text:
Is it possible to get a professor position without having had any fellowships in grad school?
As a deferred action for early childhood arrival (DACA) student, I found out that I am not eligible for federal fellowships from the government or through the university.
Some universities allow for fellowships to DACA students if they meet in-state requirements but being a student who attended undergrad at another state, I do not qualify. (I applied to all out-of-state graduate programs)
With the DACA status, I can still apply and work as teaching assistant or research assistant to fund my Ph.D. program.
So my question would be, if I do not have any fellowships on my CV and only RA & TA positions, how much would this negatively impact me when applying for assistant professor positions, if at all?
Do hiring committees ever place emphasis on whether the student had had fellowships or not? And would it be more worth it to go into a Ph.D. program in-state where I may qualify for some federal fellowships made through the school (from a funding perspective)?

I would argue that RA and TA positions are both kinds of graduate fellowships.  In my experience it is very rare that they are treated like the kinds of merely part-time employment that they may sound like.  For instance, usually when one is a grad student TA, you put in your pocket all the money you make.  You don't apply that towards tuition; rather, the tuition gets waived.  That's a fellowship.

I'm in the UK, so please consider this as a "global" rather than "local" perspective.  What hiring committees especially want here are: (a) good publications; (b) evidence of teaching experience; and (c) mainly as a "bonus round" -- successful grant applications (small ones are OK).  They may have differing priorities among (a-c) and there are probably some other things I haven't thought of.  But a fellowship is sort of like a type of "grant" and not as important as the other two (in my own opinion).

It looks like you've found an additional but hopefully minor downside to the deferred action status.  I think the comments and answers on this page have downplayed the potential negative effect partly because the probability of it affecting your chances are probably small, and partly from wishful thinking.  But I can see your point.  A competitive merit fellowship might be a feather in an applicant's cap. // Regarding your last question, my guess is that it would be wise to take this factor into account, but in the context of the whole funding picture at the schools you are considering.

There's no way that you are going to be disqualified from faculty positions by not having a graduate student fellowship. There's no "has a fellowship" checkbox on rubric that search committees use.
What will matter is a holistic evaluation of the quality of your research, your publications, your teaching experience, and your letters of recommendation.
Of course, evaluating junior faculty candidates is difficult and lots other things matter as well and can help reinforce (or cast doubt) on a committee's evaluation of a candidates quality. In that sense, a prestigious fellowship can be an additional positive signal in an otherwise strong packet. In that context, you should think of a fellowship as a "nice to have" — it does nothing to replace great research, great publications, and great letters.
In some ways, not having a fellowship might even help, if it translates into more work as a TA and RA.  This might lead to teaching experience and publications, which will be viewed as more valuable than all but the most prestigious fellowships. For example, I've seen faculty candidates who had made it entirely through graduate school on fellowships dinged for a lack of teaching experience.

The same restrictions apply to international graduate students, so this won't make you unusual at all.  Certainly many international grad students get jobs, so that's proof that it won't put you at a prohibitive disadvantage.

One major difference is that a DACA student could potentially look like a US citizen from the point of view of a faculty hiring committee (US bachelor's degree, US-specific history.) I think fellowship-eligible students who don't get them might get some questions (did they not apply? did they not succeed?). This might argue for disclosing DACA status earlier - though this is obviously a complex, fraught question.

@AJK: It's a fair point, but I don't really see hiring committees reading that much into these things anyway. Remember that award of a fellowship would be based on your undergraduate record, which in general counts for very little in faculty applications.  Most jobs will not even bother to ask for undergraduate transcripts. And I think hiring committees know that such fellowships are usually competitive, and even strong candidates can get left out.

@NateEldredge - this is true. Of course, depending on the field, this could continue to be an issue through a postdoc, where applying for fellowship funds is both standard and based on your track record. Also, as a related note: faculty can sometimes recruit postdocs under the assumption that they will help fund their own work via fellowships, which can depend on citizenship quite a bit.

@AJK Tons of students are not US citizens by have US undergrad and Ph.D. degrees, so that seems like an odd objection (I even know some examples where the person went to high school in the US, though).  The answer will probably depend on the field though: certainly in lots of fields people will not assume postdocs can fund themselves.

I cannot speak to your field (which you have not specified) but I did not have any fellowships (fellowships are fairly rare in public health) and was fine getting a tenure track job. Fellowships are nice little prestige markers, but letters, publications, funding applications, etc. are also critical.
So no, it's certainly not impossible. It might not even make things appreciably more difficult.

Graduate fellowships are usually awarded at the time of admission to a graduate program; as such, the question of whether or not someone gets one is only a reflection of their undergraduate record.  In my experience (mainly in math), tenure-track hiring committees care very little about an applicant's undergraduate record.  For instance, most applications do not ask for any information about the undergraduate degree beyond the date and the name of the institution - not even the GPA.  A minority ask for an undergraduate transcript, but my impression is that they don't really read them - they are mainly to weed out fraudsters claiming degrees that they don't actually have.
As such, I would expect graduate fellowships, or lack thereof, to carry negligible weight in a faculty application.

It would be helpful to specify your field, since as usual academia varies.  From my perspective, I would be embarrassed to try to argue to my colleagues in favor of a candidate for a tenure-track position based on their having a graduate fellowship.  I would expect their reaction to be some mix of laughing off the suggestion and thinking I'm a prat.  So in mathematics, I think in their direct effect they are mostly irrelevant.  Indirectly having the time away from teaching to do research can be helpful, but the effect is uncertain.  Certainly, DACA students have much more serious concerns over the next few years than this one.


text:
Professor that refuses to fail students - should I talk with him?
I am an instructor, and the head of my department is a professor that refuses to fail students.
I found out about this situation through multiple semesters where students would complain about this professor treating them unfairly, both to other students within my classroom, and to me directly; my ultimate question is: Should I talk to this professor, who is also the head of my department?
For context:
The professor assigns a group project with 6-8 students in each group. The projects take most of the semester and each group does 2 projects at the same time. Each student has a very heavy work load for these projects and teamwork is essential.
The issue is when a student refuses to do the project. I've heard reasoning from, the student didn't agree with what everyone else in the group agreed to, or the student just didn't bother showing up to any group meetings.
When students mentioned how one of their team members would not participate, which was only increasing the work load for other students who also had to worry about their other courses, the professor seemed to take the right action at first by talking to the non-participating student about the project and how important it is for them to contribute.
If the student continued to argue with group decisions (sometimes they do the project their own way) then the professor would just tell the group "find something for [the student] to do." And if the student never did anything, they would still pass the course, despite never participating on the 2 biggest assignments, which equated to 60% of the grade (including participation).
Back to my original question -
Should I speak with the professor - head of my department - or let it go?

As it stands, this question depends a lot on your professor’s attitude and thus can be only answered by people who know him very well. However I think there is an answerable and interesting underlying question here, namely, something along the lines of: When should an instructor/professor switch from moderating to escalating when a student refuses to participate in a group project?

Would you clarify "to me directly"? Were you his student before?

@scaaahu I was not his student but my students often feel very personable with me so I hear a lot about how they feel about other instructors and their academic questions.

What do you hope to achieve by "talking to him"? If he's senior enough to be department head, whatever you plan to tell him, he's probably heard it before.

Personally I'd consider it worth talking to him, where 'talk to him' is defined not at 'tell him he's wrong' but as 'for your own peace of mind try to find out why he believes his choice is a good one'.

This is a dodgy topic in some way and it will (!!) vary significantly from country to country and institution to institution.
My comments are from the UK perspective (specifically England) - however this approach is slowly permeating into the rest of Europe.
In some places (e.g. the UK) we have reached a kind of toxic education system in which rating are more important than actual teaching. Pass rates are key (primarily true to tertiary education) - while grade distributions are important in secondary education.
This means that "education institutions" (schools, colleges, universities) have little interest in failing a person and instead prefer to pass them - even if it is with very low marks. This isn't too much of an issue if there are grade boundaries, however if the choice is between a pass or a fail this will seem and is extremely unfair towards those who do put in work.
Pass rates or grade distributions will be used to allocate funding - and can also be a factor for chosing a specific institution. Higher pass rates will mean more funding and more students.
This is an old article from the Guardian, but you can research a lot more on the topic if you so desire: http://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/2011/oct/03/targets-league-tables
So my advice would be the following:
First find out what policy exists in your institution - please keep in mind that you will be unlikely to find written instructions that say "pass all students".
(Possibly inquire from colleagues how they would suggest you handle a weak student - a reasonable query if you are new.)
Once you have established what the policy is, you have a number of option:
1) If all are to be passed, you should not complain, but:

You can try to achieve higher standards in your group.
You can try to get involved in the politics of education - but that would take years, be warned.

2) If you find that there is no unofficial requirement to be lenient you may want to talk about it with the Professor himself - he may have reasons for his choice. Also look at how other staff grade - maybe there is a culture of  being lenient.
3) If you find that there is an expectation to be strict I would think you would be right to talk to the head of the department, BUT again you may want to discuss this with the Professor first.

You are a sympathetic listener, and since you are on staff with the department, students may feel some hope that you would be an effective advocate for them.
I have my doubts about that, however.  Nothing personal -- it's just that it sounds like you are low man on the totem pole there.
There is something positive you can do, however.  You can encourage the students to take their issue to an administrator.  I suppose an administrator will ask them whether they've taken the matter to the department chair, and if they say no, will tell them that's the first step.  Therefore, they should go ahead and meet with the department chair, even though it will most likely be a waste of time.
College students are at an age when it is very appropriate for them to advocate for themselves.  Encourage them to do so.  Explain to them that their voices will make the most impact.

source: Stack Exchange

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

authors: Наталья Тарбушкина

sort: votes


text:
How to deal with unwanted physical contact, presents and attention by a postdoc supervisor?
Posting this to academia stackexchange, but if this may fit better in other place please let me know.
My girlfriend is a new PhD student in a male dominated field, and is supervised by a postdoc in a research group led by a professor. For the last few months, her postdoc supervisor was constantly giving her small presents, and trying to meet with her outside of work hours such as in a restaurant on weekends, for a reason of discussing the current work. This makes my girlfriend uncomfortable, but she is too shy to say no to those things, and the behavior of the postdoc supervisor up to this point was borderline, I even accompanied her for one such meeting on a weekend. Yesterday however her postdoc supervisor surprised her where he took off her glasses from her head without her asking or warning her (because her glasses were a bit dirty); My girlfriend was startled, and pulled the glasses from his hands, and put them back on. At this point he further unannounced tried to touch and fix her hair, as she put her glasses in a rush which messed her hair. The overall situation stressed my girlfriend considerably, and she ended up in tears in the evening when she was telling me this. There have been some other similar situations (albeit with no / less physical contact) which makes my girlfriend distracted and nervous when she communicates with her supervisor, which impacts her ability to do her work.
My view on this is that we should let her supervisor know clearly that this behavior is not acceptable asap and escalate to the professor, in order to prevent such situations from happening again. The issue right now however is that her scientific work is depending on her supervisor, so she does not want to escalate or bring up this situation for discussion until the paper deadline that she works on. I am inclined to go and talk with the professor and postdoc myself, but I also do not want to do anything that my girlfriend did not ask for. Do you have any advice for me of what I can do to help? Do you have any suggestions or comment in general what to do in this situation?
Edit 1: As pointed in the answers / comments, I will not attempt any talking with prof or with postdoc on my own or other similar actions.
Edit 2: Unfortunately some 1:1 situations cannot be avoided, as my gf needs to take measurements together with her postdoc who knows how to operate the machinery.

"I am inclined to go and talk with the professor and postdoc myself": DON'T.

@MassimoOrtolano, you should probably expand on that. Inquiring minds need to know.

@Buffy I'll be on the phone for several days and not able to write much.

The postdoc has moved to physical (wo)manhandling - the postdoc crossed the red line big time. I have little hope that she can keep things under control (i.e. not getting worse) until the paper deadline unless that is really very near in the future. Is there any support structure against harassment at the institution? My advice in such situations: put the foot down as early, clearly, and unambiguously as possible or get out while you can. Sorry to be blunt, but "not escalating" is read by that postdoc as "I am a challenge", not as "I am not interested".

Aside from this ugly situation: No student should (be content to) depend on some postdoc to do essential lab work. Learn to do it by yourself, and better than that postdoc, so you can do it alone, or replace him by an undergrad student if two hands are not enough. Just in case the postdoc vanishes on short notice, or turns out to be an unfriendly or a dunce. They all do, at least temporarily. ;-)

"What can I (the partner) do?" is a different question from what your partner should do. Which would would you like answers about?

This might be more of a Interpersonal Skills question, but:

don't take any action on your own
do support your GF in any way she asks, including (1) being supportive and helping her deal with the stress (2) being present as a third party at meetings or (3) in conversation as a reminder that she's unavailable or (4) as an excuse ("oh, sorry, I have plans with my boyfriend (cough) so it'll be inconvenient to meet in person this weekend, but we could communicate via Zoom/Slack/e-mail ...") — not that it's OK that any of these are necessary in the situation.
after the submission deadline passes, it's a judgement call (depending on personalities, relationships, etc.) whether it's best for her to try to work things out with the postdoc supervisor or go immediately to the professor

@Buffy correctly points out in a comment (I should have included this) that the highest priority is for your GF to stay safe by making sure never to be in a private/one-on-one meeting with the postdoc: if you're not available or she doesn't want you there and she can't set the meeting for a public professional space, ask her to ask a friend or colleague (especially female) to be there (mentioning this advice to your GF would be the one possible exception to "don't give her any help she doesn't want"). If your GF and the postdoc need to work together to take measurements on some equipment, do whatever you have/she has to to make sure there's a third person present.

Or, if the OP can't be present at these meetings, make sure that some other person always is, One of her friends or another student. Especially another female student.

I can understand your concern which is completely natural but I think it is up to your girlfriend to handle this situation by herself. The most appropriate thing you can do is to be supportive of your girlfriend and give her advice but not to take any action by yourself. From the outside, this could be probably seen as "threatening" by other people.
I do not really agree with the idea to wait for a deadline or something. If by keeping quiet and resisting somebody's harassment just for a project for a long time, your girlfriend's psychology could be affected, then you should not wait for it.
Maybe the question to be asked by your girlfriend may be: what would I feel in 3 months, 6 months, 2 years after the deadline if I do not say anything or take any action about this issue? At that point, I think there is another trade-off to be taken into account.
If I understood well, the postdoc is aware of the hierarchy and abuses of his position. The OP did not specify the location of the institution in question but note also that many universities and research institutes in Europe and in the US are very very sensitive to the issues of sexual harassment.

+1 for "I do not really agree with the idea to wait for a deadline" and for your username which is very apt here.

Look up the university's sexual harassment complaint process.
What you're describing is sexual harassment, and it's both unacceptable and illegal in almost every developed nation, as well as most developing nations. I would strongly recommend that formal action should be taken against the post-doc in question.
You don't state location, but almost every reputable university should have a process for handling complaints of sexual harassment. In the US, this should fall under Title 9, and would likely be handled by the Title 9 office at the university, but other countries would have different names for things, and every university has its own internal policies and procedures. As a result, I would encourage you to read up on what the policies and procedures of this particular university's sexual harassment process are.
You may be able to make a complaint on your girlfriends' behalf, either as her boyfriend or anonymously, and there would likely be anti-retaliation processes that would protect her from retaliation by the post-doc for making the complaint, and which would prevent her studies from being harmed while the resolution of the complaint was in-process.
Finally, you may want to look up laws regarding conversation recording and one-party consent in your location. In some places, it's totally legal for one person to record a conversation that they're a party to; in other places, it's illegal unless everyone involved consents to the recording. If it is legal where you live, you might want to consider buying a recording device or phone app that your girlfriend could use to record her encounters with this post-doc, as evidence for any sexual harassment complaints that might be made.

"there would likely be anti-retaliation processes that would protect her from retaliation by the post-doc for making the complaint, and which would prevent her studies from being harmed while the resolution of the complaint was in-process." In theory, this is likely the case. In reality (and speaking from first-hand experience), anti-retaliation policies don't often successfully protect the complainant, just as sexual misconduct policies don't often hold such abusers accountable.

One more comment: regardless of whether or not she wants to file a complaint, I would suggest looking up laws in your location regarding one party consent/recording conversations. In my own experience, it never occurred to me to record interactions with my abuser when the unwanted behavior was going on, but by the time I filed a complaint, I wish I had done so, because I would have had some evidence. Your girlfriend may never want/need to share such recordings with anyone, but I only recommend it as an extra precaution. Again, only if it's legal where you live.

@Ace Thanks for the suggestion, I've edited the post to include a mention about looking up recording laws.

Note that even if one-party consent is legal in your jurisdiction, it may be against your university's policies to create a recording without two-party consent.

One more quick point about sexual harassment (SH) complaints: at my former institution, once a potential SH complaint has been mentioned to someone in an official position (e.g. the supervising professor), it MUST be reported up the chain to appropriate authorities. This is a good policy IMO - it removes the possibility that someone in the chain will fail to transmit a complaint - but it does mean that IF you prefer to try handle things informally  before making a formal complaint you should initially discuss the situation hypothetically ("I have a friend who ...")

Situations like these can quickly escalate. And by that I mean, that the postdoc can escalate his actions towards your girlfriend since he is not having any repercussions from continuously pushing on your girlfriends boundaries.
In a situation like this I would like to escalate it to a professor or head of institution right away, with the very least a consultation. Your university is your workplace, and the heads of institutions are responsible for creating a good work environment.
If she mentions that it is difficult to communicate boundaries with her coworker now, it allows for a possible relaxed conversation where a professor can offer to mediate a boundary conversation or a way for her to be less dependent on the postdoc.
If you instead push up the date of mentioning it, it gives him more time to push her more, and leaves open the risk that he gets to be the first to bring it up to the other people, where he could make it seem as if she is making things up or are being over dramatic.
Of course, as you say, don't do anything behind her back, but do help her feel safe enough to speak up about it as soon as possible.

sorry your girlfriend has to go through this.
Step zero is to document everything. This includes taking screenshots, etc and storing all evidence of him asking her out in a non-university controlled environment (e.g. gmail docs). Keep it like a running diary. You never know when documentation comes in handy. She will also need documentation to prove what is happening to her.
Next, try to respond to everything he does in email / text so there is a paper trail (preferably a non-institution controlled mode of communication - if she has to email using an institutional email, she can forward emails to an external email, e.g. gmail).
Finally she needs to map out what other alternatives there are. Can another postdoc or team member teach her? Is there another project she can work on without this guy? Is there a policy which defines harassment at her institution etc? If so ,read it - even if she doesn't complain, it's good to know her rights.
Once these factors are known, she should decide her course of action, any communication should be over a non-institution controlled medium (like her gmail) as much as possible (this is so she retains control over the information).
Some ideas:

If there's a trusted female friend, or woman in the field maybe they could support her in talking to her professor?
Work with him only during work hours.
If she feels weirded out in his presence, she should override any feelings of being polite and just leave. No explanation, no nothing. She should GTFO and always trust her gut. She can say any bullshit after the fact, like "I felt ill" etc.
Are there student advocates or unions on her campus? Could she get support and advice from a student organisation?
She should be mentally prepared for the academy and professor to not support her - this may not be the case, but I'm just saying this does happen to people.

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


text:
Should I negotiate research hours with my advisor in hopes of getting funding?
I've been working hard on research with my advisor, and he seems to be happy with my progress. I would like to get an RA position next semester.
Should I tell my advisor that I'm going to cut back a bit on my research time in order to encourage him to give me an official RA position? I've been putting in a lot of time because I want to impress him, but I also have TA responsibilities to deal with, and I've been feeling worn out.
Edit: Perhaps a more positive framing: This is my first year, and I feel like the pace I've set for myself is not sustainable in the long run. I want to cut back slightly on the average number of research hours I'm putting in each week. Should I be honest with my advisor about this, in hopes that it will strengthen my case for funding, or should I just slow down a bit without saying anything?

Your framing is confusing to me. Are you trying to say something like "Professor, I can't keep up doing 20 hours of TA, taking my own classes and trying to do research, therefore I'm going to limit myself to X hours of research per day?"

@Yachsut, my suggestion after reading your edit is that you get serious about writing grants for yourself. If what you want is funding that allows you to exclusively work on your research, it isn't a matter of your advisor giving that to you, it is something you win by way of a fellowship or a grant. Tell your advisor you want to apply for grants and ask for support in finding them and editing your proposals.

This seems to me a very very very bad idea. Think about it this way: What is your response going to be if the professor says: "You feel you can't keep up and need to spent less time on research? OK". What will the professor "lose" and what will you lose when (s)he says that? In short, your bargaining power is not in the amount of time you spent doing research.
The best case scenario I can come up with is that your professor responds "Awww, how cute. A student who tries to negotiate for the very first time. I will spent some time tutoring her/him on how to do that." Most of the professors I know would be (mildly) annoyed, and just say no. However, most of the professors I know do take career development of their PhD students very seriously, and if you just discuss your concerns with them, would be very willing to work with you and see if a solution can be found.

Response to your edit:
I would recommend discussing this openly with your advisor. A dissertation is more like a marathon than a sprint, so you should pace yourself. Helping with things like time management and finding a work tempo that is sustainable is also part of a advisors job. Not all advisors are equally good at it, but it is a legitimate topic to discuss with your advisor. Even the best advisor cannot read your mind. So if there is something bothering you, then you need to tell them. Otherwise, the advisor won't know, and thus cannot help you.

I would just be upfront and ask for what you want. Ask if he is able to support you on an RA and tell him the reasons why you would prefer it to a TA position. Being passive aggressive is rarely well received, and this isn't much of a threat anyway as you will only be hurting yourself by focusing less on your own research.
Keep in mind as well that being an RA means that you will be working on a project for your advisor that is not necessarily your own, amounting to a similar amount of time as a TA position. So while it has advantages, you may not end up feeling like you are working less than you are now.

I suggest to tell him that the combination of TA and research is very heavy, and although you would prefer to do research you have these TA duties and ask him for advice/what your options are. This gives him the option of proposing an RA position is if he is willing and able to do so.

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


text:
Being in "Reviewer invited" state for 3 months, What could it say?
For a math journal, after 4 weeks of submission, the status went from "with editor" to "reviewer invited", and its been in that particular state for the past 3 months. If you have any editorial experience, I'd like to know when would this kind of state happens, and does it say anything about the manuscript content, especially why the editor is finding hard to get the reviewers accept invitation, or is it that the reviewers for the subject matter of the paper, are rare to find?
Edit : more informtion
I have enquired. The Editorial Manager assured me that the Editor is carefully following and taking good care of the review process. What I have seen in earlier communication with Editor, I have no reason to doubt his interest in the manuscript. He seemed very much interested.
Earlier communication with Editor in Chief

If the journal staff say there is no problem, then the editor is having a hard time finding a reviewer. Nothing much you, or anyone, can do, except grow a few grey hair worrying over your manuscript, or simply retract it. Not having seen your manuscript, I can't advise on that. ;-)

Been there. Likely trouble with reviewers. Nothing you can do but wait! I was in limbo for about 4.5 months for my last paper (the paper was accepted).

@Shinobii : For how much time it was in "Under review" after coming out of limbo?

Finally it went into "Under Review" recently.

It means the editor(s) invited reviewers who have not accepted the invitation. If this status has remained the same for 3 months, it's not a good sign. Completing the review can take time, but agreeing to review should be much faster.
My guess is that the editor is either very busy or not very active. He/she invited reviewers and left the manuscript alone. Now would be a good time to nudge the editor and hint that they should be inviting new reviewers, since the currently-invited ones are not likely to agree to review.

It could also just mean that the status hasn't been updated in any visible way.

@Buffy it could, but if these statuses are the ones I'm familiar with (using Editorial Manager), then once the reviewer agrees to review the status updates to "Under Review".

@Allure : I have enquired. The Editorial Manager assured me that the Editor is carefully following and taking good care of the review process. What I have seen in earlier communication with Editor, I have no reason to doubt his interest in the manuscript. He seemed very much interested.

Earlier communication : https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/125267/102868

The reviewers could be busy themselves - other things might be higher on their priority list...

@SolarMike : When the reviewer is invited, do they also recieve the manuscript, and reading which they take decision to whether accept the invitation for review. Or they are usually given just an abstract?

@user102868 such a good question - probably depends on the editor...

It could also mean that the reviewer has accepted the review, but he/she forgot to click on "accept", and for some reason the editor hasn't insisted. Possibly they met at a conference and the reviewer accepted verbally.

@SolarMike if that happens it's good practice to decline to review.

@user102868 yes, the reviewer receives the manuscript when they are invited - they wouldn't be able to tell whether or not it's interesting otherwise.

@Allure if all stuck to « good practice » then we would have a lot less questions...

@user102868 Please edit the additional information into the question proper, so that people will know the context without reading comments to a currently downvoted answer.

@FedericoPoloni : Finally it went into "Under Review" recently after being in "reviewer invited" state for close to 7 months. If it gets out of that quickly then probably your prediction is right!


text:
Submitting an extension paper of a paper that is currently in review for a considerable amount of time?
I have a paper under review for over 6 months now. Recently I have done some more work which is an extension of paper under review and wrote it as a new paper. As there is dependency on the paper under review, I have included some important theorems of paper under review in appendix of the new paper. Can I submit this new paper to (a) the same journal, although there is a paper already under review for a long time. (b) Should I submit to another journal, even before the review process of current paper still going on.
(c) should i seek advice of the EIC of the current paper under review
(d) Don't do anything and wait for the decision on the current paper under review and proceed accordingly?
Appreciate any pros and cons or suggestions/advice in this scenario.

Over 6 months? Apparently some disciplines it can take 2 years...

Can you include the old manuscript as "supplementary information for peer reviewers but not for publication" with the new manuscript?  Probably (a) is good, but it depends on the particular journal and papers.

@SolarMike : Let me call it "a considerable amount of time".

I wouldn’t submit the follow-up paper while the first is still under revision. For the moment I’d consider the time that you’ve waited as pretty normal. So stay calm and wait some more time. If the first paper eventually gets publish, fine, then proceed with the follow-up paper. Otherwise, I would consider the option to merge both versions to a more influential single version and submit this one (maybe even in a higher-ranked journal).

@SebastianBetchel : Thank you for the answer. Makes sense to me.

In what field are you working?
I would suggest to proceed with caution because of several factors. If you submit your new work and gets published faster, there is a risk of rejection of your first paper because it is not novel enough, etc. I have heard of a case in physics in which the review process took ~1 year, and it was eventually rejected because the same authors during that year generated data with better resolution, and thus their original work was not worth as much as it was.
Another important point to remember is that you can't plagiarize yourself. This means that if you add appendixes with copy/paste of your own paper, that does not count as plagiarism. However, journal editors may disagree. Many journals have automated software, and if it gets marked for not-to-publish, editors won't spend a second more on it. Again, proceed with care, because your first paper can be locked out because of your follow up paper.
If you have the option to submit to different places, I would ask the first journal to withdraw the first paper from the revision process, and submit it somewhere else (but again, you are the only one who can judge whether it is smart for your career). Sometimes just asking it, makes the editors speed up the review process.
Finally, you can consider publishing your first paper to a pre-print server, and cite it in your new paper. If it happens that your first paper gets approved before publishing your second one, you can update the references. And if not, both reviewers and readers have access to the original work if they want to follow your procedure.
I think that it is a tricky situation, in which a lot of what is wrong with the review process starts to surface. In some areas, reviewers block the publishing of papers because they are working on the same area and they want to be published first. You can always pressure the editor to speed up the process, perhaps finding new reviewers, or if you say you are going to submit elsewhere and your paper is worth it, editors will speed up the process. Remember that publishing is, in almost all cases, a business, and losing a paper is losing money.

Thanks for the answer. Journal field is mathematics (journal is on specialized topic and multidisciplinary in nature)

I'm not sure how the mathematics community work. I am a bit more aware about the awful things that happen in the bio-world of publishing and reviewing...


text:
How direct should I be in my email to a potential Msc advisor?
In an email to a potential masters supervisor, should I ask to "speak" with the professor / researcher as opposed to instantly asking for her/him to supervise me during graduate school? For instance, should I mention that I find his/her research is interesting and I would like to speak to him/her about it? Or, should I just "cut to the chase" and ask if they could supervise my studies? I have heard conflicting opinions on this topic.

It's a bit of an art and a stochastic process because depending on the personality of you and the recipient same tactic can have opposite results. With that in mind, you can aim for an approach that is most efficient, courteous, and professional.
First a disclaimer: my experience is only relevant to the U.S. Generally, most researchers are wary of saying yes to supervising anyone without knowing the person. So, asking if he/she will supervise you from the get go can lead to a high rejection rate. And in the same time, you want to use your time efficiently so going in as a 100% academic consultation may not be the best for your interest, as some researchers may be interested to talk to you, but they may not have any funding or effort available to guide you.
To increase the success rate, I'd recommend starting with an introduction to describe who you are and what you are planning to do in the next academic stage. Then, ask for a defined amount of time  for an information meeting (30-minute is a sweet spot for me, 45-min is also fine but I'd avoid asking for any commitment for more than an hour). Lay out the major items you want to discuss, include using part of the meeting to ask academic questions that are pertinent to the researcher, and express the interest to learn more on optimizing your application process and tips in looking for an advisor, etc.
If you have a short, well-formatted resume, by all means attach with the e-mail for the recipient to "better understand your background before the talk."
The overall goal is to make the e-mail low-risk but with clear purposes. During the meeting if they are interested they may mention any opportunities that are available. And if they can't be your supervisor, they may still be able to connect you with somebody if you have impressed them enough.
Another tip is try to seek for a referral if possible. For example, if someone you want to meet has collaborated with one of your professors with whom you are in a good standing, check with that professor and see if he/she will be able to introduce you.
After the meeting, regardless of the result, send a thank you e-mail or a thank you card for their time and advice.
Good luck!

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


text:
What does a systematic review entail? In what way is it "tedious"?
I spoke with a research professor who informed me that I may be able to work with him on a systematic review. However, he warned that it can be very tedious and frustrating so I should think about it. I understand that a systematic review involves looking through many papers, however, I would appreciate if someone could tell me, from their experience, how it is tedious. I would also have other classes in addition to this research so would be able to work on it for about 10 hours a week.

In terms of searching for papers and writing summaries of them

You can get a degree of understanding of what a systematic review will entail by reading its Wikipedia page. Depending on the topic of your review you may have many or few papers in the literature to review, and obviously this has consequences for how long it'll take you. This page on systematic reviews does include the sage advice "don't underestimate how long a systematic review will take."

This fits in a certain archetype of frequently asked questions on this site: "My professor told me X.  What did they mean by X?"  A website populated by experts on X may indeed have some insight into what your professor meant by X, but the best approach seems to be asking your professor what they meant by X.

Asking how something is tedious would seem to be primarily opinion-based. As to what it entails, that's been asked and answered already

Tedious has a negative connotation. In many ways systematic review is meticulous, which to some people may appear tedious. One who enjoys reading, inspecting clues, and putting puzzles together to reveal hidden patterns would enjoy doing a systematic review.
The first hurdle is perhaps setting up the research question and search criteria. If the set of keywords is not close to perfect the resultant articles may not be exhaustive, and being exhaustive is a spirit of systematic review. In addition, all searches need to be documented through writing or using codes, so that the search can be replicated by other people.
The second hurdle is combing through moderate to large amounts of abstracts in order to identify the right targets. A set of carefully developed selection criteria will help. But a good handful of the retrieved abstracts may still fall into the gray zone and require some meetings to sort them out
Then it comes the actual reading and data extraction. This can take months and months of reading, re-reading, tabulation, and revision. Again, if the authors know what to extract very clearly, the process can get less iterative.
Notice that for the previous two hurdles, some research team may require two or more researchers to do them independently and then compare their results for agreement before divvying up the work. Be prepared for frequent team meetings or communications for troubleshooting.
The last hurdle is to put all the tabulated information into use, through grouping, sorting, summary, and synthesis. This requires a great deal of understanding from the reading process and one's experience. The process can often be iterative. Making a good conceptual framework will help setting up a more robust draft. Keeping the research questions in mind as the north pointer can also prevent getting lost.
And, all of the actions above need to be documented so that anyone can pick up the review and conduct a similar search (say, maybe 5 or 10 years later) in order to compare with what you found. In a way, systematic review can be viewed as an exhaustive, planned, and replicable literature review.
Now back to your case. If it's 10 hours a week for a semester, chance is you will not see the fruition of the article, but you can definitely take part. The important part is to get a very clear idea which part of the process you're taking. Article searching and downloading may work for more flexible schedule, even 10 hours on a day per week is fine as long as you keep good searching notes. But if it's the later stage, it's better to work on it by small amount, like 2 hours every day, as the later stage requires more consistent immersion and regurgitating.
And if I may make another suggestion, ask if the supervisor needs anyone to do a more general literature review for a grant proposal or a journal article. That should give you a smaller, more defined task and you can use this chance to see if you like this kind of work and, more importantly, if you and your supervisor work well together.

Thank you, this is extremely descriptive. This is actually a brand new project that will begin shortly. So I am assuming that the supervisor has already or will shortly set up the research criteria.  The topic of this project directly relates the my field of interest in graduate school and am hoping this is useful when I apply to graduate school. Thus, it is very relevant (and the researcher seems nice), but he did frighten me and now I am afraid that I will let him down as it will be too difficult.

A review article can be a massive undertaking.
There might be no co-authorship if your contribution is not significant enough, if the scope of the review paper is very large and your contribution is a very small proportion of the work involved.  Check whether or not you may expect authorship credit.
I am concerned that this might end up being grunt work for you.
On the other hand, even without co-authorship, if you are really interested in the subject, and if you are able to put clear limits on how much time you put in, and stick to them, it could be worthwhile for you.
It can be tedious in the sense that there can be so many articles to include in the review that it starts to feel like you're crossing the Atlantic Ocean in a rowboat.
(Not that I have ever written one.  But I typed one in LaTeX for my advisor and even that started to feel rather endless after a while.  I am still astounded how he managed to keep track of so many different papers.)

Why would you assume no co-authorship?

@ff524 - There might be no co-authorship because the student's contribution might not be significant enough, if the scope of the review paper is very large and the student's contribution is a very small proportion of the work involved.  This is a potential downside.  Obviously, co-authorship would make the project more attractive.  But the question, are these articles OP wants to read anyway, is quite important in figuring out how well this project would fit.

If that's what your concern is, you should clarify in your answer (or suggest that the student make sure to discuss what the requirements for authorship would be up front, before starting). Right now, your answer sounds like you're suggesting that "no co-authorship" is what the student should generally expect, which is just not accurate.

@ff524 - I added "perhaps" in a key place.  Or did you have something more substantial in mind?

I don't find the addition of "perhaps" to be especially helpful. If you're going to mention authorship, you should clarify what your concerns are. For example, instead of "perhaps with no co-authorship" you might say, as in your comment, "There might be no co-authorship if your contribution is not significant enough, if the scope of the review paper is very large and your contribution is a very small proportion of the work involved." (And ideally, how the student can find out whether or not to expect authorship credit.)

@ff524 - If I managed to make any improvements, it was due to your help.  However, if it's still not very clear or positive, it's not your fault.

I think this is much improved over the previous version. thanks

It would be unlikely that a student do not get authorship if work is done on it, especially if it is a solo review. The whole process of a modern systematic review is that there are at least a couple of reviewers in the selection and the write up process, in order to provide more objectivity and engagement with the review. A solo author is unlikely to be published in 2020 compared to 2016.

tedious and frustrating

Systematic reviews are tedious and frustrating. There is a high level of transparency and accountability in every stage of the review process, which can make it very complex. Many "big" reviews are a product of a series of articles as the result. Some reviews publish there methodology as a separate article, BMJ Open is one I have seen, and then their review in another.
Ultimately, you are setting up and defending a process that another researcher can hopefully pick up, rinse and repeat when they want to pick up new articles from when your review finished. Setting up a search strategy, usually with an academic librarian is important. Then strategising and documenting the tedious process before the next step of sifting through the sometimes enormous numbers of articles. I have seen reviews which included nearly 10K to 20K title elimination. That is probably where the frustration levels hit the roof (and you haven't even started the analysis and write up process!).
I thought this is worth a new contribution because there are now plenty of systematic review tools that can help reduce the tediousness and frustration. So more time can be spent on the "meatier" sections of analysis and write up, but there is no consensus on the tools as yet.Most of the systematic review tools are developed by the health disciplines, so understandably some are open source are available to all. So you can hopefully adapt them to whatever field that you are in. My simple Google found these sites, but I am sure you can find more appropriate ones for yourself (Google adapts to your preferences).
Personally, I was keen to use Covidence for my review, but my supervisors were keen to stick to their tried and trusted Excel, argh.
https://ktdrr.org/resources/sr-resources/tools.html
http://systematicreviewtools.com


text:
Hired as a research assistant and told to track working hours for payment, is this normal?
I have been given a great opportunity to work as a research assistant. I will be working under this researcher (and her team) for about 5 months. I was only suppose to start in mid-January. But she said she would like to hire me as a research assistant for the next few weeks (full-time). She said she will be paying me (and the rate /hr is surprisingly high). Come mid-January (when I was suppose to start) I will not be allowed to be payed for my work (school rules).
Anyways, this work can be done anywhere (I do not need to be in a specific location to do it). Thus, she told me to track all of my hours and then send her a bill in January. I guess, sort of like what contractors do. I have never had a paid job before, let alone a research position. I am wondering, is this usual?
I could potentially earn 2 000 dollars over the next couple weeks. However, I feel like this is too much money. I feel as though I should understate the hours I worked. However, at the same time if I did that she would know I didn't work "full-time". This is all new to me so it would be great if someone with experience can make sense of this for me.

Did you discuss expected hours with her? For example, at my university, research assistants were expected to work 20 hrs/week. She may have offered you the job on the expectation it would cost her x hours/week, and may not have funding for you to work more than that.

I'd advice to make it a habit to always track your work hours together with the broad task you are working on (e.g. giving classes, laboratory, communication, organization, writing paper, analyzing data). It takes me about 5 minutes daily and it has served me on various occasions in different jobs: for example one employer messed up my holidays, another paid slightly too little because he forgot to include some hours one day. But the largest benefit that I see is that you actually get to know how much time you spend on which task.

You don't mention where you are, but if you're in the USA and a part-time worker, schools I've been to limit your work to 20 hrs/week for legal reasons (after that, Obamacare says they need to provide benefits or something).

the very same policy is applied in two more universities i know. i do not know the details e contract, but it usually states an upper bound of working hours

From my experience doing research assistant work at a state university in the US, and from speaking with peers in both "hard" and "human" sciences this is par for the course. A tiny bit of paperwork (a signature or two), and away you go. Though I'm assuming by "she will be paying me" it will be through the university rather than out of her own pocket.
Do the work (well), do not understate your hours, and enjoy the paycheck when it arrives. I can almost guarantee the researcher is concerned about getting things accomplished in a timely manner, and that the cost of your time is minimal compared to theirs and the other costs associated with the research.

There are often limits as to the number of hours the student can work per week, either due to visa or other factors - it's worth checking to make sure.

Working with her is a contract as any other contract. You should make sure that the full terms of this agreement are fully understood by both parts. Try to have everything written (not necessarily formally, but still written), at least on email, to avoid future frustration. For a beginner, as you, it is not at all uncommon that you misunderstood something, and because of shyness, you agree with something that you would have not agreed, if everything would have been made clear from the beginning.
For example, maybe the payment is only meant for "successful" working hours, or it doesn't include taxes, or you're supposed to cover some spendings for the project you're working on. If this is not made perfectly clear before you start, in written, you'll find yourself cheated when you'll get 700$ for what you considered to be 2000$ worth of work.
Never lie in these circumstances (Yes, there are rare circumstances where lying is a good option). There's no point to it. Both of you have the exact same goal, you want to finish this partnership successfully and nobody has anything to gain if you understate your working hours.
If it eases your stress, I have many friends working as research assistant, and they make about 2000$ per month, but this depends a lot on the country.
Also, read this. Imposter syndrome is very common in academia, and it looks like you have it. You feel like you don't deserve this money, because you're a beginner, etc., while you are deserving it, and the only needed proof for this is that someone is willing to give it to you.

I like this answer more as it stresses the understanding and mutual agreement more than just what to do, i.e. create a bill - a bill that surprises one party is not a good idea, even if your not getting paid immediately still log & send the hours (and preferably a task worked on for each block of hours) on a routine basis

I am very concerned about this part:

I will not be allowed to be payed for my work (school rules)

What rules are these? This isn't an idle question - what rules prevent you from being paid determine the possible penalties for violation.
If you are, for instance, in a foreign country on a visa that limits your payment or employment, working as a contractor in violation of those rules could have some very serious consequences. Depending on your country and the specific policies, this could go all the way up to cancelling your visa and deportation. This is certainly true in the US, and comes with other requirements:

Students and Exchange Visitors
Students and exchange visitors may, under certain circumstances, be
  allowed to work in the United States. They must obtain permission from
  an authorized official at their school. The authorized official is
  known as a Designed School Official (DSO) for students and the
  Responsible Officer (RO) for exchange visitors.

Unless the professor (or you) commits tax fraud, the government would have ample opportunity to find out - so certainly don't chalk it up to "they probably won't find out" if this is your situation.
There are other possibilities, including being prohibited from working due to scholarship/fellowship/assistantship. Violating those rules could mean anything from being required to return the money, to having your agreement cancelled quite suddenly.
The other possibility is that as an employee of the school you are limited to a certain number of hours, such as under insurance restrictions (Obamacare in the US). Going over this amount means the school is fined quite heavily (a few thousand I believe is the minimum fine), and violating such a rule could land both you and the professor in trouble.
Another possibility is the program prohibits you from unapproved employment outside the program (pretty common with PhD programs in the US). Violation of this without permission could be something the program turns a blind eye towards - or it could give them full authority to dismiss you as a student and/or cancel your funding.
It's not clear from your question if the professor knows or understands why you are being prohibited from receiving payment, but I would urge you to make sure you understand what the rules are and communicate them to this professor as well. Regardless, remember that you are ultimately responsible for following the rules that apply to you, and "the professor said it was ok" may not be sufficient to protect you from negative outcomes in any way.
This arrangement ultimately could be acceptable, but please find out the potential risks in advance!

By the first part, I mean that this project will be used for course credit. In order to obtain course credit I am unable to be paid for my work during the semester. The PI knows this. However, I will be paid for my work prior to when the semester begins (I haven't even registered the project as a course yet).
I am not on a student Visa of any sort and do not live or go to school in the U.S. I am also not on any scholarship or assistanship. I am an undergraduate student.

@aspire94 I see - so kind of an 'independent study'? Do the work, get paid, then take a course where the work you already did is the work for the course and get a grade for it. Is the person giving you the grade the same professor as the one paying you? It sounds like it is clearly prohibited, so you'll have to decide if the risk of breaking the rule is worthwhile. You could just switch the course to something else, the rule would no longer apply, and then you can get paid and no rules need be broken. Ultimately, you'll have to decide what you are comfortable with.


text:
How do I ask / inform my supervisor that I need to take a day off?
I just recently got a job as a research assistant over the holiday (which will later turn into an unpaid independent study project). Before hiring me for the job, my supervisor asked me if I would be taking a week off for vacation during the holidays. I told him no. However, for Christmas, I recieved (as a gift) tickets for an afternoon weekday show of an expensive stage production. The show is about an hour and a half from where I live so I would need to take most of the day off. I will be informing my supervisor via email about this. How do I inform him/phrase the email?

"Hi Alice/Bob, can I take a day off on ?"

XX,
I was just given a surprise gift -- tickets to a show in YY City.  It would be thrilling to go -- any chance you could spare me on Thursday?  Because of the distance, it would mean missing the whole day.  However, I'm free all day Saturday.  If you like, I could come in then to make up the time.
(however you like to sign your name)
Please feel free to adjust this as needed.  For example, you can make the tone less breezy and more formal if you want to.

There is no answer for your question. It totally depends what kind of relationship you have with your supervisor. In my case I have very friendly relationship with supervisor and a text message is enough to inform him about this kind of minor issues.

My guess is that if it were that simple for the OP, s/he wouldn't have asked.... // Glad you hear you have this level of comfort with your advisor!


text:
If I haven't had a response to a request for recommendation letter a month before applications are due, should I contact someone else?
I have two profs that would make great references for me since I worked closely with them on some research. I emailed them 2 weeks ago (which was nearly 6 weeks before the application deadline). I heard back from one of them immediately but still haven’t heard back from the other. To be fair, it was the day before the holidays. I sent him a follow up a couple of hours ago. This is a professor who has always responded back to me within a few minutes. Still haven’t heard back. The application is due in less than a month and I’m really panicking I’m running out of time! If I need to find someone else, I don’t want to give them short notice. So should I contact someone else today?
Another question, I’m not really sure if this other person would be an appropriate reference. I worked with her on a research project (the same project I worked with the other professors on). She’s not a professor (which is fine) but I didn’t work all that closely with her on the project. I helped her out with a few specific tasks, but the other references would definitely be better able to evaluate me. I know you can’t tell me if she would give me a good reference, but does anyone else have a similar experience with getting a reference from someone you only worked with briefly on a project?
If I do ask her, what should I say in the email on such short notice (and since we aren’t that close)?

Contact the second person anyways, but continue to try and get the slow-responder to get the recommendation to you.  This might mean extra work for you, but having backup options tends to be a safer bet.  Good luck!

I assumed you need only 1 reference letter, in this case a good action plan in my opinion would be:

Contact again the missing professor in a more pushy way (e.g. by phone or in person) if possible and show to them the importance of this letter to him. There could be a number of reasons for his delay and in my experience, he may have forgotten or failed to give due importance to that. Thus, it is always better to make things clear and fight for your goals. Do not mind to bother him as it have a critical importance for you.
Contact other professors and create a possible list of references. Send some emails asking if they would be comfortable on writing reference letters for you. State clearly your goals and deadlines (if possible, give a tight deadline for them) and show how important it is to you.

You can take a proper decision based on their answers. Remember that one not so strong reference is better than none.
Good luck and keep pursuing your goals.

No, do not follow the first suggestion.

Could you clarify why you believe that ? @AndrésE.Caicedo

I didn't mean in any way for him to be unpolite, just to let the professor know the importance of this task. I had some experiences with professors that simply forgot that I've contacted them before or didn't put my request deadline as their priorities. When I contacted them politely by phone and told them the request was very important to me, they answered promptly and without bothering with it. But I think it has a bit of a cultural aspect too.

Your approach may be perceived as rude. Send the professor an email, indicating the deadline and that you have not heard from them yet (and yes, have a back-up reference writer in any case). As you indicate, you do not think your suggestion is impolite. And in some cases, it may not be felt as such. But if all communications on the matter have been by email, the phone call or visit in person call may feel intrusive. Plus, there will not be any written record of it, which is probably what the professor will need instead to keep track of it.

If you are bounded by deadlines or in the hurry of getting the letters please do contact someone else.
If its okay for you to spend some more time and wait for the letters then I think that's what you should do.
Getting letter from people who know your expertise and your work flow is really important. Also it does make impact in future.
cheers!


text:
Question of authership. Belonging to two institutions. Are both required to be mentioned?
I have a question about my affiliations on my article.
I belong to two institutions, A and B (both are schools).  I have a regular position at A (so I receive a monthly salary from A). I also have a non-regular position at the other shcool, B.
This time, I am contributing to an article as a co-author at school B. Do I need to mention school A as one of my affiliations? (I did not do anything at A. I did not use any resources at A. )
One more question. Do you think school approval (review) at A is usually required ?

@Roland "That can only help you in your annual performance review."  That's a good point, thanks!

The answer to your question will very much depend on the specifics, but I will try to give some rules of thumbs.

Do I need to mention school A as one of my affiliations?

This depends to a large extent to the relevance of you being affiliated to A to your publication. If the subject of your publication and/or the venue where you want to publish are even partially related to A's activities, then: yes you should present the affiliation.
Let me give an example: suppose you work as accountant at an oil company, and in your spare time you have done some environmental related research. While you might consider you to be unbiased, and the daily activities of your work do not have direct environmental aspects, it is still important for the readership of your article to know that you are professionally affiliated to an oil company. They can then decide for themselves whether they want take that into account when reading your article.

Do you think school approval (review) at A is usually required ?

This depends very much on the rules that A has in place for their employees, and on your own agreements with A. Read your contract, any other agreements and regulations and ask your boss (or any other relevant person who has the authority to make decisions about this).
Some companies have strict regulations about publishing. You can try to make deviating arrangements, but if you do, make sure they are clear and they are in writing.

Yeah, in my case, A and B are both in the same field, though they have different foci. I think my view is (somewhat slightly) biased by A. I will mention A. Thank you very much.


text:
Number of publications "are enough" for US PhD admission in CS?
How many publications as an undergraduate are enough if one's goal is to do a PhD at a top US school?
Of course quality is important, but assuming all are "high enough" quality (e.g. in a reputable well known conference but not world class) should a student try to publish more given that he can?
Maybe publishing in different sub-fields shows one has a broad understanding of the field?
For example one can publish a paper with a professor as his Thesis, and 1-2 extra papers with other professors working with them as research assistant.
Is there a point where one has "proved" he can do research and there is no need to publish more? Will graduate admissions view 2 vs 4 publications much more positively?
Edit: I am talking about Computer Science

It really depends on the discipline. In my own discipline, i.e., philosophy, no one expects you to publish before entering a PhD programme. However, a publication cannot hurt your CV.

@Arturo Belano Thanks! Added a clarification.

@Nate Eldredge I am not asking how many are needed, the questions is more like "is it worth doing more than 1-2"? Maybe I am better relaxing and playing video games since it won't make a difference if I have 1-2 VS 3-4?

@New_GUY: "I am not asking how many are needed."  Then please edit the title of your question, because it sure sounds like that's what you're asking.

@NET_GUY: Admission at top US universities is extremely competitive.  There isn't any fixed number that will guarantee admission, so more would always be better (assuming of course that they are good papers).

I don't understand.   You are not asking how many are "needed" but rather how many are "enough"?

@GEdgar Sorry I can't explain it better... Maybe it would be more clear to say, how many publications the top 10% of applications have.

I have no idea what the "top 10% of applicants" means, except perhaps "the applicants that were offered admission".

Is there a point where one has "proved" he can do research and there is no need to publish more? — I believe that's called tenure.

Publications are not generally a requirement for admission to a PhD programme.
The top applicants (i.e. the successful ones) will have usually demonstrated their ability to conduct research. This may be demonstrated in their own statement of purpose or their recommendation letters. Publications are another similar happy by-product of the research process.
I do not think it is wise to compromise on quality by rushing to publish lots of papers at this stage.
If you can publish one well developed paper, that will certainly be well received by an admissions committee- provided that all your other "components" are also very good (I assume you are talking about US PhDs, so these components will be things such as GPA, GRE scores, recommendation letters etc).
Publishing (for example) four rushed, poor papers in different subfields may speak to your lack of focus or attention to detail- not good qualities in a PhD student. At this stage, quality over quantity is best.


text:
How common is it in papers to contain copied paragraphs from previous papers?
How common is for good and high quality research papers to contain 1 or 2 paragraphs of copy paste from previous papers of the same researcher?
Is this common or it's a red flag of low quality research?
Edit: 2 papers from the same researcher tackle different problems. To solve each of these problems some sub methods are used. On paper A sub methods 1, 2 and 3 are used. On paper B sub methods 3, 4 and 5 are used.
Sub method 3 is copy pasted (exact same explanation) on both papers A and B. The newer paper (B) makes no reference to paper A. The papers have nothing in common, aside from using this sub method.

Please specify a bit where in the paper that copy-and-pasted text is found. For example, if it is in the conclusion, or in the description of experimental goals, I would consider it rather questionable. On the other hand, if two papers on very closely related topics more or less (i.e. with only small changes) share parts of their related work, I would not be surprised, and if two papers produced on the basis of the same project contain a brief description of the goals and type of the project in two short paragraphs or so, I would almost expect these to be absolutely identical.

When I worked at a sequencing facility, our customers often asked for detailed description of our protocols (for the Mat&Met section of papers). We had pre-written paragraphs for our standard protocols, and they probably ended up in several papers.If the method does not change, I don't see the point in artificially rewriting a perfectly good description.

You say 'copy paste'. \What about paraphrased text, would it be (effectively) plagiarism?

If you are copy & pasting, you should be referencing where you originally published it, as people may be curious to see this paper. And if it is ever so slightly different, this needs to be clearly communicated. It's not about rewriting it or making it easier for you to write, it is about communicating with your readers.

As a user of papers I strongly prefer copy-paste to rewrite for the sake of rewrite. It takes a lot longer to see if there are any differences in the method between the papers if the descriptions use different words.
That said, it seems to me that the later published paper should reference the earlier one.

Actually, in a lot of papers you find an empty section ("method as described in Xxx et al"), which is then followed by you looking for the referenced paper, which references yet another one, and soon you've lost two hours. Copy/Paste + referencing seems a pretty good choice to me!

This is a form of self-plagiarism though. A reference is not sufficient.  It should be made clear that identical text was previously published

How about "method as described in Xxxx et al. The description is repeated here for reader convenience."?

@innisfree where was it indicated that the same author wrote both?

@TheGreatDuck The question says "previous papers of the same researcher".

@innisfree I think that really depends. If I'm writing several lab reports in a row for the same program, chances are high that if the experiments are similar that I'll take the previous lab report and delete the irrelevant stuff and fill in with new material. I'm specifically referring to the part about steps in doing the experiment. Granted, those were not to be published as they were just assignments as part of a lab class. However, the point still stands that it being reused has nothing to with plagiarism. If the papers are meant to go together, I see no reason why one cannot do that

(with a reference of course)

The later paper should only reference the earlier one if it contains a novel description of a method. If, as is common, it contains simply a description of a method that is described in a third reference, I do not see a problem.

This does not answer the question which asks about how common this is. Your answer does not address how common it is, only that you support the practice.

For methods, probably very few people notice or care about copy pastes (for the reasons said by others here, although I more often see "as described", which can be a pain).
That being said, from a strict definition, self-plagiarism is still plagiarism. Referencing something and quoting it word-for-word are two very different things. Plagiarism software should pick it up and self-plagiarising is technically academic misconduct. Outside of methods I would consider it the reddest of red flags.

Just to clarify - using the same text again is not plagiarism. It is not indicating the source of the text that makes it so.

@Floris for plagiarism, the copied (or paraphrased) text and material needs to be clearly highlighted with quotes. Omitting those quotes can be serious academic misconduct. Sorry for the nitpicking, but I'm sure not all readers find this obvious.
That's probably less true for self-plagiarism or for standard boilerplate.

@Blaisorblade yes of course. Thanks for clarifying

This came up a number of years ago on a technical program committee for a computer science systems conference.  If I remember correctly, someone identified a page or two of text that was identical to another publication, people objected, and the paper was rejected over the self-plagiarism issue.
So it does happen, and some people do care.
That doesn't mean it isn't relatively common, and also, the amount of repeated text here was more (let's say 2 pages out of a 12 page paper), not just a couple of paragraphs.
But it is clearly a gray area, and something that some people feel more strongly about than others.  I think if I were reviewing a paper with that sort of overlap, either with another published paper or a dual submission to the same venue, it would be a red flag, and I would push back.  But if it was just a couple of paragraphs about background or methodologies, I wouldn't reject it out of hand.  Some might.
My own approach is to start each paper anew, unless I'm extending something explicitly (conference->journal).  Call that rewrite for the sake of rewrite if you like, it's definitely safer.


text:
Extremely stressed person
I have a classmate who is extremely stressed up. He has a 4.0 GPA and is an exception student. But seems like he is pushing himself way too hard and this is very obvious if you talk to him. He is very frequently showing up awake the entire night.
He doesn't have any heath issue (at least he says so) aside from overworking himself and missing sleep constantly without taking any breaks the entire year.
Will professors give a great recommendation letter to such a student? Won't they be concerned about his ability to handle stress in the long term? Talking to him makes you wonder how long it will take him to collapse.

It might make you wonder, but a recommendation is not the place for "what ifs" and suspicions, it is the place to state things about a person you actually know.

Doesn´t really matter if this lifestyle will influence any recommendation letters because it is very probable that this will lead to burnout / mental heatlh problems or even physical health problems sooner or later...

@JayFromA But will it?

@NET_GUY Depends on the extend of doing it but like I said, it´s probable. The "missing sleep" part alone can be enough to cause health problems on the long run.

I do not think professors will take his personal life into consideration as long as he has great academic performance or social skills if needed for whatever he is trying to get reference letters for.


text:
Low undergraduate GPA. Strong research profile. Any chances of getting into the likes of MIT, Caltech, etc?
I am a final year undergraduate student of Mechanical Engineering from Nepal. I plan to do master's in aerospace engineering (propulsion systems, to be specific) at a prestigious university in the US. With virtually zero scope for aerospace engineering research in our country and little to no guidance from experts, I have been involved in many research projects for years and have already got a number of papers published so far. I hope to add at least three more conference papers to my profile before I apply to any graduate school.
But the problem is that I am going to have a very low CGPA, anywhere between 2.4 - 2.7. I have heard that many schools don't bother to look at anything else in an application when they see a low GPA and reject it straightaway. Does that mean I have no chances at all? I have been working very hard to offset my low GPA and make my resume look better than those of most other applicants.
MIT, for example, recommends a minimum of 3.2 as a guideline. What does that mean for me?
Please respond.

One of the problems you probably are going to have is funding. Do you have your own funding? Or funding from the government of your country? If you have no funding source, you probably need to apply for PhD because most master programs do not provide funding. This is why I believe your question is a duplicate of the question I linked. If you do have your own funding, please update your question and I'll retract my  close vote.of duplicate question. Thanks.

My undergrad gpa was about 2.5, got my PhD (with full funding) few months ago from a top school in my field (Engineering). When i applied for MS, I had about 5 publications. When I applied for PhD, I had about 14 publications. It's doable!

@Rüdiger even better, MIT doesn't offer my field :)

@TheFireGuy if an engineering uni like MIT doesn't offer your field, it must be a field in which perhaps 10 or 15 people work

In the US, yes. Internationally about 50. Close estimate by the way! Good job :)

@TheFireGuy Where did you get your MS degree? Please let me know the details so I can decide what things I need to do before I apply.

@scaaahu I can't afford full funding. I will have to look for assistantships.

Then my advice is to apply for PhD. The linked question should be helpful to you.

I did not do my MS in the US. Remember very few people work in my field. The thing is, publications do help a lot in certain fields. But, still you can't blame a prof. for being hesitant not to fund you (even when you have few publications), if you do not have good "grades". After all, grades do matter to admission, grad committees etc. My advise is try to contact different profs and if possible attend conferences nearby to meet them in person. When you explain things in person, people tend to understand your situation. Keep applying and best of luck!

@CoderInNetwork, I do agree with your point, to some extent. However, I still believe that each case should be treated separately!

As The Fire Guy noted, there is a chance, but as it stands you haven't provided enough information to give you an informed answer.  In my eyes, a solid publication record as an undergrad can balance the poor gpa.  Undergrads are rarely expected to have publications!  However, if those papers are not in respected journals or in major conferences in your field, their help is questionable.  If they are in journals or conferences that are of dubious quality, they will actually hurt your application.  If this is the case, I have confidence stating you have absolutely no chance at all.

If a department doesn't say they have a minimum GPA, then there is certainly some chance of admission - many departments make it a point to review all applications in full and refuse to use individual cut scores for any element of the application. And yes, some departments use cut scores anyway so if you don't meet their (often unpublished) minimums your app gets tossed.
Is it worth applying? If you can spare the ~$100ish US dollars, sure - the worst case scenario is you don't get a yes, and you'll most likely get a nice generic rejection email telling you how many applications they had this year and they just can't take everyone who's great.
The more important point is that you have only mentioned a few of the world's most famous institutions on planet earth at this time in history. All of them receive many hundreds of applications, and some applicants with no obvious negative marks, letters of reference from leading professors at that institution, and a masters degree from another famous institution (sometimes even that same place) and/or a bachelor's from another famous place...still do not get accepted routinely. If you'll only be happy with the least likely outcome, you are most likely to be disappointed. So if it's potentially a good fit for you and you have the extra funds, you can certainly apply - but I don't think it's helpful or wise to make it Plan A.
I suggest you apply to the famous places just to satisfy that drive to do so, but dig deeper. Look for places with a more specific fit to you with 2-3 people who are doing work that excites you, look for places you'd have an awesome opportunity at even if the institution name isn't a Hollywood-shorthand for smartypants (as the Batman Lego movie says, "Harvard for cops", or in this case "Harvard for engineers"), and search for places that also offer a variety of expertise that you think is interesting even if it doesn't seem like a perfect fit at first (if you get in you might find on a visit that there is something that just blows you away you never thought about).
The process has a serious random component, and there is no well-ordered universal ranking of students, faculty, programs, departments, or institutions - i.e., there is no true best-worst that everyone agrees on. You just need to find one "yes" that works for you and your goals. Don't talk yourself out of aiming high, but don't let other people's marketing get in the way of your long-term happiness. Be strategic, apply broadly, work hard, have back-up plans, and you'll be ok.


text:
Advice and etiquette for building up collaborations
I'm going to start a tenure-track position in fall. I'm planning to start some collaborations with some researchers that are a lot more senior than myself, who I met at some conferences and with whom I have joint interests.
When contacting them regarding a visit, should I straightaway offer to take care of the travel/accommodation costs or should I postpone that question for now?

This depends on the field. In some fields there is no need to physically meet in order to perform the collaboration, and some of these  senior scientists might in fact prefer not to visit at an early stage.

You sound very optimistic that having met a senior colleague at a conference and having a desire to work with them, will automatically lead to a collaboration. You should consider that they may have other constraints on their time, and may not be able or interested to engage in more collaborations.
Before jumping into the details such as travel arrangements, you should first find out whether they are interested in a collaboration and, if the answer is yes, how they would like to go about it.


text:
How to find DOI for article in JSTOR?
I have a link to an article on JSTOR.  I can't see the DOI mentioned.  Is there a standard way to find the DOI?  Do all articles on JSTOR have an assigned DOI?

may be there is no doi to this article as it is quite old?

Not every journal is DOI indexed. Even papers in recent issues of the Journal of Anthropological Research don't seem to have DOIs.

The article in question above can be found via this DOI.
NB: I was able to find it via following the JSTOR link above, going to the journals webpage, going to the year/volume/issue and read it off the URL of that article. Most often I am under the impression it is a JSTOR choice not to show DOIs rather than articles not having been assigned one.

DOI's are managed by Crossref.org.  For each DOI, Crossref's database has a redirect to the current location of that digital object, and the owners can move things around and update the Crossref database as needed.  When you follow a link to https://doi.org/<DOI>, the crossref servers redirect this request to the current location of that paper.  As mentioned in another answer you can lookup an article in the crossref.org database to see whether or not it has a DOI.
Recent articles have typically been assigned a DOI by the publisher, and most publishers put the DOI on the title page of the paper so it's easy to find that way.
Older articles were originally published without a DOI, but the publisher may have assigned one after the fact.  If the publisher has not already assigned a DOI, then JSTOR may have assigned a DOI to the article that will point to the copy of the article in the JSTOR database.  This is a service offered to publishers by JSTOR, but not all publishers use it.  Thus not all articles in JSTOR have DOI's.
It appears that the article you linked to has not been assigned a DOI by either its original publisher or JSTOR and thus has no DOI.  I can't find the article in the crossref database.  The "stable URL" that you linked to is probably the best way to link to the article.

+1 for JSTOR's stable URL, which serves the basically the same function as DOI.

Try viewing the page source and then search for "DOI". Worked for me.

Amazingly, that works even for the article given in the question.

Yes, you find a DOI but it does not resolve. E.g. with the article from the question https://doi.org/10.2307/3629752

you can search for Crossref DOIs at search.crossref.org (disclaimer: I work there) but if not found it doesn't mean there is no DOI. We house the metadata for 87 million DOIs but there are other registries too such as DataCite, KISTI (Korea), etc. Crossref is a good start though!

You could try to query Crossref (of it are not to many articles); http://www.crossref.org/
Just enter the title in the search box


text:
Using a similar application essay I used before
I recently submitted an application essay for a pre-college program, and was accepted. I'm particularly proud of my essay; I put my best into it.
Now, after the pre-college program, I intend to apply for one of the institute's degree programs.
I've written an essay for the application. Most of it is rewritten, but it does have a lot of similarities (the intro paragraph is nearly identical).

Would it be considered plagiarism for using my own work? If not, is it still frowned upon if there are many similarities, and could impact my chances of getting accepted?

I understand that it is likely that answers are individual to each institute, but I'd like to know what the general answer is.
I've read some sources that claim students applying to multiple schools use very similar essays for all (assuming the prompts are similar), only changing statements specific to each school. So, maybe it is alright that I do such a thing? But then again, this is the same institute I'm applying to.

It's not plagiarism.  These essays are not published.  Thank you for asking, though!  It's good to be careful.

However, this site is not for undergrad questions, so I will vote to close.

@aparente001 - Discrimination against youngsters? :) Sorry, though; I didn't realize that undergrads couldn't ask (even though there is a bachelor tag). Is there a site that does cater to undergrads?

@aparente001 - Thanks for the answer. For secondary (well, more likely primary) opinion, I contacted admissions, and they said that they didn't mind, as long as it followed the prompt.

Sorry, I didn't make the rules.  Also, sorry, I don't know another site to point you to.  Note for future use, it is sometimes possible for an undergrad to ask a question in a way that will be useful to people other than undergraduates, and such a question is likely to be accepted and answered.

@aparente001 - Alright, thanks. Should I delete the question (given it violates a rule), or is it worth keeping?

Sorry, I don't know.  You could search for that on Academia Meta and if you don't find it you could ask.  On the other hand I have occasionally deleted a question or an answer I had written, and nobody seemed to mind.  I guess it comes down to whether you think the Question and Comment might be useful to others.  I think maybe yes.  Which is partly why I wrote my comment for you.

@aparente001 - OK, I'll keep it. Thanks, though!

If the question was to re-use parts of an essay in a grad school application, I believe that would be on topic here, but I don't know if that would be as useful as norms between grad school applications and undergrad applications might not be very related.

@aparente001 This site is for undergraduate questions that can be generalized to graduate courses. Please, don't vote to close automatically. See also this meta discussion: http://meta.academia.stackexchange.com/q/3300/20058

@SirJony - Sorry!  I am clearly not an expert on finding this fine lines.

I honestly think there is nothing wrong in applying with a similar work of yours. And I think it, well, for all the reasons you've mentioned yourself, starting with the fact that it won't be considered as plagiarism, since the primary version of it is yours as well, ending with the fact that the work is sent to the same school.
However, depending on whether you've made only minor changes to it or not, you might adjust the work a bit more, or expand it, or formulate some thoughts differently for the sake of back-up (say, if there is a chance that any of the members of the admissions know or have previously seen your primary work - then they might think that you weren't generous on the effort and,therefore, don't perceive the opportunity to be worth working more on that work or on additional ideas). After all, you're the creator, so it is still up to you to decide upon all the abovementioned things!

Plagiarism of one's own work is a contradiction in terms. It does not exist. However, duplicate publication is rightfully frowned upon, unless made explicit. Parallel grant application is allowed by some funding bodies and disallowed by others. Even if disallowed, the same application materials may be reused later. Parallel job or stipend applications are taken for granted, and it is perfectly acceptable to reuse the application materials. Whether it is also prudent is another matter. Applications are much more likely to succeed if they are tailored to the position.