good" for Northern England: Don't underestimate the cost of living in "the North" - e.g. in South Yorkshire. And where rental costs are lower, the commute is expensive...

I'll say a reader salary is quite nice in Scotland, and I live(d) in a particularly expensive bit of Scotland. I'm leaving in a week's time, mind. Healthcare and prescriptions are free up here. Dental care is partially free and otherwise costs next to nothing by US standards.

Oh yes, food is cheaper in the uk compared to the US, at least it will be until Brexit. I have found cost of wifi and mobile phone contracts to be significantly cheaper in the UK.

The average cost of living in the U.K. compared to living in the U.S is about 6.5% lower. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/100214/what-cost-living-difference-between-us-and-uk.asp

Scotland also has free university, which is a huge benefit if you have kids.  Health care in the US is terrible in general, but it’s often affordable and good if you’re a professor.  Many of the advantages of UK over US don’t apply once you have a TT university job, so a lot of the trade off is giving up salary for a better life for your children.

The free uni for Scottish kids thing is huge but it's worth checking the specifics (if the OP happens to be heading to Scotland that is). I think you need indefinite leave to remain for your kids to qualify. I can't quite remember, though, it might just be 3 years of residency.

Good answer, except for the grotesque exaggeration of calling these salaries “unliveable” in London. You certainly won't get rich off them but they're most assuredly liveable. Furthermore, you might actually earn more in London due to the London allowance which also exists for academic jobs, though doesn't quite cover the difference.

@KonradRudolph With the London allowance, lecturer starts at either 36k (grade7) or 44 (grade 8). I don't think 36k covers decent accommodation (or cheaper accommodation + expensive transport if living an hour outside London) + typical student debt payment + utilities, food etc. Sure, it's liveable in the strict sense of living in a 6 room HMO, but I don't think it's a 'grotesque' exaggeration.

@JenB I don't know where you get these numbers from but 36k is a postdoc salary in London in science. 44k isn't grand by definitely liveable, and a reader salary is considerably more. This isn't hypothetical either, I know junior lecturers living comfortably in London zone 1, albeit not having to support a non-working household.

"is to find the average (pre-tax) salary for both locations and compare the salary based on what multiple it is of the average" - this is wrong. The right approach is to calculate the post-tax salaries in both locations, subtracting the costs of accommodation in both areas. Whatever remains is the amount of money you can spend on your own needs. For an example of such a calculation see this post.

@JonathanReez - the problem with that approach is that you then need to know about the cost of living (including things like differences in how social security works). Gross salaries are accessible information, often by location. The point of using average earnings is that's it's reasonable to assume that is a liveable salary taking into account all the peculiarities of local rules.

@JenB average earnings are only important if you're applying for a job which is around the median wage or lower. For wages which are higher than average the most important factor is how much cash you'll have on hand after subtracting inevitable expenses. It can also be important in a super cheap country like India in case you want to hire local assistants/cooks/drivers. But for a UK to US comparison you want to know exactly how much $ you'll get in your bank account.

@JenB and even if comparing is more difficult - shouldn't we all do it? If I'm considering moving somewhere for a few years, it's worthy to spend a week making a detailed calculation. Assumptions and naive rules of thumb are the source of many screw ups in life.

To add a bit more to the other fine answer:

There is a set and published salary range for Senior Lecturer/Reader at each UK University, and they are all close to the same. At my (and other) UK Unis this is grade 9. If you search for the University in question's salary scales, you can see the grade 9 range and that is what you have to work with. They cannot offer you more without making you a professor and making you a professor would be strange indeed (see 2)
Untenured assistant professor to reader is really quite a big promotion in UK terms. You started at what we'd call Lecturer and you've skipped a whole academic rank (Senior Lecturer) that most people would spend a few years at. As a reader you may be asked to serve as head of department, or on higher level University committees, etc. Yet the service jobs wont be as onerous as those for being a professor. You might get a further teaching buyout due to taking on some of these service roles. You'll have less teaching than the US anyway. As you are in a promoted position, more funding opportunities will be available to you via the research councils as you'll look senior on your CV. You also have the ability to apply for promotion to professor in your next promotion round (or as soon as you feel like you have the evidence). Reader is quite a good position to be in.

Note, if you find that they have offered you something on the low end of the Reader salary range, you can ask to go up a few pay spines. That's certainly an acceptable request.

Higher ranks are an advantage when there are fixed salary ranges, but I don’t see why they’re an advantage otherwise.  Most of what you list seem obviously like disadvantages (increased administrative responsibilities).  The research council point may be relevant in the UK, but in the US assistant professors aren’t at a significant disadvantage for grants, and at any rate the UK is barely going to have grants post-Brexit.

@NoahSnyder "the UK is barely going to have grants post-Brexit" that's certainly true and is exactly why I'm leaving.

It’s not true that they can’t offer more to a reader. In some subjects “market supplements” are common, and these are sometimes large. The reason stated (that they want to avoid a pay anomaly) seems plausible to me. Having one reader being paid twice , say, what all the others make will be costly to morale.

I've never heard of such a thing. Perhaps it is a reflection of my subject. However, I don't understand why someone who is getting professor-level pay wouldn't be made a professor. What's the point of keeping them as Reader but paying them as a professor?

https://jobs.lse.ac.uk/ViewVacancyV2.aspx?enc=mEgrBL4XQK0+ld8aNkwYmJ+JEXnky2a4mluJ1yWaN8wWov6ZFVwVcJNm5GKbh37ClXOuPTE1P33MWqpBM2v3lZQa3YIZPE/Z+DoazCL58If+ClmlOsn0lflcYpKdHvM7teh1GD09/ycGgbUeb0Dg5Q==

If your department is in a field where this is normal then you may pay everyone more than the standard scale in such a way that you can still maintain distinctions in rank based on achievement/contribution. But, my impression is that this practice  is limited to some institutions and some subjects.

Ahh I see. Yes. I'm far, far from finance or the likes. That world is unknown to me. I can see what you mean. I presume the OP isn't in such a field.

I think to write that "You'll have less teaching than the US anyway" is very institution dependent and cannot be stated with any confidence unless you know which are the two institutions.

Comparing salaries across the Atlantic is really difficult, because there is so much difference in what they have to cover. It's worth using a cost-of-living index from the web to compare your old and new cities, but then you need to allow for differences in Healthcare costs, education costs if you have kids, the greater level of municipal services provided out of taxation... In general there's less you have to pay for in the UK. If you're potentially staying for a long time, then most UK academic jobs come with good pensions, where "behind the scenes" your employer currently contributes over 20% of your gross salary (this is currently under threat, and so may not continue to be the case. But it'll still remain better than the usually non-existent employer contributions in the US).
With all that said, under the current exchange rate a UK Reader is still likely to earn less than a US Professor (which is roughly the equivalent rank), but the differences can be smaller than they first appear.
As others have said, there are fixed national pay spines that most UK universities adhere to. You can find this with a search engine. Reader would usually be a Band 9 job (check the job ad to confirm), and there will be a range of salary points within Band 9. Within the band, the spine point is down to the individual institution. A common approach is for people to start at the bottom of their band and move up by one point each year, until they "max out" at the top of the band - at which point pay rises don't stop, because the pay scale as a whole is negotiated nationally each year, but they slow down dramatically. Universities can start people at a higher point within the band - a common reason is that somebody was previously earning more elsewhere - but the given reason of not paying the new guy more than existing staff of similar rank is a plausible one.
Jumping from Assistant Prof to Reader is a big leap up the academic ladder - some would argue that it skips a level - and while of course there will be personal considerations around any relocation, the  biggest "advantage" is that you get this on your CV - so if, in a few years time, you find yourself moving back to the US, you will probably be looking to do so at full US Professor level (I'm not sure if/how "bypassing" the tenure process like that works, but that's a different question)

"Comparing salaries across the Atlantic is really difficult". It's actually not that hard to calculate, see this post. The US will come out on top most of the time. And if you're about to decide where to spend 10 years, it wouldn't be a stretch to spend an entire week making a detailed calculation, as your financial wellbeing depends on it.

"But it'll still remain better than the usually non-existent employer contributions in the US" - all employers contribute around 10% of your salary to social security. Plus many employers match 401k (private pension fund) contributions. Retiring professors in the US are way way wealthier than their European counterparts, presuming they worked at a good institution and saved their money.

@JonathanReez Huh, I stand corrected - I understood that employer contributions to 401ks were rare nowadays. However, I've only worked in the US at postdoc level, and certainly the inequalities are greater over there ;-) I fully believe that retiring professors in the US are way wealthier, if you add "provided that nobody in their family got seriously ill" :-/

@JonathanReez: All UK employers contribute 10% national insurance towards our equivalent of Social Security. All University employers also contribute ~20% of salary to the "University Superannuation Scheme (USS)" on top of that. Employers must also pay 8% into the scheme (note Unis are paying more than twice what employees pay). If you pay into this for 30 years, it gives you a guaranteed retirement income of 50% of your career average salary indefinitely. Such "defined benefit" pension schemes are rare both sides of the Atlantic these days.

Thats not to suggest that US professors are not wealthier than UK ones. At a comparable level on the ladder, they almost always are. But the pension is pretty amazing. 50% of your salary for life for only 8% of your salary is something you'd struggle to match with a 401k, certainly with zero-risk.

@IanSudbery is that guaranteed pension actually properly funded or is it a pyramid scheme which is projected to dry out as the years ago? A lot of pension systems in Europe suffer from this problem. And if you want guaranteed pay out until death you could also purchase a life annuity in the US.

@IanSudbery I've made a calculation and you can get a life annuity of $3000 for life (equivalent of UK professor's 50% income) with a downpayment of $600k, presuming you're 65 years old. A US professor is likely to have at least $1m in their 401k/IRA and a $1m house by that age.

Its government guaranteed, so even if everything went wrong, the benefits would not be endangered. The actual level of funding is currently in dispute with estimates ranging from 96% to 120% funded, but the pension protection scheme means the benefits are completely safe whatever happens.

Annuities must be cheaper in the US. A joint (ie inheritable), lifetime annuity of that size would cost £700k in the UK. About $1m. Plus you get a lump sum of 1.5 years salary, life insurance included. But the key point is that this will have been achieved at only 8% contribution of a smaller salary. And is cast iron. No stock market crash, or low interest environment, or change in annuity prices can threaten it.

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


text:
Is it rude to take all the time allowed to make an offer decision?
I've been made an offer for a position that I will likely accept. I've been given a week more time than planned (at my request) to make a decision, which makes it possible to attend a campus interview (already scheduled) for another position, although it probably won't be as good as the already-offered one.
Knowing this, should I just accept offer A? I feel bad taking the full extended time to make a decision that I've pretty much already made privately, although I feel that I can't cancel the campus interview since they already booked the travel accommodations (on the same day I received offer A no less). (And I suppose it could actually be a better offer).
Will it hurt me to take all the time they've given me? I would literally be letting them know maybe 1 or 2 days ahead of the full bracket. I don't want to look like I'm dragging my feet and they've made it clear that they're trying to close it out quickly. My assumption is that they've given me time, so I should use it- but I just don't want to hurt my chances.
The alternative however would be, I suppose, to accept offer A and then attend the campus interview, which sounds worse. Thoughts? Thanks.

I actually had a similar story, but I was open with them about the other interview. After all, it is the obvious reason to want an extension, isn't it? Though I did also (honestly) tell the first one I liked it better based on what I saw so far. Then (well before the deadline) I started getting emails from faculty welcoming me to the department, so be careful how you word that part...

Meeting a deadline is never wrong.  Missing a deadline is always bad.

Do you expect an offer to made quickly from the campus interview? That offer may not come before your deadline is reached. If the campus interview goes well, you may do well to let them know you have another offer and ask for what their level of interest is and what type of offer they would be considering. If you can't get that, the deadline may pass before you have all of the information you need to make an informed decision.

No, of course not.

Not at all. You should go to the interview, see the competing offer, if you get it, and then decide. Note that you will likely not have time to have either school make a counter offer. Therefore, I would recommend that at the interview you let the school know you have an existing offer and deadline and that they will have to move quickly and at least match the other offer (or whatever it will take to get you there).
If the school that has made the offer asks, just tell them you are waiting to hear from one last place. You could send a preemptive email telling them that, but there really is no need.

So this. If they needed or wanted a sooner decision, they would have given an earlier deadline.

Taking the time and considering the other place is certainly a good plan, and it isn't rude.  However, you're considering the wrong alternative option.  It's not ok to accept the job and hide it from the other school, but it is totally reasonable to accept the job offer that you're excited about now and withdraw from the other search.  Going to an interview if you know you're not going to take the job is a waste of everyone's time, and it's not rude to withdraw if you have an offer you prefer.  You can say that you're still happy to give a talk or cancel the visit as they prefer, but they won't need to have half-a-dozen people meet with you including a dean when it's all a wasted effort.  (See Frank Thorne's answer.)

Going to an interview if you know you're not going to take the job is a waste of everyone's time - Yes, see this question: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/106960/19607

But also see various comments and answers on the question @Kimball linked to, pointing out that you should never "cancel anything until you have formally accepted a formal written offer."

If there is any chance that offer A will be filled before you accept, than you should accept it and never look back. If you believe that they will keep it open for you (despite them wanting to fill it quickly), then take all the time available to you. If in doubt, accept offer A.
People might say its unlikely (and so unprofessional!) that they will fill the job if they offered it to you, but its happened to me.


text:
Is a professor allowed to require me to give him permission to speak with my doctor before letting me make up an exam?
I study in the USA.
Can a professor ask me to waive my right to privacy so he can talk to my doctor about my medical condition? He says he needs that in order to allow me to take a make-up midterm for an exam that I missed, even though a medical note certifying my illness is provided.
Also, the doctor that gave the note is usually a nurse practitioner (NP), but he instead wants a note from a doctor of medicine (MD).

What does the existing note actually say? At some institutions, it's not enough to provide a note that you went to a health care professional; it has to specifically state that you were diagnosed with something that prevented you taking the exam (and some schools also specify what kinds of medical officials can make that judgment).

Comments have been moved to chat. Please see the above notice.

@Kat The OP shouldn't need to be concerned with any specific authority.  If any authority has a rule for this, it's relevant and worth learning about.  Vagueness and generality aren't always bad.

That sounds like a big no to me, but that comes from Germany with very strict rules on privacy. Your medical condition is your thing, and yours alone. If you have a document that certifies your illnesss, that should be enough.
Check your university policies, what you need to provide in case off illness HAS to be written down somewhere. If it states there that a written thing is enough, it is enough. Point your professor to that document, if that does not help talk to faculty cousellors. They should be able to help you.

I would go one step further and definitely talk to the faculty counsellor about this. By asking alone the professor may be overstepping his boundaries far enough that officials should at least be aware of it.

Take care how you handle this, while the situation can get you a replacement exam - the professor could have the choice WHEN it will take place ie next week or next semester...

I am from Germany, too, and I recently read that some medical faculties require you to give detailed information about your illness to the exam committee so that they can decide whether you were "ill enough" to not take the exam.

Two German sources, I do not know if the details are correct: http://www.spiegel.de/lebenundlernen/uni/attest-reicht-nicht-studenten-sollen-mediziner-von-schweigepflicht-entbinden-a-1094325.html
and
https://www.zeit.de/campus/2010/02/studieren-dwdd

@J.FabianMeier The sources already tell you that data protection officers pushed back hard against this, the second source even openly throws the question of compliance with the basic law into the room. Those articles are furthermore years old, and I have not seen such ridiculous request in recent times, so I'd guess this has been squashed, hard.

Check your university policies, what you need to provide in case off illness HAS to be written down somewhere - I don't know about Germany, but this is not true in the US.  At my university, in cases of illness the rules just say it is up to the discretion of the instructor.  (And the practice is usually to ask for a doctor's note.)

@Kimball You’re safe to assume that in Germany, there are door-stopper leaflets with all eventualities explained if you should be sick, what actions should be taken and so on (I am German). Do you mean “not true in general in the U.S.”, “not true in this one university”, or “not true for most universities”? That would be both interesting to know and a pretty good answer.

@Kimball In Gemany, everything that should reasonably have established procedures be written down will be written down. Either in law or in policy. We don't like eventualities. getting sick is commonplace enough that it warrants procedure.

@Narusan I mean at least "not true in general in the US."  I imagine my university's policy is similar to many public US universities, but I'm not positive.  I couldn't tell if this answer was asserting that statement should be true outside of Germany or not, so I just wanted to point out it's not true everywhere.

This answer is wrong as it stands. The professor may absolutely ask nearly anything  they want legally.

@tuskiomi: even in the sources J.FabianMeier linked, it is not the professor who can ask but the exam committee. (And, as I understand, those questions [of which I'm not sure how legal they are - see the cited legal opinions of data/privacy protection officers] are not about waiving all rights to privacy, but certain possibly rather specific ones. Such as specifying that the medical attesttation must say that the illness is not related to the fact that there is this specific exam at hand.)

@SolarMike I'm almost certain this is not true in the US. Surely the replacement exam would need to take place during the normal semester.

@sgroves If the semester's over, there may be no choice. I have heard of universities where you can only retake finals during the next finals week (three months later).

I highly doubt the correctness of the answer .To my understanding a slip of someone like a nurse partitioner (-> not  a doctor of medicine), is worth nothing in this regard in germany. He might not be allowed to ask about the sickness itself but asking that the note will be written by a doctor is the only way also in germany as far as I know.

@KamiKaze The OP is in the US, where an NP's signature should be perfectly sufficient.

@Kimball My school prefers you talk to the instructor but otherwise leaves it up to a separate office (e.d. advising or disability). A decent number random schools do as well, such as Duke, UAlbany, Harvard, RPI, Cornell, and GA Tech which even specifically says "Students have the right to expect that their privacy will be protected under HIPAA..."

@AzorAhai This answer made from a german view point and in this regard wrong.

@KamiKaze Where in this answer do you get something coming from a nurse? It simply says "document certifying" - presumably, that document comes from someone recognized by the university.

@corsiKa The question specifies that the note the OP has is signed by an NP, not an MD.

I am not sure if it is relevant to your situation since you haven't mentioned a country (I am in the UK), however I have personally been asked a similar thing when the professor wanted to check that the medical note provided was indeed from my doctor and relevant to the allowances being made for me.
The privacy I was giving up by letting him talk about my condition was not for them to fully discuss the details of my illness, but instead to merely check that the note was real, that my illness did indeed prevent me from being able to take an exam. This was standard uni procedure, so should be documented for you to check if its something similar.
If you have data protection laws similar to the UK in your country then the doctor cannot even confirm that you exist to a 3rd party until you give them permission to discuss with that specific 3rd party, and if that is the case then it is perfectly reasonable for the university to request you give the doctors office permission to disclose that you are a patient, and that the letter is genuine.
Equally it is perfectly acceptable for you to only give the doctor's permission to give that specific information (and withhold any additional information) as it is your data, and they would be bound by the permissions you give them.
On the other hand if the university are asking for complete access that is a no go, but I think if you communicate more with the lecturer about what they actually want, it won't be as bad as giving them full access and details.

At my university (a well-off private university in the USA), there is an Office of Disability Services who, in situations like this, acts as the middle-man between doctors and professors to determine test accommodations.  You fill out an accommodation application, your doctor fills out a form that this office supplies, you submit both to the office, then they meet with you and determine reasonable accommodation.  The professor is then informed by this office what the accommodations are and is required to abide by them.
I bring this up so that you can check whether your university has a similar office or service.  It's good in that the revelation of private medical information is contained only to a single office specifically designed to handle such information appropriately, and professors and other university members need not know the information, just the required accommodations.
If your university does not have such a service, then I don't know what to do, but I'd imagine (as others have pointed out) that there must exists some policy of what is an appropriate level of proof of necessity of medical accommodation, and if what your professor is asking exceeds that, then point them to the policy.

I would be shocked to learn of ANY college or university in the USA that does not have an office like this.

This does not seem like a request for a disability-related test accommodation.  At my school, this office would not get involved in this matter.

@ScottSeidman, at my school medical accommodations (even temporary ones) are handled by the disability office.

@ScottSeidman My school (US) handles temporary things such as this.

@ScottSeidman My school (US, private engineering school) has a vaguely named "Office of Undergraduate Education" which deals with things like this. I also googled a number of universities and I have not been able to find one without a similar policy, in fact most of them prohibit instructors from lowering grades due to absences which are approved by whatever office handles them.

It is highly unethical for the professor to make this request.  The professor is asking for the student to waive their right to medical privacy and in exchange all the professor will do is their job.
The professor has the right to contact the student's NP to confirm the information on the note and discuss whether student had a bona fide reason to miss the midterm. (I have done this.) However the nature of that reason is none of their business.
Whether and NP is good enough or an MD is required should be set out in the university's policies.  If the university doesn't have a policy, then the department may. If the department doesn't, the policy should be on the information provided by the instructor.  If there is no policy, then an NP should be as good as an MD, since making this sort of assessment is within the normal scope of practice for NPs (in most jurisdictions).
That said, the best advice for the student is to find out what their university's policies are on medical notes.
(I'm working in Canada.  This would be the situation in Canada and I expect also in the U.S. and Europe.  Other places could have other norms.)

Agree completely!  You should be able to contact the medical provider to confirm the veracity of the claim, but not to get any information about the nature of the condition (other than that it would prevent the student from taking the exam).  I have had a large number of students lately (4 or 5 a semester) bringing in notes from online doctors.  This has been particularly frustrating to verify, and I suspect these docs are basically in the business of forging medical excuses.  However, I cannot ever figure out how to actually contact the doctor.

@StevenGubkin: over here (Germany) the doctor in question would not be allowed to tell the professor whether the student is their patient unless the student waived their privacy rights to that question. OTOH, sick certificates here are on official forms, so this question doesn't arise. And, if there's a suspicion that the certificate is a favor, you could ask the student to bring a certificate by the so-called Amtsarzt who is a doctor and public official at the local health authority.

@cbeleites in the US (and it seems like Canada is similar) really all we do is check the authenticity of the note.  Sometimes offices (sadly) just start running off photocopies of the medical excuse forms and so even a real form can look incredibly fake.

Are you saying you called the doctor's office and asked if Jane Doe was a patient there? And they confirmed? That seems very unethical on the office's part.

@cbeleites: Isn't there a Hochschularzt who could provide something similar? I know my institution had one.

@AzorAhai If the student submitted a note, he or she has already alleged that they are a patient there; the doctor's office should be able to confirm whether the note is authentic (in which case they haven't added any new info to what the student already disclosed) or not (in which case there isn't any doctor-patient relationship, so no doctor-patient confidentiality to be breached).

@aeismail: I've never heard of a Hochschularzt (≈ university doctor). Closest thing that comes to my mind is Betriebsarzt, but they're for work-related prevention questions (in general, not only at universities). I've never heard of them for questions of sick leave or student sick leave certificates for missing an exam. That was always either immediately Amtsarzt or first normal MD, and the exam office/committee reserved the right to demand an attestation by the Amtsarzt in cases of repeated sickness at exams or for very important exams (state exam).

I would argue that it's more than highly unethical: it's extremely immoral too. One might argue they're one and the same but I see there as being a difference (albeit perhaps subtly so). They should be ashamed of themselves. And I imagine they'd love the positions reversed...

@AzorAhai What I have done is to phone the doctor and asked her to confirm that it was her medical opinion that the student was unable to attend my midterm.  I did this because the letter was not all that clear on that point.  I don't think that was unethical on her part because she only divulged information that her patient had requested her to divulge.  I don't think it was unethical on my part because I was trying to establish whether the letter was sufficient to allow the student to miss the midterm. But that's just my opinion.

@aeismail Universities in North America (or at least Canada) generally have a clinic on campus. However students are free to choose their own Doctor (or NP in some places) and do not have to use the university cliinic.

@TheodoreNorvell Also in the US. And usually students use it because it is much cheaper and many services are included in students' fees.

As someone who has both been an undergraduate student and, oddly, served as Instructor of Record for a college-level undergraduate course, in the US:

it is completely reasonable for him to ask you for a doctor's note, and it is not too unreasonable to stipulate that the note come from a professional physician (MD, DO, DDS, etc.) and/or bear the letterhead of the clinic, etc. Use your judgement.
By HIPAA, your healthcare provider can't discuss anything about your treatment with others without your consent (barring a few exceptional cases). By FERPA, your professor can't discuss anything related to your education with others without your consent. So, neither of them can contact each other about you without your consent; a conversation between them would be even more off limits.
Give him a note signed by a MD and w/ the clinic's letterhead. This should be authoritative enough for every reasonable person. If he insists, say NO immediately.
Again, if he insists, he is treating you unfairly. Escalate the issue immediately. Especially, contact the following people, as you see fit:

the department chair;
your academic advisor (if this position exists at your school);
your advising dean (if this office exists at your school);
the Dean of Student Affairs (or equivalent), and/or his associates;
your school's associate dean for undergraduate education, and, if the situation gets really bad, your school's dean.

I would not contact HR, though, as it is not their issue. This is an academic/instructional issue involving the mistreatment of a student by an instructor.

The student should check the allowed regulations carefully. While HIPAA and FERPA do not allow communication between doctor and instructor (unless privacy is waived by the student), policy dictates what the student can expect. For example, at my school, missing an exam or class for anything that isn't a university-sanctioned activity is entirely up to instructors' discretions. They can simply say "no" and give a zero, if they choose.

Again, if he insists, he is treating you unfairly. - I'm not so sure.  I've been in situations (particularly when the student is asking to take an exam weeks later) where I've wanted more information than a note saying a student had a medical appointment or was excused from school just for the day of the exam.  I haven't done this, and I wouldn't want medical details, just to know that the student has a valid medical excuse for the whole situation, but have thought about it.  (Just like aeismail, what to do is left up to the discretion of the instructor at my university.)

@Kimball Yep, but I still believe that insisting to talk to a healthcare provider is off-limits. That is why doctor's notes exist in the first place.

As with any privacy matter, the one ultimately making a decision is you.
A professor is allowed to ask for you to waive your rights to privacy so your medical discussion can be discussed with the doctor, but you have the choice to agree or say no.
So, a professor can most definitely ask if it would ease communication with the doctor and evaluation of a re-take exam. Nothing wrong with that request and the comments I've read so far on this question are a little on the strong side. No need to jump on the professor's case just for asking.
Where the line is drawn here is if your refusal to waive your right to privacy has a direct impact on your exam or result from it. In that case, taking this to HR or the uni board would be a good thing, because that would not be proper.

I have had to deal with fake doctor’s notes : sent the suspect note to the doc who said it was fake ... date changed etc And, the doc was kind, he could have prosecuted the student as that is a serious act...

I disagree.  Protecting students' privacy is important.  Beyond checking the genuineness of the certificate, the professor has no business talking to the doctor.

To HR? How is HR involved in this?

@AzorAhai: The first step should be to appeal this decision and behavior to the chair of the department. Going to the board will take much longer. The HR department—or its equivalent in the administration (the provost's office in the US) could get involved if there   is a faculty conduct issue.

Your assertion that a professor even can ask is not obviously true, and almost certainly false. The act of even asking a student to do this is a serious transgression.

I find these comments rather riduculous. Have you all fallen so far from normal human interaction that simply asking is already considered a major offense? Like I stated very clearly it must be an open question with no repercussions if refused. But the question itself is most certainly not something that should be punished or marked negatively.

Asking someone to forfeit their privacy when you are in a position of power over them is deplorable and deeply unethical - should be a first time firing offense for any university official. The power imbalance between student and professor is big enough that any question to that effect carries an "or else" like "or else you'll get a zero on the exam". No, just no.

One thing the professor can do, without violating medical privacy laws, is to simply contact the medical practice to ask if they can speak to Doctor Such-And-Such (in other words, verify that the doctor is, actually, doctor), and then to ask Doctor Such-And-Such to verify that he/she was indeed the author of the note. After all, the doctor sent the note. So you could say to the doctor "While I do not wish you to talk to my doctor about my medical condition, feel free to talk to my doctor to verify that the note is valid".

You ask about what's allowed, which may not be the same as what's right or ethical.  In the absence of some course and/or university policy (and/or state law) stating otherwise, the decision of whether or not to allow a student to retake a missed exam is entirely at the professor's discretion.
As a first step, you should check to see whether any such policy exists at your school or for your course.  If one does, then you're in luck.  Refer your professor to it.  If they still don't come around, involve an advisor, department head, or similar third-party to resolve the duspute.
If there is no such policy, you'll need to shift your perspective a bit.
The default scenario at this point is that you've failed the midterm.  That's the outcome you have if the professor simply sits there and does nothing.
So while it's true that the professor cannot legally require or otherwise compel you to waive doctor-patient confidentiality, it may also be true (barring any university policies in your favor) that you cannot require or compel the professor to let you retake the midterm.  They can deny your request for any reason, or for none at all.
You've got a stalemate; the professor is almost certainly allowed to ask you to waive doctor-patient confidentiality, and you're certainly allowed to refuse.  In which case the stalemate continues, and you're stuck with the default outcome of a failed midterm.
In essence, nobody is requiring anything.  You missed an exam, and you want to be allowed to retake it.  You may have a completely valid and reasonable excuse for missing the exam, but in the absence of any policy to the contrary whether or not you get to an exam is at the professor's sole discretion.  You're asking the professor for a favor, and they're asking one back.
None of which means that the professor has been reasonable or fair or ethical if they've not accepted a genuine medical excuse at face value, or that the incident couldn't have negative repercussions for the professor if the details get out, or that you wouldn't find support if you took the matter higher up in the university food-chain.
But your question is about what the professor can do.  And they can ask you to let them speak to your doctor, yes.  They can't force you to, but they can sit on their hands and do nothing if you refuse.  They shouldn't do that sort of thing, but without a university policy stating otherwise they almost certainly can.

The answer will greatly depends on your region.
Some things to consider would be to look at your local laws and your University's guidelines, too.
A note from and MD rather than an NP may be a valid request depending on your University's guidelines. Many universities require a note specifically from an MD for such occasions.
As for his asking to talk to your doctor, it would be useful to know what he is trying to achieve that a note couldn't do. Ask him why exactly he needs to speak to your doctor.
If he doubts that you have/had an illness then it should be completely unnecessary to ask for more than a note from an MD. If that's all he wants to do and doesn't back down after getting a note, look at your local laws and University's guidelines and contact HR if he oversteps any of those.
But you didn't mention what your illness was, perhaps he may not be doubting that you have the illness but rather wants to assess whether or not it was a good reason to defer an exam. If his questions are about the illness in general and why it would be a valid reason to miss an exam, suggest consulting any doctor about it.
Lastly, and perhaps the least popular suggestion, ask yourself exactly what you'll lose by letting your professor know about your illness. Perhaps the easiest solution, albeit least favorable, is to just let him speak to your doctor about it. His demands may be out of line, but if you were honest about your illness there's no real harm to you for allowing him to speak to your doctor about it.

Well, if the OP was recovering from an abortion, or from syphilis, then they might not want the Prof knowing.  It's also important that people get sniffy about their medical privacy when they have had a cold - precisely in order to protect those whose condition was more embarressing.

I understand the humiliation aspect of things, hence why I mentioned the possibility of just letting the prof know as my last point. Regarding syphilis or an abortion as examples you pointed out, letting the prof know about your condition won't GET you syphilis or force you into a situation where you get an abortion - that's what I meant by no real harm. If it boils down to failing a class or allowing your professor to talk to your doctor, it's something that should be considered.

You’re assuming that a violation of privacy is not “real harm”. The existence of privacy laws suggests otherwise.

since, at the time of writing my answer, the OP's location was not specified, there was a possibility in which the professor's requirements were legal and allowed by the University. In that situation, it is a very reasonable suggestion to ask OP to assess exactly how much harm they receive by obliging to those demands. I clearly mentioned that I understood the humiliation aspect of privacy laws, and by real harm I clearly meant physical harm; allowing your professor to know about your condition won't make your condition worse than it already is.

Since this sounds like a disability, talk to your college/university's disability office. Get an accommodation letter that allows you to make up classes and exams. In every college I have attended, this letter is sufficient for establishing that you have a disability and the professor would be violating university policies if he were to require more information on the medical condition.

This does not sound like a disability.


text:
Is it possible to submit new GRE scores after having applied to an acadmic program?
I intend on taking the GRE but I haven't had the time to study much and so now I feel I am facing the option of either

Taking the GRE anyway, most likely getting very unimpressive scores and applying to academic programs with these scores, or
Cutting my losses and applying for programs the next time they announce applications (which, in some cases, is a year from now).

Is it possible to apply with my first scores as some sort of "provisional" score and inform them that I will be re-taking the rest soon? How much does a "bad first time, better second time" affect how admissions reviewers see applicants? In the case that extra background information would be helpful, I am a non-traditional student who already has a (short) record of research experience.

I am in a similar situation, though I decided to take it anyway. Now I am wondering if its even worth while studying for it more and send additional scores or just forget it until decisions are out and instead focus on my research position I currently hold...and if I don't get in anywhere I want instead just then only study for the GRE again...

Honestly, the GRE scores are perhaps the most useless part of the application record. Good scores tell me that someone speaks English well, and is capable of basic mathematics. A bad score could just be a signpost of having a bad day, or perhaps some issues with English that don't necessarily translate into being a bad student or a bad researcher. (Just about the only thing GRE scores tend to correlate with in grad school is the performance in first-year classes!)
If you do have replacement scores, you can definitely send them to grad schools. They'll be considered, but they're not likely to sway a decision (unless the school has a minimum cutoff—which is possible for international students).

if its the most useless then why put us through the pain of doing it and distracting us from things that actually matter?

Because that's what's always been done. (Seriously. It's inertia more than anything else.)

is there a way to motivate universities to abandon such useless traditions? Or at least the first step to motivate to stop this?


text:
How do industrial researchers get access to online journals?
When one is hired by industry to research (or something of innovative nature), he or she may want (or need) to access online journal articles.
But I suppose normal industrial jobs (e.g. software engineer in Amazon) don't grant online subscriptions to journals (like, access to a network IP with a subscription, just like many university accounts).
So, do industrial researchers purchase subscriptions themselves (this seems to be close to impossible)? Or do they apply for subscriptions through their company?
I have not worked in the industry, but I am curious.

Visit your local university library. The bigger the better of course.

If that journal is essential for the job they hired you to do, then that company should get you access to it.  On the other hand, what journals are available to workers at that company may be something to ask them when they are recruiting you, and maybe you will take the answer into account in deciding which job offer to accept.

I don't know exactly how many online journals my employers subscribe to, but the company (in the UK) used to run its own library (with more than one librarian, plus several assistants) and subscribe to maybe 30 or 40 print journals - and kept decades of copies of them in storage. If that's what you need to operate, you pay to have it! Technical books were also available through interlibrary loans, of course...

I use sci-hub.bz

But I suppose normal industrial jobs (e.g. software engineer in Amazon) don't grant online subscription to journal (like, access to a network IP with subscription, just like many university accounts).

Some industry research labs do subscribe to digital libraries, though in my experience, not as many as a university. For example, in the industry research lab where I'm currently spending my summer, I can access the ACM digital library, but not Elsevier journals.
To access papers that are not available by subscription, researchers in industry usually try one of the methods described in the answers to these questions:

What do you do when you find yourselves with an unreadable/inaccessible paper?
Access to journals for individuals outside of an institution?
Ways to get free and legal access to research papers as a researcher


text:
Degree in Philosophy at Mathematics department?
I saw some tesis that, for me, look as paper of Mathematics and, indeed, are from mathematics' department. However, the name of the course is "degree in Philosophy".
There is any explanation about it?
I would imagine degree in Philosophy something about thinkers sociologics, human theory, etc.
Many thanks.

Was it "Doctor of Philosophy" by any chance?

It is unclear what you are asking, but a PhD, which is the normal doctorate for a mathematician is literally, Doctor of Philosophy. Math was traditionally one of the fields studied by philosophers, also including Rhetoric, etc.

@GoodDeeds, yes!

@Buffy, I understand... Where I studied were very different disciplines, but you're right.

From Wikipedia: " In the context of the Doctor of Philosophy and other similarly titled degrees, the term "philosophy" does not refer to the field or academic discipline of philosophy, but is used in a broader sense in accordance with its original Greek meaning, which is "love of wisdom." "

One of my professors was on an airplane and was asked to help a passenger with a heart attack... he replied I can help with the engines I am a doctor of engineering... passenger survived though

@GoodDeeds, very good answer, thank you so much. I did not know that PhD had this meaning. In my region is different. Now I understand. Many thanks.


text:
Left off four publications and counting by old PI? What to do?
I had worked in a research position before moving to my current job.  While working there I synthesised numerous compounds and developed the methodologies to do so, I sent these off to a number of collaborators in large quantities.
I have now found out that around four papers have been published using the materials that I prepared and sent off enabling the work.  However, on all publications.. in which my old PI is on.. it states in acknowledgements synthesised by her.. She never set foot in the lab never mind having the ability to make or synthesise them! I also still get regular messages from 'her' staff asking me for help on how to do work in which she has laid out the claim she is the world expert... they cant prepare the compounds since I have left.
Its getting a bit sickening now seeing this happening multiple times and being completely cut off and complete credit stolen, not even an acknowledgement.
Is there any thing I can do?
Many Thanks

Is it possible that the authors don't actually know who developed the materials and are just making an assumption based on the lab it came out of? When you sent it off, were you clear that it was your work, rather than our word? In your field is it natural to attribute everything to the PI? Any of those could point to an innocent, if unfortunate, state of affairs.

I don't know the conventions of your field, so the following suggestion might be absurd, but it seems to me that you could offer to provide the help that her staff needs but only under the condition that you be a co-author of any resulting papers. (I have no suggestion for what to do about previous papers.)

I would be replying to those requests to contact her... then see if anything happens.

First of all, I think we can all agree that situations like this are terrible, and can be very discouraging to students and junior researchers. Anyone facing a situation like this should take a deep breath and try to calm down, then think clearly about what they want. It's too late to be added as an author to any of the four papers that were already published. It might be best to simply cut ties with this research group and walk away. Or, you could advocate for an acknowledgment in the next paper the group puts out.
In this case, the OP cannot know for certain that the PI did not actually go back and synthesize the relevant chemicals herself, after the OP left. Most likely, there was no conspiracy to keep you off the paper. Perhaps the authors either forgot to put your name on it (or in the acknowledgments), or talked about it and decided that your contributions didn't warrant an authorship (but, if they did have this discussion, they should have alerted you).
The OP mentions that he "synthesised numerous compounds and developed the methodologies to do so, I sent these off to a number of collaborators in large quantities."
If any of those collaborators were authors on any of the four papers in question, the first step would be to write to them. Doing so, it would be good to avoid an accusatory tone, as this will only make them defensive. Instead, I'd say something like "Congratulations! I'm really excited to see this work finally published. I remember synthesizing the compouds mentioned in this paper back in year X when I was in the lab." You could then include the correspondence with that author, showing your contribution, and tactfully ask whether the authors had discussed how to recognize your contribution. This is a person who you helped, so hopefully they will respond. If not, you could reach out to the first author on the paper and try to figure out what happened. If that fails, then you could reach out to the PI, but the PI will probably just say that she synthesized the compounds herself.
Having written this answer, it seems to me that the best thing to do would just be to walk away, happy that you got paid for the research you did in those years, and that the lack of these publications doesn't seem to have really impacted your ability to get a good job after. But, if you want to get credit (and it sounds like an acknowledgment would be enough), then perhaps by writing to the authors starting with "most likely to help" you could get it included in their next paper that this series of papers built on your contributions from back when you were in the lab.


text:
Resolved: changing name on online abstract after legal name change
I am an undergraduate at a US university. I have a first author publication that I worked really hard for: both data collection and creation and the actual paper itself.
However, as I am an immigrant, I changed my legal first and last name to a more American name, and the journal said they cannot make changes to the abstract after the submission deadline (which was in 2021).
I feel kind of defeated right now because I was banking on this publication assisting me in landing research positions via cold email and feel like those hours put into the lab won't be recognized.
I also don't understand why this journal won't let me change my legal name (the impact factor is around 7 so it's a decent journal), as journals like Nature and Science have allowed for author name changes as a way to be inclusive. Should I try calling instead of emailing?
Also, how can I list this on my resume? I feel like it would be so weird to not even have my new name on the citation, especially since I'm first author, and having to explain a relic name to my future PI. Even if I don't get asked directly, I feel like there will be some stigma. I might be overthinking, but as I am very young, this was my pride as I worked so hard for this and was banking on landing future opportunities with this under my belt.
UPDATE My legal name change on my online abstract was approved! Any changes to the abstract submission after the deadline was against their policy, but they made an exception for me, so I'm very happy! I feel like the most important takeaway for people who are in my situation (if you ever view this question) is to ask nicely yet maintain professionalism so that they take you seriously. Best of luck to anyone else who is in my position!

On the resume list the paper as published, with your original name. But note your name change somewhere also there. It won't really be a big problem for your career since it is only one item and it is so early in that career. You are overthinking it.
But long term, you should think about publishing (all future papers) under a single name that need not be your legal name or your birth name. This is especially important for those from cultures where name change at marriage is typical. Publishing under a single name makes name searches easier for people. Choose a "professional name" that need not match your legal, birth, or common-use name.
Hopefully, however, you will eventually have published enough that missing one abstract in a name search won't really matter.
Things like this are not an issue in grad school applications as they are common enough to be easily understood and accepted. But also note that cold email is a poor way to try to make an impression for grad school admissions. Such things are easily ignored, especially by those busy people you most want to reach.
You won't be able to get the journal to change its rules. Among other things, they don't like it for old citations to become obsolete (or weird) because they change their online entries. It is much worse for print journals, of course.

Just to add a couple of of points to Buffy's answer:

you can in principle use whatever pen-name you like but (as you're aware) at some point potential employers will want to verify your publications list, and using different names will make this awkward at best. You would need not just to use ORCiD (or similar identifier) but also to list your various names on your public ORCiD profile. This has obvious direct implications for your privacy, on top of the disconcerting general "Big Brother" aspect of such identifiers. Ensuring that the publisher has embedded your ORCiD in the paper's Version-Of-Record a priori would help a bit.

one long-standing option that can help in some cases is to publish using only initials, rather than giving forenames. So, if you've changed name from "Bob" to "Worried", you can still publish as "B.W. Scientist", and this will even allow for some future changes such as from "Worried" to "Brilliant". (Obviously, this doesn't help with surname changes.)


text:
Using a publicly available dataset in my paper
I would like to publish a journal paper and an ArXiV preprint, where I validate my results using the dataset available here (scroll down to the Files section).
I would like to submit my paper to IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing (TSP). My question is, do I need any approval from the authors? I would, of course, cite the paper and the website. My thinking is that they voluntarily uploaded their data online. They didn't specifically state the data can be used in other publications, but they give a bibtex citation format right after the files section. I cannot find the relevant TSP guidelines on this, but if I could avoid contacting the authors (while being fully ethical) I would prefer it. What is your opinion about it? Thanks a lot!

It is common to use publicly available data. You need to cite the source of the data you used, but you do not need explicit permission from the authors of the data. As you said, they made it public.
(Caveat to this paragraph: I am not a lawyer). To be thorough, you might want to spend time poking around to see if there is a license that explicitly lays out what you can and cannot do with the data. However, I've never come across a situation where published data is off limits for use in a scientific study, the limitations are usually around things like selling the data or passing it off as your own.

Note however, that one should cite the dataset and you cannot republish it without explicit permission.

Thanks both. I wouldn't republish, it's just to show how my method performs on that data, so essentially all I will publish is a few plots of that data processed in some way. Of course I would cite the dataset.

@Andrew: Are there any references for this?

@mike No, this is just based on my personal experience. If you're in a situation where you have enough doubt that you need a reference (and you don't have a supervisor or your supervisor also has doubts), you should check the policies of the journal you're submitting to and any licenses associated with the dataset you're looking at. Contacting the journal and/or authors of the data is also an option -- probably unnecessary in most cases in my experience, but doesn't hurt to ask if you have doubts.


text:
Leveraging research-adjacent experience for graduate school admission
I recently completed an undergraduate degree in Computer Science and unfortunately didn't realize my interest in attending grad school until my senior year. This means that I neglected to take advantage of many of the research opportunities presented to me like REUs. I graduated with a relatively good GPA, but no research to speak of.
For the last 6 months I have been working in industry as a Site Reliability Engineer, but I feel that before I apply for a masters in CS program I should have some research experience under my belt.
I have looked around to find some research opportunities but it appears that they are usually scoped to undergraduates (REUs) or graduates, not much in the way of postbacc  roles.
I recently found out about "Research Software Engineer Staff" positions at places like UMich or jobs at the national labs where I would be helping to implement research projects, even if not researching myself. My question is, would this be worth pursuing to get closer to academia? If I can't find any true research opportunities, I was thinking I'd attempt this, since I could imagine that this sort of experience might be appealing to programs.
Any thoughts on this approach or any other ideas about research opportunities post-undergraduate would be appreciated.

Is this question about study in US? Or where?

US, Sorry for leaving that out.

For study in the US it won't hurt but isn't likely to be necessary or improve your prospects by much. Some, not much. But given that you need to do something between now and the start date, sure, do it.
Note that many masters programs in the US are not primarily research focused. They are normally too short for serious research to be undertaken with any hope of completion in a couple of years. Also note that most of the competition for slots in masters programs won't have much of any research experience either.
Admissions committees will look at your grades, especially in major subjects, and at letters of recommendation primarily. If you are asked for a Statement of Purpose that can be an important way to demonstrate your seriousness and goals.
A job such as you suggest might be a way to get a letter of recommendation, but if the job isn't especially "academic" then others with more knowledge of your academics would probably be better.
A boost, yes, but only a minor one. Better than slinging burgers somewhere, of course. If you already have a CS bachelors then a job that is probably programming focused won't give you many new skills. I'd assume you have those already.
One advantage, though, of such a job is that it might help firm up your goals; watching researchers and taking direction from them. And it might be a fun way to spend your time while you wait for decisions.

I realize that this sounds pessimistic - maybe a bit too pessimistic. Actually, though, I think you are in a good place for acceptance given the question and what you say. Just be realistic about the application process. Make a broad search for universities, including some that aren't in the "very top" rankings.

Thank you for the response. I think your points are good. Could you elaborate on your point about masters programs not being enough time for serious research? I am specifically interested in those programs with a thesis option as preparation for a PhD. If I couldn’t get suitable research experience during a masters program with a thesis then I am not sure where else I would get it. I thought it was uncommon to get admitted to PhD programs without research experience.


text:
Will taking a vacation hurt your academic career/recommendation letter?
I’ve been curious about this question for pretty long. I’m not in academia, but I heard from my friends who are in PhD programs talk about not wanting to take a vacation or ask for vacation approval, fearing that it will hurt their advisors’ evaluation on them. As far as I know, they’re very hardworking and dedicated people (with no problem to work overtime, on weekends, on call etc) who aim to publish as many high quality papers as possible, but it seems a little bizarre for me to understand, if taking a vacation really shows sign of tardiness in academia? And would that hurt their publishing speed (sorry I can’t think of a better word to describe what they want)?
I apologize in advance if this question is off-topic, please suggest anything to improve my question/vote for close if it’s the case.

I recall taking a variety of vacations in grad school, including a scuba diving trip with my advisor. Clearly this might differ in different places...

Rested students are alert students are fast students are productive students.

I studied in the UK and I took several vacations during my PhD. I am still an academic in the country and I still do take several vacations a year. As many as I can! And so did everyone else, including my supervisors/PIs

Working over the weekend or long hours during the week are already red flags. Take vacations as needed and work a 9 to 5 or other comfortable time period.

It also depends a lot on what is meant by "a vacation".  Does it mean having a weekend off, or a whole week, or a whole semester?  The "a vacation" expression can mean many things to different people.  If I were a supervisor and someone wanted a week off to refresh the mind and relax, I'd be fine with that, even encourage it.  But if they wanted a whole semester off, I'd be a lot more concerned.

The question has several possible answers. The right one depends e.g. on the country, the region, the university, the field, as well as the research group and the 'culture' promoted there. The answers you can expect here will therefore be mostly based on specific examples and cannot be regarded as universal.
I for instance want my PhD students to take vacations if they feel it is necessary, and they also simply have the right to do so. My reasoning is that they will come back with some extra energy, motivation and fresh ideas effectively increasing their research output. I do not know if this is true though. [Actually, I do not care if it is true. There are more important things than maximizing research output at all costs.]
In reality, the PhD students often do not take the amount of days off they could. In many cases this is because they are so involved in their research that they do not want a vacation. I sometimes send them away then. It could however also be due to pressure they feel from their supervisor. This pressure might be real or not, and often enough it is real. But: At least where I work most supervisors are convinced of the benefits of an occasional vacation. With these people, it would be a big mistake not to take a vacation when necessary and instead keep working until motivation is gone -- especially if that is only the case because you do not even talk to the supervisor about it because of fear of the outcome of the conversation.

Thank you for the answer! Tho it is true that I can only collect few data points here, it’s very reassuring to hear from a professor’s perspective that most supervisors are approval of time off. I will let my friends know!

@numerairX As I wrote: Where I work most (not all!) supervisors are generous with vacations. I could give you other examples where the opposite is the case, and I would not have to go far away from my institution.

This might be location dependent. In Germany, doctoral students take vacations in the same way as employees in a company would do. That is, they are allowed 30 days a year of vacation, and they do take them without problems.
Threatening doctoral students with consequences (bad evaluation or otherwise) if they exercise their right to take vacation is seen as an abuse of the supervisor's power, and will probably get the supervisor into trouble with the university if the students complain.

This is true in a technical sense. But also in Germany many supervisors build up a general pressure that lives in their groups and drives people to work the extra hours. It is usually not enforced as openly that there is hard evidence, and generally there is no culture to complain about it (from my natural sciences perspective).

I think the point is that hours are hardly trackable. (And no one I am aware of lets the scientists punch in and out, there might be some documented hours, oh noes!) The vacation times are mandated by law, local regulations, and typically handled by the administration, not by local group. So aside from "fill for a vacation and still go to uni" there is little obstacle to the vacation possible. And being at work during vacation raises some insurance problems, I'd guess.

Henri Poincare, while on vacation:

At the moment when I put my foot on the step, the idea came to me,
  without anything in my former thoughts seeming to have paved the way
  for it, that the transformations I had used to define the Fuchsian
  functions were identical with those of non-Euclidian geometry. I did
  not verify the idea; I should not have had time, as, upon taking my
  seat in the omnibus, I went on with a conversation already commenced,
  but I felt a perfect certainty. On my return to Caen, for conscience’
  sake, I verified the result at my leisure.

Mathematical Creation,
http://vigeland.caltech.edu/ist4/lectures/Poincare%20Reflections.pdf
The essay continues with a discussion of the value of alternating periods of conscious thought and intervals when one's subconscious can process ideas.

While I cannot top this story, I will give a supporting anecdote. After a brief stint in academia I embarked on an industrial research career. When I hit my 10 patents milestone, I took a moment to figure out "when did this idea first come to me". It turns out, 8 of 10 patents were first conceived while "away from work" (vacation, weekends, ...). This seems to confirm that Poincaré's experience is not unique.

I find holidays are the best time to work, no meetings, no talks, and no emails to deal with. I can concentrate only on what I want to do, rather than all the things that I need to do.

This will, of course, vary with advisors. Some are hard driving, looking down on what they consider slacking. Others are more humane, realizing that an occasional break from routine can be invigorating. A wise student takes short breaks fairly frequently and longer breaks aren't necessarily a detriment to good research.
In fact, a period of rest, even a week or two, can lead to a settling of the ideas that can lead to insights. But it is also good to have a way to jot down notes and ideas as they occur, even on the beach in Cannes. Your brain doesn't shut off just because you aren't at your desk.

Views on vacation vary widely depending on the adviser/department.  However, here is an anecdote to illustrate how hostile some labs can be to vacation.
I had a friend who needed to take a break from graduate school because she needed to be hospitalized.  Her adviser knew where she went and why, and that her need for hospitalization was at least contributed to by the long hours she had been working in the lab.  When she came back, even in private conversations, her adviser kept referring to her hospitalization as a vacation.  He also expressed concern the other graduate students (who also knew she was hospitalized) would start thinking they could take long vacations like that because she did.

I generally agree with the rest of the answers, but there's an important point I think needs to be explicitly discussed: PhD students are legally entitled to time off. I can only speak for the few PhD programs I'm familiar with (mostly in the UK), but I'd be highly surprised and disappointed if that weren't the case in most universities.
Of course some people may want to keep working for extended periods of time. Of course students need to agree dates with their supervisor in case there's a deadline or ongoing project. But, if your friends are not allowed to, or simply discouraged from, taking reasonable vacation, then I would gently recommend your friends to get the hell out of their lab(s) as soon as possible. That attitude is exploitative, unfair, and harmful to students' physical and mental health.
Let's end this stupid culture of consensual exploitation in academia.

Based on my past direct experience, students that do not want to take holidays are considered very bad and it is negative in Academia. PhD students (future researchers) must have the ability to balance their free time with the hard work. It means that they must have the ability to respect the deadlines and they must dedicate free time for themselves. In Academia nobody wants to work with a person that is 100% only dedicated to his job.


text:
Negotiating salary before in-person interview for an administrative position
I had an interview for an administrative (IT) position at a very prestigious US university. I had a second phone interview with an HR representative who asked for my salary expectation. I gave my range, and the HR person gave me their range, whose maximum is 20% lower than my minimum. She asked me if I was interested in continuing the hiring process within their range, and I asked to give me a day to think over it.
This is an extremely interesting position for me, but the modest salary increase would make the move to another state hard.
I counted all, salary, benefits, relocation package, but still it seems a tight fit. The HR person said that they are kind of locked into that range, which I have a hard time believing.
I come from the nonprofit world but I am not used to negotiation tactics in academia. Is this just a negotiation trick? How should I respond to avoid down-selling me without stalling the process?
Thanks.
Update:
I found some salary grades from this institution from a couple of years ago, and indeed the range I was given was the midpoint of the published salary grade, which includes mostly positions lower than the one I am apply for.
Without sharing details with my HR interlocutor, I replied that from my research, given the responsibilities, I expected a different range, and she replied that the range is non-negotiable because it's a nonprofit. Which I know is not true, because I myself work at a nonprofit.
So I could just walk out of the deal and see if they come back, but it would be a bummer to let it fall through without even a chance to get to a real offer. Or I could suck it up and go with their rate, and work toward a raise within the following year or two, but it would be a tough start.

Presumably, this is a private school, not a public school, correct?

Yes, it's a private school.

I would expect this not to be a "hiring trick". Administrative positions in universities have a reputation of paying significantly below market rates (at least here in Europe).

So two phone interviews but no real interview yet? That seems annoying (a common sentiment when dealing with HR departments...). I'd say go ahead and go, you might be able to negotiate for a more senior role to get the salary you want (and they may be neglecting to mention this to you) but don't promise anything that will lead them to say you misled them if you refuse their offer.

I would just take their statement at face value.  In my (admittedly somewhat limited) experience with academic hiring, stating a salary range is done simply for the obvious reason: so that if the candidate is unwilling to work for that salary, they can drop out immediately, thus saving the university (and themselves) the time and expense of further interviews.
If you are willing to consider working for a salary in that range, then go to the interview.  If not, then withdraw and look elsewhere.
As far as "take the job and hope for a raise", note that academic institutions are not generally known for being able to offer large raises to reward or retain valuable employees.  I wouldn't count on that.
It's obviously not true that nonprofits are inherently unable to negotiate on salary, and I don't think that's what your HR contact meant.  I just take it as "we're a nonprofit and our budgets are tighter than they might be in industry, so our salaries are therefore lower".

Not sure what your question is. You could respond yes I am interested in continuing the process and see where it leads. Maybe they have some benefits you don't know about. Maybe the job is even cooler than you think. In other words maybe something happens and you are willing to take the job for less money. Then again, maybe things pan out how you expect and you tell them know that you have seen the complete offer and understand the job more, you cannot take it for less than X (whatever that number is, plus some wiggle room).
You could also respond no, because do you really want to put up with crap like that.


text:
master project topic bigger then I expected
I am a master student in Germany. I want to submit master project (not thesis) in 2 month. project has 4 months duration and 8 credit.
I don't have enough experience in research area.
The problem is my topic have really big domain. I thought I can complete in 4 month. unfortunately it come bigger bigger when I research more.
my topic to optimize fulfillment of norm requirements by EN50128 with agile and project management tool.
How can I make it simple without loosing quality of paper? please someone guide me how can i do research, something wrong with my way of writing paper?

By the way, unless it is somebody who is very well informed on project management, they won't know what "EN50128" is. Even the concept of "agile" is not necessarily going to be known to somebody who is uniformed on project management.