text:
Transfer Over of EPSRC Funding When Changing Universities
This situation I'm in currently is the following. This is all based in the UK (England, more precisely). I'm at university A with full EPSRC for a maths PhD. However, I'm not getting on well with the university, and would like to change to university B. (The particular reasons for this aren't pertinent to this question.) I've looked on the EPSRC website and I can't see anything that says this isn't an issue. Ideally I'd like to move to university B at the start of next year (so not wait until the new academic year).
I've spoken with university B about this, and they are happy to have me, subject to being able to be funded. The person I spoke to said they were unsure if I could get funding, as they'd heard that EPSRC will only fund someone once, and so since I've already had a term of funding, they wouldn't fund me again. They aren't sure on this though.
Does anyone have any knowledge of such things? Surely while changing university during a PhD wouldn't be common, it can't be that uncommon?

Note the close relation to this question "Is transferring to another university an option for an unhappy PhD student?", but that mine is slightly different. The university to which I would transfer have said that they would have me, subject to getting funding, so this is not an issue.

The CV question should be asked in a separate post, and the question about how employers would view this isn't really one we can answer.

I'd argue that it's one question with multiple parts, but that part wasn't the main part. As it is now, it's simply a question about funding policies. I don't expect just anyone to be able to answer this -- it's not an opinion question. I was hoping that there would be someone with more knowledge of the EPSRC regime than me. I've not used academia.se before; are funding issue off-topic for here? (If so, my apologies, I didn't realise. Funding is integral to academia, so I assumed it was fine.)

Funding issues in general are on-topic.  I think the concern here is that you're asking about the policies of one specific organization; this site usually doesn't entertain such questions, on the grounds that they are relevant only to a narrow audience and should be asked directly of that organization instead.  However, I think perhaps large (multi-)national funding agencies should be an exception to this, since their policies can be relevant to a large class of academics.  I voted to reopen.

Fair enough. I didn't realise that what I asked was off-topic, but I understand why it could be: this is a community, not a site just for people to get an answer to their specific question. I agree though that with EPRSC being one of the biggest agencies in the UK it would apply to more. If it's decided that it's off-topic, that's for the community to decide and I'll respect that :)

@NateEldredge EPSRC is the funding body for engineering and the physical sciences in the UK. I don't think that's "a narrow audience", so I'm also voting to reopen.

I agree with the reopen votes: I don't see why we should treat such a question any different from those about other funding bodies like the NSF.

Hi @ImranRashid -- I wasn't able to take my stipend with me, but this wasn't an issue: I simply stopped my funding at Uni A and Uni B gave me a new set of funding. This actually meant that I got an extra term of funding: Uni B gave me new funding, so 3yrs worth on top of the 1 term I'd already had at Uni A.

From the tags I assume that you are a PhD student funded from EPSRC.
Unlike First Grants, Standard Grants, and Fellowships, PhD stipendships can not be transferred. The reason is that the EPSRC does not fund a PhD student directly. Instead, EPSRC funds Centers for Doctoral Training, and successful candidates get their funding from these centers. PhD students have financial "contracts" with CDT's, not EPSRC. Every CDT has a separate budget. For this reason, if you want to move universities, you can not take your stipend with you.

I understand, thank you. Rather than transferring my stipend, do you know if I can apply for a new stipend at the university to which I would transfer? Is this basically up to the new university if they want to fund me, or it is that you can't get EPRSC funding (through a DTC/CDT) on two separate occasions? (Does this question make sense?)

You should check if you are still eligible, and you new target host should be able to help with it. I do not know if EPSRC allows it, but DCT's may have their own policies as well, and of course they are not keen to fund a student who can leave in a middle of a term.

Ok, thanks very much for your help! :) -- just to add to your answer, EPSRC don't only fund CDTs. They do stuff through DTPs as well: https://www.epsrc.ac.uk/skills/students/.


text:
Supervisor insists on writing a manuscript, yet procrastinates on writing for years
So my supervisor insisted on writing a manuscript himself (because he wants to submit the paper to a better journal), but constantly procrastinated on the task for one and a half years despite repeated reminders from me. The drafting of the manuscript was completed eventually and submitted to a journal, but I can't help feeling that this situation has caused me to lose a tremendous amount of trust in my supervisor. This stems from the repeated broken promises by him to complete drafting the manuscript after attending to whatever unrelated tasks he deemed a higher priority at that time. And as I said, this went on for 1.5 years until I started to lose my patience and complained to the dean. This loss of trust is also a major cause of a further breakdown in the relationship with my supervisor down the line (e.g. me pestering him on other tasks incessantly etc.,) among other problems.
This is in the past and I will be graduating soon so it is now too late to change anything. But I now wonder if I should have acted any differently? Is it not that big of a deal for a supervisor to delay something for so long? I was concerned with being scooped, the delay affecting my cv post graduation, and other potential complications that may arise from such a delay. Did I make a mountain out of a molehill? If not, maybe I should have requested for a change of supervisor before things had gotten out of hand. At that time, I thought a change of supervisor was a huge decision but I now realize that the alternate path that I have treaded has become the death knell of my future academic career.
Edit: I had actually prepared a draft manuscript way back before my supervisor decided and insisted on writing the manuscript himself because he wanted to submit to a better journal (believing his writing skills to be better, which may or may not be true but that is unimportant; for what it's worth, I have sole-authored publications before so my writing skills are at least satisfactory).
Edit 2: The degree in question is a PhD but the publication was only just submitted on the eve of the submission of my thesis (~2 months before).

"I will be graduating soon so it is now too late to change anything" ... too late to change anything? But if you are graduating, why do you need to change anything now?

Looking back, it might have been useful to prepare a draft manuscript yourself. You could have presented it as an exercise to practice writing, but your supervisor might have decided to use it, with some editing that would have been quicker than writing from scratch.

Are you finishing a MS or a PhD?  In my opinion, the difference is highly relevant to this question.

I am assuming that this is a manuscript that you were involved in as a co-author? Your post says nothing about your involvement in the manuscript, or why it would be important to you that it be done quickly.

@sgf Yes both of us are co-authors. I was concerned with being scooped, the delay affecting my cv post graduation, and other potential complications that may arise from such a delay. I am unsure if a delay of 1.5 years is something to kick up a big fuss about which is why I am posing this question. I am aware of long article review times in economics for instance but It shouldn't be in my field (physics). Even if it were, my supervisor should have just straight up told me instead of constantly making short term promises he couldn't keep.

@joe I can't change anything now and I am not trying to. I am just wonder if there was a better way to go about doing things. Should I have asked for a change of supervisor instead? And at what stage? Would this have been grounds for a change in supervisor at a typical university?

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How do you keep up with (non-periodical) conference proceedings?
I am an EE & CS graduate student and IEEE is a typical and well-known associations.
I am getting papers published in Transactions, Journals Magazines, etc... via RSS feed. For example, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing has a feed published once a month.
So far, however, I couldn't find a way to get a list of conference proceeding papers when they are published. As a conference proceeding is not a periodical publication, generally, there is no such feed things. Therefore, I have to wait and check everyday until it is published. (Some conference provides papers when conference is being held. But in general, it takes two or three months from the conference to be published.)
Furthermore, USENIX has a feed, but it is not a feed about published papers. USENIX does not provide any feed even for the periodical.
In such situation, how do you keep up with the recent publications?

I don't care about the recent publication. I search them on demand.
I keep up them manually. (You are a very diligent person. :-> )
My organization (university, company) has a sort of curation, curator.
None of them. Other ways.

I am not sure about EE, but for Computer Science, most of the venues you would usually want to track are listed in DBLP. DBLP itself does, as far as I know, not offer a subscription service, but (behold the beauty of open data) somebody else has built RSS feeds for DBLP.
This would allow you to use your favorite newsreader to keep up with conference publications the same way you are already tracking journals.

It's a non-answer, but, assuming you have a personal account (free to create), IEEEXplore (which costs a small fortune to any university) has a very limited interface to receive alerts for all conferences as a content alert on a weekly basis. I truly wonder who subscribes to this, as it must be information overload!

It's a shame, because the periodical interface to receive content alerts is not bad:

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


text:
How to Cite Online .pdf Publication in Article?
An entry in References which does not look good, here the url

where I am unsure about

having second name as "A." there; I would not necessary have it at all but the problem is that you do not necessarily know if it is the second name
URL: ... does not look good
having URL as red does not look good

Sure

year missing, so should be 2015

I remember that you do not need to provide url sometimes at all, but not sure.

The title of the article is "System Study: Residual Heat Removal 1998-2014". It's not the year of publication, it's just part of the title.

If you Google the article, you would find this link which gives you all the citation information, formatted citations for several styles (look for where it says "Citation Formats") and bibtex. Not sure how much more you need...

What do you mean "I found"? Did you write it yourself? And what is your question exactly? If this is a question on how to achieve a certain result with bibtex styles, it should go on tex.stackexchange.

The URL is required, as is the date of access and the date of creation (if it's available). I don't think the colour is really a necessity; however, what does matter is that you are consistent throughout your piece of writing. I normally use dark blue or black. I try to put it with that kind of serif-y "programming language" font, e.g. using the \url{} package in LaTeX.
The style of citation changes the way you cite electronic sources.
For MLA:
Editor, author, or compiler name (if available). Name of Site. Version
   number. Name of institution/organization affiliated with the site
   (sponsor or publisher), date of resource creation (if available).
   Medium of publication. Date of access.

for an entire website. The rules for MLA change slightly for other types of website citations.
For APA:
Author, A.A.. (Year, Month Date of Publication). Article title. Retrieved from URL

for websites with a known author. For websites without an author, and other types of electronic source citations, the rules are different.

For this website in particular, I would say it's closest to MLA-type citation but that perhaps it's missing the name of the institution that it's credited to. I haven't checked the website, so perhaps it's unavailable for some reason. Check the MLA link above to see the proper way to cite this particular PDF, as the link has multiple citation fashions which depend on the type of website / online material it is.
I think they were going for something like this (using the 'single web page' MLA):
John A. Schroeder. "System Study: Residual Heat Removal 1998–2014"
     Idaho National Laboratory. INL, Décember 2015.
     Web. 3 August 2016. URL: http://nrcoe.inel.gov/resultsdb/publicdocs/SystemStudies/rhr-SPAR-unreliability-external-2014.pdf

However the most important thing (second to making sure to cite, of course) is that the author is consistent throughout.

And finally, according to google scholar, the article is a 'tech report' and the BiBTeX citation is thus:
@techreport{schroeder2015system,
  title={System Study: Residual Heat Removal 1998-2014},
  author={Schroeder, John Alton},
  year={2015},
  institution={Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)}
}

The institution seems to be Idaho National Laboratory so I think it should be put as the institution. What do you think? - - I am not sure about the publisher. The laboratory is operated by Battelle Energy Alliance.

See my edit. But yes, IDL is the institution for sure.

INL, not IDL. Programming brain.


text:
To cite an organisation correctly in IEEE style
My tex based on Espanta's answer
@techreport{AAMI,
    title = {Recommended Practice for Testing and Reporting Performance Results of Ventricular Arrhythmia Detection Algorithms},
    institution = {{Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation}},
    year = {1987},
    address = {Arlington, VA, USA}
}

which is shown correctly now after Espanta's answer in Bibliography.
However, the thing is shown in my text similarly as before :

where AAM (1987) is shown.
I do not know what I should have in the text body for this citation, since the citation does not have author but institution.
I think AAMI (1987) is good.
What is the correct way of citing this organisation in IEEE style?

I think what you are referring to is a technical report or white paper from certain company. Then it should not be misc type. I think if you change your item from misc to technical report, the IEEE style in latex will handle it.
The correct field in citation style should be
Authors(if any), title, publisher, address, year.

Thank you for your answer! The other problem remains with having appropriate text when citing the document in the body.

Let LaTeX takes care of it. Supposedly LaTeX shld follow the style n we are not suppose to modify it manually.

Referring to

I do not know what I should have in the text body for this citation, since the citation does not have author but institution. I think AAMI (1987) is good.

and

The other problem remains with having appropriate text when citing the document in the body.

(comment to @Espanta)
When using LaTeX / Bibtex, you are not supposed to control how the citation appears in your text. This is the task of the style that you are using. Unless you have clear evidence that this is not the case, I would assume if a given journal requires you to use a given style, then whatever text the style generates should be ok.

Thank you for your answer! I simply leave it as it is with three first letters of the word AAMI in the citing.

@xLeitix, I did not recommend him to change the style, but I gave him a general clue that what it will look like. If he changes type from msc to proper type, the rest should be okay. Here is the point in answer I think if you change your item from misc to technical report, the IEEE style in latex will handle it.


text:
When to use academic titles in presentations in Europe?
I have M.Sc. (tech.) in physics. I am doing second degree in MD. I normally just present my work without academic titles in MD studies.
I am thinking the benefits of using academic titles in different fields.
Some of my friends use MD in medical stuff, while M.Sc. (tech.) in technical stuff.
However, many times, I have to deal with epidemiology and statistics where I use tools in Physics.
In these cases, I am thinking if I should use the academic title because my work is so different than anyone else in the group.
Same goes for the reports which I write.
In Finnish culture, we do not want to emphasize what you have achieved, which is the reason I am not using the academic title.
However, I am not sure about it.
Other titles which I can use EUR ING soon.
I think it is extraneous in such presentations.
Not sure which are the rules when to use this one, for example.
I think it is enough to leave the latter in CV.

Do you mean presentations in the academic context (i.e. conferences), in the industry/company context, for governmental agencies or for the general public? The use of the title/degree differs amongst the contexts - i.e. in presentations in front of a academic audience I would not put my degree on the slides.

Exactly! Those are use cases about which I am interested in.

If I understood correctly, you live in a culture where flaunting one's title(s) comes across as a bit crass; at the same time, you wonder if mentioning your title on the first page of a powerpoint presentation might increase your credibility when you are presenting to certain audiences.  (Did I get that right?)
You may be able to get the idea across in a more subtle way, that people would not interpret as bragging, on the first or second slide, as an acknowledgment.  For example, you could acknowledge the mentorship of Prof. XX in the YY Master's program at ZZ University.
That's just an example.  Does it give you some ideas?

Great idea! The challenge is how generally you can use it. Etc you do presentation about basic statistics and epidemiology of this disease in causing these manifestasions in this speciality. It is already so multifactorial where I need to work hard with R to answer the topic. - - I find it frustrating with some audiences sometimes. - - I would like to thank very often Schrödinger institut and R core team for their great work, because without their great work, I would not do what I do. However, not sure if enough subtle way. What do you think?

@LéoLéopoldHertz준영 - I think you need to run it past some fellow Finns, or at least some fellow Scandinavians.  I lived in Denmark for two years and I noticed that it's quite difficult for outsiders to give meaningful feedback about regional cultural norms.  (But to me your draft sounds fine.)

I do not think so it is about Finns, I need to ask. I work in international environment which consists of swedish, germans, autrians, ... students. There is so big gap between scandinavian and German cultures. - - The problem is that you never know when the presentation what you listen is really evidenced-based. Mostly, they are not so it is safest to assume that none of such presentations is completely evidenced-based and check the facts always yourself. - - I am not sure how I should deal with the problem because there are no guidelines for the cultures working together.

Why not make an informal survey of your peers? // Take a look at http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/79832/32436.


text:
Recommenders for grad school applications have not submitted and deadline is imminent
The application deadlines for several programs I am applying to are December 1st and two of my recommenders haven't submitted their letters yet. (Admittedly probably should've asked this question before now.) I asked both of them in October, they both said they would be happy to write the recommendation. I sent follow ups which they acknowledged two weeks before the deadline and then an additional follow up 3 days before as well as the request from the application system.
Is there anything I can do to still have a valid application?
Update the professor submitted but two days late. Fingers crossed.

Note that the deadline for recieving reference letters may be later than the deadline for recieving the application.

You have done what you can, I think. Most likely it will turn out ok for two reasons.
First is that letters do tend to get written, even by procrastinators. And many professors are, indeed, procrastinators. But if you ping them three days in advance it is about all you can do.
Second is that the recipients also realize that professors are procrastinators and, being professors themselves will make some allowances in most (not all, alas) cases. The final decisions about things won't be made on the deadline dates and the staff will spend some time gathering things together for some future meeting. It is an easy task to add late arrivals.
They might not be so forgiving of the applicant as they are of each other, of course.
Relax for now. If it becomes a problem then the recipients will let you know an you will almost certainly get a chance to explain and correct it.

Almost certainly? I've heard of departments that toss apps with two few LoRs. They can't follow up with all of them.

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


text:
Should I write a bilingual email to a professor who can't speak German very well?
Should I write a bilingual email to a professor who can't speak German very well?
That's basically the question. I don't know if this is the right thing to do, because it could mean that I underestimate his abilities. His native language is English, but mine is German and German is the local language.

Can you just write in his language, rather than bilingual?

@Buffy Yeah, that would work too. Is it better than writing the whole thing in German/bilingual?

Could you mention your own language skills and what the other language in "bilingual" is? Also, do you know how well they read German?

The Person is a native English speaker. I'm not quite sure how good the person can read German.

If you speak English, why not write him in English?

Ok, I thought it's kinda weird if I write him in English, although I speak German. Well, I'm just overthinking it and it is probably the best idea to write in the language he understands the most.

I have quite a few German friends. We always communicate in English. Thankfully. My German would make them cringe. Their English is mostly fine. They sometimes confuse "loose" and "lose" but that is about the worst of it. I can order schweinshaxe in Bavaria, but that is about the limit.

Yeah, you're right, it's probably better this way. Although you have to take into account that speaking is a bit different to reading/writing.

English is the language of academia, so write in English. This is especially the case if his primary language is English.
In the reverse scenario where the professor is not very fluent at English but is great at German, still write in English, but feel free to sprinkle some German (e.g. in the salutation or signature). If he responds with more German, then you can use more German too.

Ok, thank you for the informations!

Yes, English is used in Academia nearly everywhere, but it isn't universal. So, this mostly works, but be aware of exceptions. But, nearly every German academic probably has a good grasp of English, just as mathematicians in 1950 needed a good grasp of scientific German no matter where they worked.

What is your relation to the professor? If you are his student, following a course in German, then I would expect German to be the official language of the course.
In all other occasions, such as a research contact, I would suggest English, at least in the natural sciences/engineering (this might be field-dependent).
I agree with cag51 that a bilingual email is a bad idea.

First, we're probably way overanalyzing this: just send the message in any reasonable form and it should be fine.
That said: as a best practice, I would not recommend writing a bilingual message in this case. Either the professor is working hard to learn German, or they find German annoying and avoid it where possible. In the former case, a bilingual message tacitly acknowledges that you didn't think sending a German-only message would be a good idea (a bit of an insult, albeit a minor and understandable one); in the latter case, they will ignore the German translation completely. Either way, better to write in English only.
My advice might be different if there was no language that you both spoke fluently (in this case, sending a translation might be a good idea to avoid confusion) or if there was any possibility that your professor was one of those people who get offended at being addressed in a foreign language. Sometimes, I have sent a message in one language and then added a note saying: "I do understand [another language], feel free to respond in that language if you prefer."

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


text:
Novelty of finding an application for existing results
I have just completed work on certain problem that was ignored in applied mathematics but is well developed in pure mathematics for forty years. I mean there are certain formulations that were developed forty years ago but nobody seriously used them in applied mathematics, I have used those formulations and derived very decent results.
I am considering to submit my work to a high-ranking journal for applied mathematics, which mentions novelty in their criteria for submission.
On one hand, I do not consider my work original work as I have just shown application of certain formulations which were ignored by many. On the other hand, when I look at publications in that journal, my work seems to be better.
Can a work that just applies existing results be novel enough to warrant publication in a high-ranking journal?

What does it say in the journal's instructions to authors?

@ff524: The journal(Applied Mathematics Letters) use word novelty, but as I said I have shown application of certain formulation which was ignore earlier, so I don't think my work is novel one, but when I look at publications in that journal, my work seems to be better one.

Related answer: http://academia.stackexchange.com/a/62913/20058

I don't believe that we can guess which category your particular paper should be categorized into without knowing quite a lot of details about both the paper and the journal.

@jakebeal I want to submit my work to applied mathematics letter but afraid of getting rejected as I am not sure of category of my work, but I believe it should be submitted to AML.

@IgotiT Have you talked with your advisor?  Other colleagues? The journal editor?

On this problem I am working independently and my advisor don't know about this subject as I am carrying this work just because of personal interest. Should I ask the editor of AML ?

@IgotiT yeah, ask the editor about your paper, I think that will be faster and more relevant.

There are numerous results in theoretical and applied mathematics that remain hidden in a field-specific journal for many years before their general applicability becomes known. Consider, for example, the most-cited paper in mathematics/computation which builds on work originally developed by Gauss (see, for example, the Wikipedia page on the Cooley-Tukey FFT algorithm). Critically, the paper has spawned numerous others showing the applicability and usefulness of the Fast Fourier Transform to a wide range of other domains. Who, for example, would have originally conceived that it might find usefulness in anaesthesia!
I think that your self-critical and self-disparaging comments (e.g., "to me, this is not original work") are unjustified. Original work in mathematics can be anything from posing (and not necessarily solving) important problems (Hilbert's list being an obvious example, the Langlands program being another) ... to communicating mathematics to a wider audience. See, for example, the paper, "What is Good Mathematics", by Terrence Tao.
As to which journal might best be suited to publish your results, I don't know, but don't mislead yourself into believing that "original work" is all of one kind.

authors: Нанжид Батцэнгэл


text:
Is it appropriate to acknowledge your family or even mention them in articles or slideshows?
What if I believe the research we conducted is not only the work of my supervisors or colleagues but also nearly all my family and I would like to acknowledge them in my slideshow or articles writing something like (suppose, which is false, my name is Bernard Roy):

Bernard Roy and his family, coauthor1, coauthor2, etc.

Is that appropriate? I want to add “and his family” in my slideshows and articles because my uncle drove me towards my lab a lot, my grandparents were of strong support by always pushing forward to succeed my thesis and so on.
Of course, this would be with the agreement of all the coauthors.

Do you want to add it to the acknowledgment or to author list? Your example mentions yourself, this is strange to do in acknowledgement...

The author list is a list of people's names. "His family" is not a person's name. You also cannot write "Bernard Roy and his neighbor", even if your neighbor is an actual coauthor.

The place where this would not look strange is to thank them in the acknowledgements sections of your thesis.  Theses often include personal acknowledgements - journal articles etc rarely do.

I am surprised by the downvotes - this is clearly inappropriate, but it is on-topic.

@Petr, both ideally, only one of the two possibilities otherwise

Contrary to what some of the other answers say, you cannot acknowledge anyone you like in an article, at least with some publishers. For example, the American Physical Society specifies:

Acknowledgments may be used to

Recognize named individuals who contributed scientifically to the research of the paper
Cite the funding agencies that provided financial support for the work
[…]

[…]
Acknowledgments may not be used to

[…]
Thank those who contributed general encouragement (e.g., family, friends)
Thank those who provided services that were not directly part of the research
Include a dedication or a memorial

I consider adhering to this rule a good idea in general. Moreover I find it likely that publishers that have no written rules against it, may still ask you to remove acknowledgements not related to funding or scientific contributions to avoid opening that can of worms.
The reason for this is that drawing the line at non-scientific acknowledgements is a rather certain way to stay clear of anything problematic. You may consider the support from your family crucial, others may want to acknowledge some deity, spiritual leader, beloved dictator, etc. And before you know it, all people from some country feel compelled to acknowledge their dictator or state-mandated deity, lest they face severe retributions. And this is just one example of how this can quickly escalate.

Authorship is completely off the table, as it is reserved for creative scientific contributions to the work. There are far stronger contributions that do not qualify for authorship, such as having acquired the funding, providing funding, or owning the lab.

"others may want to acknowledge some deity": possibly relevant question on this site

"at least with some publishers" is the key statement here.

I always suspected those guys who acknowledged the assistance of "Dr. Pepper" in the preparation of their paper. They got away with it, though.

I fully agree that family or similar acknowledgements are not suitable for a scientific paper or a presentation. However, there is one spot where such acknowledgements are welcome and common, namely a PhD thesis. These frequently have a lengthly acknowlegment section which not only contains thanks for scientific support but also thanks for help from family, friends, deities or whoever else the author wants to include.

As an editor, I have never objected to, or even commented on, anything an author has included in their acknowledgements. I question what this could "quickly escalate" to? If you want to spend a sentence or two thanking family or a deceased mentor I see no problem with that. If the acknowledgements section gets too long, or includes problematic issues, I still have authority to require changes to bring it in line. But in hundreds of reviewed articles, this has never once come up.

I certainly think Kim Jong Un should appear in the acknowledgements of all meteorology papers.

In acknowledgements:

You can acknowledge whomever you like. (Edit: not always, see @Wrzlprmft's answer. But the principle holds if the journal's policies do not forbid it.)

You don't generally need your coauthors' permission to acknowledge anyone. (But this doesn't mean they wouldn't get annoyed or embarrassed if you make inappropriate choices of people to acknowledge.) Naturally if they do not share your desire to acknowledge someone, the acknowledgement would name you personally as the person acknowledging that person. (E.g.: "JKHA thanks his uncle for driving him to the lab, often on weekends and/or during inclement weather.")

In extreme situations, say if you decide to acknowledge certain universally despised historical figures, the above may not apply and your coauthors may reasonably insist that you remove the acknowledgement if you want their agreement to go ahead and publish the paper. (I don't think that ought to apply to the situation of acknowledging family members though.)

Acknowledging family members is highly uncommon in a scientific paper.

Acknowledging family members (especially for the particular reasons you cited) in the acknowledgements section of a paper or in a scientific talk may make you look silly or overly sentimental and may affect other people's perceptions of you, possibly not in a positive way. But as I said above, it is still your right to include such acknowledgements if you desire to.

In the acknowledgements section of a thesis, there is more leeway to write something sentimental than in a paper. Acknowledgements to family members are very common in theses, and no one will care if you add one.

In authorship lists:

It is not appropriate to assign coauthorship to family members if your reason for assigning them coauthorship is that they "drove you to your lab" or "pushed you to succeed" etc. Any coauthor, whether a family member or not, needs to have made an intellectual contribution to the work.

You absolutely need the agreement of your other coauthors to add anyone else as an additional coauthor.

I found the second bullet a bit misleading until I read the third one. Authorship implies that all authors have read and agree with all aspects of the paper - the very act of publishing implies that the other authors did, in fact, grant permission to include the acknowledgement. It's not generally possible to publish something without stating that all authors agreed with every aspect of it. That said, I cannot imagine a major disagreement about the vast majority of possible acknowledgements, so permission for acknowledgement is often safely assumed (but that doesn't mean it's not granted).

@NuclearHoagie I disagree. By your logic, if I publish a paper with coauthors then that implies my coauthors granted me “permission” to spell my name in a certain way. I mean, they had the option of vetoing the paper and demanding I change the way I spell my name, but didn’t, right? That’s obviously an absurd interpretation. The same goes for the acknowledgement. As long as the acknowledgement does not imply the coauthors expressing an opinion they don’t want to express, they cannot reasonably withhold their approval. (Maybe except for some extreme exceptions as I stated.)

@DanRomik If I saw a paper that acknowledged Hitler or some equivalent, that would absolutely reflect poorly on every single author in the byline, even if only one author wrote and put their name to that specific acknowledgement - every author is responsible for the entire content of the paper. I could see some authors not wanting to include acknowledgements of pets, or deities, or coffee, or other non-human entities as well - I don't agree that you should presume your coauthors will be fine with anything or anyone you might want to acknowledge, or that they have no say in the matter anyway.

@NuclearHoagie that was precisely the point of my third bullet.

I find it weird that, especially for someone who's a postdoc like OP, acknowledging the people that made your academic work possible thru logistics and emotional support is considered "silly" or "sentimental". As far as I understand, junior researchers are not well paid, so it is even more critical for them to receive the sort of support OP describes.

@ave postdocs also need to eat. Should they acknowledge the farmer who grows their food? The grocer who sells it to them? A lot of things in life are critical, but we don't write about them in acknowledgements sections, because they are not of interest to anyone reading our scientific papers. I am grateful to my mother for many things, but to assume that that's something people want to hear about when they read my papers would be, literally, sentimental.

@ave by the way, in my answer I wrote "overly sentimental" not "sentimental". Some level of sentimentality could still be considered appropriate. We are all humans, not robots, after all.

@DanRomik you pay for the groceries, and the grocer pays the farmer for the produce, so that's not an accurate comparison. And besides, acknowledgements is not there to be of interest to readers, is it? You may thank your grant, but this info is useless to readers. What if someone selflessly contributed to your research thru help that isn't towards the text of the work, but rather making it possible where otherwise it may not have been? Did they not help as much as a grant, possibly?

@ave I'm not convinced, sorry. An academic journal is a place to publish scientific knowledge, not personal stories from your life. But as I said, you're free to acknowledge whoever you want.

In the US in my experience, it's traditional in the thesis defense specifically to thank family, significant others, close friends, past advisors: those who had an influence on your development as a researcher as a whole person.
In other scientific talks, though, I would stick to acknowledging the people who had direct input to the work being discussed. Not doing so could appear to dilute the contributions of your coauthors. I would be especially sensitive to this when the people you are acknowledging are your juniors in the academic hierarchy. I'd also encourage spreading acknowledgements throughout a talk: these experiments were done by Alice, Bob suggested we do this analysis of the data, Charlie collected the data used in this figure, etc.
It's possible your field has a different set of expectations or standards. I would also consider an exception for special circumstances, for example in my field at the biggest annual conference it is traditional that some invited talks are effectively "career talks" where a senior scientist outlines all the influential work across their entire career. Like a thesis defense at an earlier career stage, that may be an appropriate time to reach back to early and life-long influences.

Generally, you can acknowledge whom you like, even if they only provide moral support for your work. In a slide presentation it is even less of a problem.
But, in publications, getting agreement from co-authors is appropriate as you suggest, and an occasional reviewer or editor might object. In that case you can deal with it then. Journals with contrary policies will publish the rules with author instructions. You will need to adhere to such rules, of course.
It might be better, however, to say a few words about why you are including family, especially if they haven't made direct contributions. Funding, moral support, etc. Don't make it long or distracting for readers.
In a slide show, you can make it the last slide, which you put up at the end of a talk as you ask for questions but don't actually discuss.

Generally, you can acknowledge whom you like – That’s not generally true. See my answer.


text:
How can I get a reference letter if I was never "close" to any professors?
I am currently thinking about getting a masters degree and many of the schools I look for require 3 reference letters from professors that has taught me.
Unfortunately, I've never really invested in building personal relationships with my professors and though I am quite confident with my ability, my abilities weren't "amazing" to the point where the professor would notice me personally.
Furthermore, I've already graduated and worked for more than a year, hence I don't believe any of my previous professors retain much memory of me.
In such a situation, how would I go about getting 1 (let alone multiple) reference letters from previous professors?
Related: here, here, here

What kind of master’s program is this: a research degree or a  taught degree? Maybe the requirements of the same university are lower for a taught program.

Could you add a sentence stating whether in your location (country/culture/academic system) that situation is "by design"? I suspect not, as you are not specifically point out the issue as a cultural one, but it may be good to make that bit of information explicit.

Could you state your country?

Unfortunately you've left yourself in a tight spot.  This is actually one of the biggest pieces of advice I give to undergrads: if you're thinking of grad school, build relationships with professors.  Even to the point of skipping a class you would prefer more in order to take another (still-relevant) class with a professor you're trying to build a relationship with.
Now that you're here however, I don't think you're in an impossible-to-salvage situation:

First off, see if any of your letters of recommendation can come from non-academic sources.  In my experience it's not uncommon for schools to want, say, two of three to be professors and would take a third one from your current boss (assuming your job is in any way relevant to what you want to study).  That would get you a third of the way there.
Secondly, begin with any professors you took more than one class with - that sort of thing tends to stand out unless they're huge sections with too many students to notice them all.  Seeing your name on papers and grades twice may have cemented you in their mind enough that a gentle reminder will get you there.
Third, turn to any professors you did particularly well with, or had very small classes with.  Did you have a project and presentation that might have made you stand out?
Fourth, look for professors whose classes are particularly relevant to your desired area of study.  It may not help you much with being recognized, but the fact that your program fits their interests so well might inspire them to dig a little deeper.
And finally, if at all possible, go visit your professors in person to ask.  They may be more likely to remember you if they have both your face and name to go with your request.  If you have to do it over email, include some details to help them out; tell them exactly what class you took with them and when, maybe include a link to your Linkedin page or webpage so they can go see your picture if they want, etc.

However you end up doing it, simply explain that you weren't originally planning on grad school and have been in industry for a year, but now you really want to further your studies.  Most professors will be inclined to help you out as much as they can, or at worst they should be willing to tell you if they don't think they can write you a good letter, giving you a chance to ask someone else.

Professors are there to help.   You may not need to stand out in their mind as long as you can remind them of your progress in their courses.  Just be sure to focus on your achievements in their course and point out the helpfulness their teachings provided.  If possible, show them some old coursework that they gave you good grades on.  This would remind them that they were happy with you in the past.
Also, I imagine you were required to do an internship and/or special project at some point.  These usually require you to meet one on one with a professor/mentor throughout the project.  They would be my first choice for the letter whether I was close or not.

As has already been stated, you may be able to use a letter from a supervisor at your job (check the application instructions, or ask); and when you contact an instructor, share some work you did in the class.
In addition:

send an unofficial transcript to the instructor when you reach out.
if it's difficult for you to get to the person's office, that's okay, a phone conversation can still give you the personal touch.  If you think it might help, you could send a photograph.
Make sure you ask in such a way that you'll be able to pick up on code language in the person's response (e.g. "You'd really be better off asking someone else" is a red flag; if you're not sure how to interpret a response of this type, it's okay to ask if you should be taking that as an indication that the person wouldn't be able to write a very helpful letter).
The key is to find someone enthusiastic and upbeat, who gives you the vibes s/he wants to support your dream by emphasizing the positive, can make a well-written letter, and will keep to the timeline.  Be alert to the instructor possibly wanting you to send an outline of your strengths, to make the letter writing process easier.
If you have any trouble, try the director of undergraduate studies, and explain to him or her what you explained to us.
It may be a worthwhile investment for the future to take a class you're interested in, in spring semester, making a point to get to know the instructor.

It certainly isn't universally true that it's "fine to get one letter from a supervisor at work". There may be some programs where this would be fine, but there are others where it would be reason to throw out the application. If the poster can give more details of their field, we can perhaps give them more information as to which might be the case.

@TomChurch - I see.  Hope you don't mind if I use your info to make a correction to my answer.

Of course! My experience is that fields that are more purely academic (such as pure mathematics, the one I have experience with) would find this inappropriate, simply for the understandable reason that a work supervisor is unlikely to know anything about research in pure mathematics. But more applied fields, or those with closer connections to industry, might well be different.

@TomChurch - Well, if I were on a pure math admissions committee, and the candidate presented two letters that addressed the candidate's mathematical abilities, I would be glad to read a third letter from the candidate's boss, extolling the candidate's work ethic, collaborative style, ability to communicate, show up to work on time, organize work flow, write clear documentation, do background research, etc.  And above all, a creative approach to problem solving.  Problems needing solving can arise in a variety of jobs.


text:
Paper claims that there is no solution for a problem I solved. Should I approach authors or editor first if I want that information to be included?
This question is the result of a discussion in another question. If I publish an article, solving a problem, or finding relevant data, and subsequently another article gets published, explicitly stating that the problem is unsolved, or that there are no relevant data, what should I do?
Should I contact the editor of the journal where the second paper was published, to inform him that the paper is faulty? Would authors take exception to the fact that I didn't bring up the matter with them first? And would the right thing to do be to talk to the authors first, even if they can't find out who brought the matter to the editor's attention? Do I owe it to the editor, or to the academic community as a whole, to try to get the paper changed as quickly as I can by going directly to the editor? And does the answer depend on whether I believe that the authors acted in good faith or not?

Anything below this line is not part of my question and just justification for asking it.
Note that this question is about a specific bit of advice given in an answer in the other question, which I find questionable. As such, obviously this question has an answer in the other question. My question is whether that specific bit of advice is correct. Obviously the answer that prompted me to ask this question says so.
However, the point of the the other question is not to find out whether that specific advice is correct, and so there is no mechanism there for
a) showing agreement or disagreement for this bit of advice or any rival advice as to how to proceed (since the question is not about how to proceed in the first place.)
b) posting answers and/or thoughts about the correct way to proceed (since that question is not about how to proceed in the first place.)
So there is no way to extract any useful information from the fact that that answer has X votes: Was it given the votes because of or inspite of that bit of advice? Would people upvote the opposite course of action? Who knows. So I see some value in posting it as a separate question.
Feel free to remove this part once it has been decided whether this question is valid or already answered.

Another line: Why this is not a duplicate of Recently published paper does not cite my very relevant work: That question deals with the issue of plagiarism and asks for specific advice if you suspect this happening. The answers there advise to do nothing. My question is for the case that the authors explicitly and wrongly state that there is no research or data available, and I have (for good or for ill) chosen to take action to get this factually incorrect point to be corrected. My question is not "What should I do if people don't cite me?", my question is "If I already have decided to make it known that the paper is wrong in claiming that it offers the first, or only, solution to a problem, and am trying to get that changed, would the correct way of going about be alerting the authors that the claim they made is wrong, or should I write directly to the editor." I have edited the question a bit to make that clearer, but even with the old question I don't see how people can construe this as the same question (and could consider any answer in the other question to be a valid answer for this question.)

Your new question has already been answered on your old question: Can intentionally omitting related work (citations) be considered as misconduct?

No. An answer to it has been included in an answer to the old question (which is not mine, by the way), and it has also been challenged (by me.) To see what others think, I made it an actual question. I thought that would be the prefererd way on this site to find out what answer people would give to that specific point. Note for example that the first answer given here, by famargar, directly contradicts the advice given in (an answer to) the other question.

The right thing to do is always to assume the authors of that paper simply were not aware of your work, thus in good faith. Depending on how many (thousands?) paper get published each year in your field, that may be the most likely explanation. Then, contact the authors kindly pointing out your own paper and explaining shortly your conclusions. If they don't take your work/yourself seriously, then write the editor.

Some part of the response depends, of course, on the timing - if their paper comes out in, say, less than a year from yours, it is possible that they did not see yours before submitting (and perhaps even until after acceptance). If your paper is 20 years old, that might be so large a time difference that the field and/or terminology has moved on. If it is truly the same field, and your paper came out 2 years ago, a nice note to them is in order.

As far as I'm concerned, this happens all the time and it's completely trivial.  When it happens to me, I sigh and shrug.  If I were an editor of a journal and someone was to write to complain that their article wasn't cited in an article in the journal, I might consider a "Correction", but I'd quite possibly also flag the writer in my mind as a self-important prig.  (Based on other answers, I realize this is going to upset a lot of people, but I'm just giving an honest answer here.  And of course, this is almost certainly different in other fields.)
That's not universally true. There are certainly citations that absolutely need to be included, and if they're not included it would be serious carelessness at best, potentially misconduct.  I'm not sure how to simply define these critical references, but they do exist, so I'm not saying it's OK to blithely skip any reference you want.  (Jon Custer's comment to another question suggests using timing as one factor -- more than 20 years, the field may have moved on; less than a year, no time to include it; a couple years separation, should be cited -- and I like that as one criterion, but it's not the only one.)
But at least in my fields (various branches of molecular biology), it's very common to pick and choose references, and to ignore some, especially the ones that are relatively peripheral to the main theme of the paper.
(It used to be common, and still occasionally happens, that journals have a hard limit on the number of references you can include.  This is baffling, especially for on-line only journals, but it is a thing, and could also explain why some references are omitted.)
For example, my PhD work was published almost simultaneously with another group who found the same thing, then was followed up in multiple papers by several other groups as well as by myself, and the articles were then summarized in a series of reviews. Thus, someone publishing in the field might, reasonably enough, cite my work, our competition, a followup, a review, or any combination of them; and whatever they chose I wouldn't consider it a big deal, even though (of course) in my opinion my paper was the clearest and most important.
Another example: My group recently published a nice but not groundbreaking study in a moderate-impact open-access journal.  I know several other people in the field were completely unaware of this paper, and they went ahead and published overlapping studies without citing us.  I've mentioned it to a couple of them at conferences, and they were startled, embarrassed, and apologetic, but it never occurred to me that I should do any more than that. The only reason I mentioned it to them was to save them the time and trouble of repeating work that's already been done.
So my answer is that I try not to skip any relevant citations myself, but when it happens to me I don't write to the editor or authors, and I don't consider it more than a really minor concern.

Interesting. Would you also recommend doing nothing if the paper explicitly says that there are no findings or proofs yet? (Or, to put it into an experiment context: That there haven't been any experiments made on this issue at all?)

I'd say that the paper explicitly says that there are no findings or proofs yet would fall into the "absolutely need to be included" category, and I'd consider writing to the editor for that.

Judging from your last comment, I think you must have misread the question. The question isn't about "the paper skipped a relevant citation"; it's specifically about "the paper explicitly says that there are no findings or proofs yet".

Now that I read your answer again, is it possible you were meaning this to be the answer to this question?

@ruakh  - The question was edited after my answer to add that new information.  When I answered the question, it simply asked "Journal article ignores your published findings".

@iayork It was in the question text from the start, though not, admittedly, in the question name.


text:
Is it possible to claim my Elsevier submitted papers on my ORCID publication list?
Elsevier submission portals (normally) have a link to your Orcid number. Regarding this, is it possible to add your submitted papers to Orcid, directly by a link?

No! Unless you uploaded a copy of your submitted paper to public preprint server like PeerJ Preprints, ArXiv or BioRxiv. If you uploaded a public preprint you can add that to your ORCID profile.

Extra note: About your published works, as you know, you can add your publications from any publisher to your ORCID profile (after you sign-in to your ORCID account) by clicking on "Add Works".
More information is given here: http://orcid.org/blog/2013/12/05/i-claimed-my-orcid-id-now-what
I'd recommend the CrossRef Metadata Search as often the easiest method of importing one's publications, provided those publications have a registered DOI.

Thanks; however, my question is about my submitted papers which have not been published yet, but are registered in Elsevier.

well, the answer is no then. Unless you uploaded a copy of your submitted paper to public preprint server like PeerJ Preprints, ArXiv or BioRxiv. If you uploaded a public preprint you can add that to your ORCID profile.

@rmounc, would you kindly revise your answer by putting your comment into the answer text?

@hossayni: If you make a fundamental edit to a post that implements comments of the poster, indicate this in the edit summary. Otherwise reviewers are likely to reject that edit as too drastic.

I have found out that both Scopus and Web of Science insist on importing a new version of my papers, even if one exists already in Orcid. :( Oh, if only there was a unique identifier for every publication to avoid duplicates, something like a digital object identifier...

@Wrzlprmft I agree; but because of a misunderstanding the main body did not contain my answer and had only some useful information for society.
Therefore, I saw that it deserved to be the accepted answer only if the main answer comes to first.

@hossayni: I do not complain about the edit (in fact, I approved it), I rather wanted to advice you to write something in the edit summary along the lines of: Implementing additions as per the author’s comments. (at least for future edits of this sort).

Elsevier has a bad reputation in science, don't publish with them, they are not worth it. Take a look here .


text:
What is the difference between a "I" or "II" after a job title?
There are several job titles such as "Research Associate II" or "Research Scientist I" or "Research Scientist II" in the research institute located near my school.
Is there a difference between the job titles and is "I" higher than "II" or vice versa?

Those are likely different pay grades, and may have different requirements (PhD vs Masters, 5 years experience vs no experience, ...). Whether they are labeled up or down may depend on the institution.

I believe there is no universal answer here. At my local university, "Professor II" means someone who works part-time in industry and part-time as a professor. But the title "Professor I" is not used, ever, just standard "Professor".

In a job title, "I" or "II" usually denotes the level of experience.  You will also see "assistant", "senior" and similar adjectives used.  The idea is that employees can be hired at one of several levels of experience and that employees can advance through these levels as they gain experience.
Someone hired as a "Analyst I" may be promoted to a "Analyst II" after some number of years.  Sometimes these kinds of job titles also have additional educational requirements (such as an advanced degree or certification) for the higher levels.  Typically there are different pay ranges that apply to employees as they advance through the classifications.
The definitions of the different levels will vary from one employer to another so there's really nothing more specific that we can say in answer to this question- you'll have to check the definitions used by your employer to see what the requirements are for each level.


text:
Writing a large part of a grant as a postdoc
Background: I defended my PhD in 2018 and took a postdoc job with my same lab as a matter of convenience.  The job had a 3 year contract, funded via an R01 grant, for whom my dissertation advisor was the original PI. He has since retired and transferred PIship to a "research track" junior faculty who followed a similar path to mine (came up through the lab).  New PI is certainly capable but perhaps not the "titan" that the original was.
Fast forward to now, I am helping to write a renewal application for the grant, and have contributed 2 out of 4 Aims.  These aims contain a lot of (perhaps not all of) my "early career plans".  At first glance, this all sounds great, but in a recent email exchange, it was indicated that I would be designated "other personnel" in the grant application, implying perhaps that my position would remain postdoc if the grant was funded.
My question is the following: to what extent is it typical for a postdoc to contribute a large portion of a grant, or grant renewal, but have essentially no formal holding power on the resulting funding?  In my particular department, it is my understanding that postdocs cannot hold PI or co-PI on an R01-type grant.  My worry is that I'm tying up a bunch of (what I consider) good ideas in someone else's grant, with my only "reward" being another few years of postdoc funding and perhaps a half dozen papers.
Options are clearly: 1. Take whatever I can get, since I have little leverage apart from threatening to "take my ideas elsewhere".  2. Try to negotiate for a position that would allow for a co-PIship (seems difficult during C19 times because university budgets are shot to heck)  3. (semi-nuclear option) Jump ship at the end of my contract (May).  4. Your ideas are welcomed!
Thanks and cheers,

It couldn't hurt to inquire about a "research faculty" position in which you could be a co-PI, but I wouldn't let that be a complete deal-breaker. Based on conversations with grad-school friends, it seems quite common for post-docs to write part or all of a grant proposal like this. I've also been told by mentors that my current post-doc in a government lab may harm my prospects in academia, because I don't have to apply for competitive funding. If you win it, you should still have it on your CV, as long as you trust the listed PI to acknowledge your contributions in the future.

Appointments to more permanent positions (like tenure-track or research faculty) are typically made by the university, not by receiving a grant. In other words, I cannot pay myself more simply because I received a grant with available funds. Depending on the university rules, postdocs may not be eligible to be a project PI, which may limit your ability to submit those ideas as your own grant proposal.
In some fields, it is common for postdocs and even PhD students to write grant proposals for their PI as training for their later career. That could even be part of the job expectations for a postdoc. Although you may not have much leverage to receive more funding from this grant, having written a successful grant proposal is a good experience that should help you succeed as a tenure-track faculty and possibly in the job market as well.

Accepting your answer since it mostly answers the question I asked, which is how common is it for a postdoc to contribute part of a grant.  My bigger concern (and perhaps this is a separate question) is that I am hoping to move on from this group in the next 6 months to year, and in doing so, I fear that I won't be able to continue working on the projects that I am contributing to the grant proposal, since they'll continue working on them without me.  Perhaps I'm over-thinking it!


text:
Is there any value in publishing screen-cast lectures?
I am getting close to finishing a PhD in applied math (next May), and I'm starting to think about job applications next fall.  I taught for 5 years as a GTA (graduate teaching assistant), but I still feel like my teaching portfolio could use a boost since the last 2 years of my degree I was funded on a research grant.  One idea I cooked up was to create and publish a series of Khan-academy style "screen-cast" lectures on various interesting topics in mathematics.  Since this could potentially consume a fair amount of time, I'm wondering what the benefit of it would actually be for an application to say, a teaching post-doc or tenure track at a SLAC (selective liberal arts college) or (not R1) public university.  Obviously if they're good, it demonstrates an ability to clearly organize and present material, but would anyone actually look at them if they saw it on a CV or in a teaching statement?

The value of such courses may be judged, among other factors, by quantifiable metrics such as how many views they get.

would anyone actually look at them if they saw it on a CV or in a teaching statement? — Yes.  I would.

Don't make them in order to strengthen your applications.  If you make them, do it because people need them and they are useful.  Also, set yourself some time boundaries so they don't suck away too much of your time.  But by all means, do experiment with this to some extent.  It will broaden your horizons and help you connect with people in ways that take advantage of your particular temperament.  (I read your other recent questions.)

I would advise against doing this, even without knowledge of tghe hiring processes in SLACs (never heard about those before) or the universities you're interested in.
On principle, it does not make sense to have projects in life whose main or only purpose is make your CV look better. If you're passionate enough about this to do it for its own sake - say, because you feel available material is not engaging enough and you had good feedback from your students - then maybe it could be a reasonable use of your time. Otherwise, your days are better doing proper research, or other publicly-visible math-related projects which are of interest to you.
Also, if you got good feedback on your teaching, I doubt your focus on research will be held against you, especially since you do have a solid 3 years. Perhaps some letter of recommendation from professors/lecturers who were in charge of the courses in which you taught could serve as guarantee of your capabilities.

Not sure I agree. I imagine a demonstrated ability to produce good digital instruction would interest a lot of hiring committees.


text:
Using endnotes in a teaching statement
I've been working on my teaching statement recently (for the mathematical sciences, but it shouldn't matter).  I'd really like to keep the main body to one page, because I personally wouldn't want to read anything longer than that, but there are several instances where I feel like I could include a little more information "for those inclined to read it".  Do you think it is appropriate to include these comments as endnotes, or is this somehow more irritating than having a slightly longer document with such comments incorporated inline? For instance, if I do something like this, I end up with one page of text followed by a half page of notes.

I've had broad success1 using a modified Moore method to teach a
  graduate qualifying exam review course.
...
Notes
1 In the three years I have taught it, 22 students have taken the course, and 19/22 have passed at the PhD level first try; in contrast, the first-try PhD pass rate for the five years prior was only 50%.

If I incorporate such statements, I'm over my (entirely self-imposed) one page limit.

I'm a bit confused - Are they in a different size font or something? (Mathematically, if it is the same number of words, plus even the extra header "Notes" and a line between the different notes, how can it be over 1 page if they are in the text, but under one page if they are at bottom of text? If it adds a page anyway that is headed 'notes', then might as well use that page with some organization.  it might be better to just organize it as the one page executive summary have some  additional sections that highlight more details of stuff in summary.

@Carol thanks for the input.  It does indeed add a page anyway, I didn't quite make that clear.  I like the idea of an "executive summary" with additional highlighting sections, I'll have to see if I can make that flow nicely.

At the end of the day, it's your teaching statement, and you can write it any way you think makes sense. I have seen plenty of different styles and formats so far, and I don't think the expectations of hiring committees are so overwhelmingly similar that it even makes sense to follow a particular style, at least not across disciplines.
That being said, for me personally this style would probably not be very effective. Footnotes or endnotes with actual text (as opposed to, say, hyperlinks or references) have always been somewhat of a mystery to me (why write this in a footnote, as opposed to in the text?). Going back and forth between the endnotes and the main text is annoying, and - let's be honest - your text is for any practical matter longer than one page anyway when your endnotes spill over to the next page, so the benefit is very questionable.

Endnotes of the sort you are suggesting would give the impression that you don't know how to write a teaching statement. In any document like this, you're trying to make a convincing case, which means knowing what to put in and what to leave out.

You're right, I don't really know how to write a teaching statement, which is why I'm asking questions...

@icurays1 Then it sounds like your question is actually "Should I include supporting information?" That's hard to say without reading your entire statement. The standard advice is that you should "show not tell" to be convincing.

Thanks for the input.  I agree that all relevant content should be incorporated into the main text, and since the supporting information I have in mind is part of my case, I should work it in, and be willing to give up on the one page limit if necessary.

One thing to understand is that it is not literally true that "one doesn't want to read more than the first page". What is true, however, is that "one wouldn't read beyond the first page if he finds nothing interesting on it". That applies to both fiction novels and teaching statements. So, instead of trying to squeeze everything relevant into the first page, I would rather put something really impressive there that would prompt the reader to turn the page over and try to see more (or, if he is extremely lazy, just to multiply the good impression he gets from the first page by the total number of pages in the statement).
The end-notes are generally a bad idea except, perhaps, for some tables (like evaluation averages, etc.) that would otherwise disrupt the normal flow of the text. Nobody really wants to look up all those small numerals after sentences and match them with the paragraphs on another page. If you have ever read a book in which the author inserts some words or phrases in a foreign language you don't know now and then and sends you to the alphabetical list of those in the end of the book every time, you know exactly how pleasant it is to read something structured in the way you proposed.


text:
Covering application fees for peer review, when your university declines to proceed, but expert in the field consider the work excellent
Situation - I produced a MSc thesis in applied data science (I mean, using data science but applied on a certain domain X), which was A-graded. An expert in the field X said it is excellent and worthy a publication, possibly on top-tier journals in field X. The research field of my supervisor is not in X, and he declined to start the peer review process. But my university would not start or fund the peer review process if a senior researcher declines to do it.
I am looking at options to fund a peer review application, which would be the strongest letter of reference I could get for PhD.

Some more context about the communication I had
I asked the primary author I based my work on, to review it and if positive to co-author in quality of reviewer. His comment is my work is worthy for publishing a manuscript, and indicated top tiers journals in the field X. I asked for his permission to forward comments to my supervisor, which I did.
I highlighted that I will not ask for further contribution and be autonomous in writing the manuscript, but made enough clear that, as per instructions of the university, it is up to the supervisor chose to start the peer review process.
I highlighted that a peer reviewed publication would be the best endorsement I could get toward PhD applications, and potential cooperation benefits between the universities, since the potential reviewer is from a top US university anyway and the areas are, even if loosely, connected.
Supervisor declined the proposal. Under the line, he made clear he does not want to be contacted anymore.
Let's leave aside of the antagonising role of a supervisor, which I really fail to understand. My questions are practical:

which options do I have to find funding to cover the application fees and publication costs, in case of acceptance ?
the work was done on behalf of my university, but I may not have credentials anymore. how to represent my work fairly (e.g. which email should I use)?

edited to address comments
I m not familiar with peer review fees, but my understanding us that you need to pay the publication if the manuscript is accepted.
i quote:

However, authors submitting to [JOURNAL] from 20th October
2014 are required to publish their work open access, through payment
of an article processing charge (APC), in the case of eventual
acceptance. Please see the open access page for APC pricing and
details of our free funding support service.

and :

Authors who publish in [JOURNAL]  are required to pay an article
processing charge (APC). The APC price will be determined from the
date on which the article is accepted for publication.
The current APC, subject to VAT or local taxes where applicable, is: £4790.00/$6490.00/€5390.00

of course i cannot pay myself, and i think it should fair the cost is borne by the university, since it was done in that venue.
as per "co author in quality of reviewer" i mean a person experts in the field who doubled check my methodology and findings

The terminology you are using is a bit strange, the peer review process does not have application fees, some Journals have publication fees, but those are different. And you do not fund or start peer review, you submit your paper to a journal or conference, and those have a peer review process, so please clarify or correct.

so can i conclude is sabotage? or supervisors has a certain budget and decision is only "practical" preference ?

ah ok. from the reply i received, it is the first. but i wad told application process should be discussed e supervisor. so i understand supervidors has typically a personal research budget.. should i check on other departments who may be keen on the domain X, to sponsor my work and co-author? other  practices ?

Even among publication costs, those costs are enormously high, and the journal you're planning to submit to, though it carries an impressive sounding name, is not actually that impressive, like the difference between winning an Oscar, the most famous award for films in the US, versus having Oscar, a guy that lives on your street, say he liked your paper.

ehm .. i did not understand the joke but i sense it is funny :P thanks Bryan, i m not fond of how the industry work. to me, it is one of biggest contradictions: one has to pay to publish its own research. journals make among the most profitable margins across any industry, and researchers are among the poorest salaries. however, i see that many do take into account the impact factor of journals. i m not pushing for any in particular, but i was left without any guidance in how peer review process or advices of journals matching my interest to endorse a PhD application. thanks for sharing yours!

Not all Journals have APCs, there are many journals where you can publish without APCs, but they usually ask for copyright of the paper, and there are some journals without APCs at all, depends on the field.


text:
Any way around letters of recommendation requirement?
I'd like to apply for an MBA (sick of working in IT and want to change) but seemingly every university I look at requires multiple letters of reference, one of which from a current supervisor.
Is there any way to get around this requirement?
I have zero trust in my current boss, and given that writing the letter would take effort for no benefit to him (since I'd be leaving the company and he'd have to find a replacement), odds are a letter by him would work against me. Also, I'd really rather not owe him a favor.
Former bosses/colleagues would be a safer bet, but I left my previous workplace about two years ago and haven't had any communication with them since (moving continents doesn't help either, I can't just invite them for coffee).
As an aside, how come one can't get access to higher education (not just MBAs) on their merits alone anymore? When I applied for my undergrad degree acceptance didn't depend on who one was friends with.

Ask the department. If you shoot them a letter saying basically just what you've said, they will likely just tell you to find someone else and then you've nothing to worry about.

When I applied for my undergrad degree acceptance didn't depend on who one was friends with. — Good recommendation letters are not written by your friends; indeed, any indication that the author is actually a friend significantly undercuts their recommendation.  Good recommendation letters are written by experts in your profession.

Your "merits" consist of more than just your undergraduate grades. They also consist of your ability to work with others, your curiosity, your interest beyond just learning what's necessary for the test, etc. This is why we ask for letters of recommendation.
As for who exactly writes your letters, there is more leeway. I don't know about MBA programs, but in mathematics we would usually be equally happy to get letters that do not necessarily include your current supervisor. I would imagine that letters from former supervisors would be just as acceptable. The point, however, is that your supervisors can speak to your work ethic and abilities in ways nobody else can, and consequently provide important insight to the committee evaluating your application that cannot be obtained in any other way. In particular, co-workers likely have a different perspective on you than what a former supervisor sees in you.

I would like to start by saying that there is no way to get around the requirement of recommendation letters (at least not in my field (CS)). Most Universities would consider an application incomplete without required number of references, so it wont even get processed.
And, most of the time you can get away with recommendation letters from other faculty members. You don't really need a letter from your supervisor. If it is easy to get, then it is an added benefit, but not a necessity. I am sure if you write to any of your former Professors, introduce yourself and remind them of the classes you took with them, they would be more than happy to write you one. Once they say yes, You should send them your current CV and any other resources that might help them to understand your accomplishments and career goals.
In grad school it is not about who you are friends with, the school wants to make sure that you have what it takes to pursue graduate studies. And who can say it better other than the people who taught you/ you did your research with/ your supervisors.

@djechlin MBA's might not have any common curriculum with CS, it is still a graduate level degree with entrance requirements similar to that of any other grad schools.

Your letters show, among other things, that you are good at establishing and maintaining professional relationships. Imagine what a request to have letters waived would look like to an MBA program. The first thing they would learn about you is that you can't name 5 people who would write a glowing recommendation for you. That's not the impression you want to make.
Undergraduate programs care less about letters because at the end of high school, you haven't yet had a chance to establish a reputation. MBA programs, at least the ones worth attending, expect you to have substantial experience in the workforce prior to attending. It's not like objective measures (e.g. the GMAT or GRE) don't matter, but people skills are just as essential as figuring out how to read a graph.


text:
What salutation to use for someone with a PhD who is a Lecturer or Reader in the UK?
What is the correct salutation to use when writing to someone with a PhD whose academic title is Lecturer or Reader in the UK?
(A related question addresses the case of a Lecturer without a PhD.)

The person's title in this case is (almost always) Dr, so "Dear Dr Last-name" would be the standard salutation for a first correspondence.  If they sign their reply with their first name, then you can consider yourself welcome to write "Dear First-name" in future.
Academics in the UK are very used to receiving email addressing them as Professor, so it's not a big problem if you do this, but there is probably a slight increase in the chance that they might view your email as spam (I say this because the overwhelming majority of emails I get which address me as Professor are at least somewhat spammy).
If someone's title is Professor, this will always be listed on the university website, so if you've done your research and found out that they are not a professor, it's probably best to use Dr.


text:
Are infrequently-cited publications detrimental in academic hiring?
A past Q&A discussed the importance of citation counts for academic hiring decisions, particularly for tenure decisions and fresh PhDs. However, the same citation count or h-index could in theory represent (1) a researcher with just a few highly-cited publications, or (2) a researcher with a few highly-cited publications plus numerous infrequently-cited publications.
Do hiring committees care about this distinction? Holding constant total citation count and h-index, does the presence of multiple infrequently-cited publications (say, papers making incremental "workmanlike" advances or peer-reviewed Letters to the Editor or response letters) reflect poorly on a candidate? Or does it not matter much, conditional on overall impact?

Based on my own limited experience hiring, or being hired, I think this is a secondary issue and would depend on the particular behind-the-scenes details at the place considering the application. It would matter slightly as a tie-breaker but I think generally speaking it is safer to have more publications, not all of which are highly cited, rather than to have a small number all of which are highly cited. However, this may be dependent on my own field (mathematics) and the places where I've been hired or been on hiring panels (Canada/UK)

@YemonChoi My understanding is that many other fields care about citation counts much more than pure mathematicians do (which is virtually not at all for tenure-track hires).

In my experience, those who like to evaluate by counting are happy to count citations and to count publications.  Thus, in their eyes you are generally better off with more publications, regardless of citation counts.
On the other hand (at least in my field of applied mathematics), when evaluation is done by actually looking at your body of work (and what others in your subfield say about it), papers that are rarely cited can still be very important if they are highly regarded.  For instance, perhaps you solved a major open problem so thoroughly as to leave little room for follow-up work -- such a paper is likely to be considered very important but not often cited except in reviews.


text:
Attachment or no attachment?
I am currently applying for a PhD position and have emailed many professors. My emails often include a general introduction and my CV plus a research statement is attached.
I try to be brief in the email text, as I know professors get tons of emails like mine and don't have time to read a long one. That's why I just mention my interests in the body with the reference to my research statement for the detailed explanation.
Up until now, the replies were only about positions, funding, etc. But today I got an email expressing this about the email itself:

I recommend that you briefly describe the focus of your research interests in an e-mail (main body, not as an attachment) when contacting a suitable member of staff in order for the staff member to assess their suitability as a potential supervisor in that area.
[...] As a principle, we do not encourage sending e-mail attachments in initial correspondence, as a public institution we receive a lot spam and potentially harmful e-mails with attachments.

I was wondering, is this the prevalent routine that I should consider for my emailing other institutes/professors as well? Or is it just their principle and others' may differ?

There once was a virus (Sircam) that transmitted through email.  People would get a message saying "I send you this file in order to have your advice", and an attachment.  Opening the attachment installed an executable file, which promptly mailed itself (as an attachment, with the same message) to everybody in the users's address book.  So there's some wisdom behind not opening messages that are attachment only.

Put your work on the web, and include the URL in your email.  If they're interested, they'll follow it.

The writer of that response has given you a valuable clue.  If, having read the email body, the recipient does not already have an active interest in working with you, the recipient is very unlikely to look at the attachments.
Instead, include a short paragraph about your research interests and a short summary of your CV  in the body of the email and offer to send details if requested.

Well, my understanding was adding the SOP would be a positive point in itself, as it shows that I have thought about the subject I want to do research on. Can a short paragraph convey that?

@Mahm00d The goal of that initial contact is to get the recipient's attention.  If you accomplish that, there will be plenty of time to go deeper.

The advice is good. The recipient wants to know at a glance whether it is worth following up. You can say at the bottom that CV and SOP are available on request - or even put them online somewhere so they can be directly accessed.
But a further bit of advice, though I realize that you didn't ask for it. Do your research first in to the potential interests of anyone you send such an email to. Some people blast out a huge number of "requests to join your research project" when the background of the sender has nothing whatever to do with the research of the recipient. These, of course get sent to the junk folder immediately and your future attempts will go there also. You don't suggest that you are doing this, of course, but I still suggest (to others reading this) that they don't do that. People with a background in "Waste Water Recovery Engineering" don't have a lot in common with Computer Science or Mathematics, but I still get such letters of interest - years after my retirement, actually.

Thank you for the advice and the further one. Putting the CV and SOP online is an actually good tip, I like it better than saying I'll provide them upon request.


text:
How to approach a continuation paper in such a way that promotes / ensures anonymity
I recently had a paper accepted into a conference, and am now working on a continuation of that paper. In the first paper I used one tool, while in this second paper I will use two tools. In the new paper, I plan to compare both tools. A lot of the text that made sense for the first paper, also makes sense in the second paper. For example, the experiment is done using the same data.
I am worried about two things: 1) self-plagiarism, and 2) keeping the anonymity for the peer review process.
How should I approach the development of the new paper?
Some ideas:

Write the new paper as if the first one was not mine; the problem with this is that I will heavily cite myself (to prevent self-plagiarism), which indirectly kind of breaks anonymity (reviewers will see that one of the references, probably [1], appears 10+ times, so they can infer who we are).
Write the second paper assuming that the first one is mine (i.e. "in this paper we continue previous research done in [1]"), but anonymize the self references (i.e. in the References section, [1] will not contain the title of the first paper, nor the name of the
authors).

What is typically done in these situations? What would be the preferable approach?

For what it is worth, I have a strong dislike for the use of the "mathematical we" in writing, and prefer to avoid phrases like "in this paper, we do [x]".  Make it imperative (in mathematics: instead of "we cancel a 3 from both sides", simply "cancel 3 from both sides") or passive (instead of "we added 2 mL of solution", write "2 mL of solution were added").  This very much augers in favor of your solution (1), since the final result is a paper which doesn't make reference to the authors.

The proper way is your #1 and you should do this even if anonymity isn't an issue. That is how you avoid self plagiarism, pointing clearly to the earlier expression of the ideas you discuss.
You not only  avoid self plagiarism by it also makes it easier to deal with copyright issues when the copyright on the first is now held by another.
In general, it is good to think of your earlier work ignoring who wrote it just as the authorship of papers by others is not material. It is the work that you quote and cite, not the authors.
And if it were someone else extending your work instead of yourself it is exactly how they should behave.
Also note that unless the peer review is double blind, you won't be anonymous to reviewers in any case. Double blind review is the standard in some fields, but not others. And even in double blind review it is the editor's job to maintain it.