text:
Getting sealed transcripts from a German university
I have a degree from a university in Germany, which I'm now trying to get evaluated by an institution in another country. This institution requires that the transcripts be sent directly from the university in a sealed envelope. Unfortunately, it seems this isn't something that German universities are wont to do (or at least not my former one): I have been told that presenting my original Urkunde (diploma) is enough, which is completely false in this case. Is it possible to get a sealed copy of my degree certificate and transcripts from a German university, and, if so, how/where do I do it?
Attempted solutions

I have been in contact with the Prüfungssekretariat (something like an "exam office"), and they told me two weeks after I first asked them upon me asking them again that they "currently don't have access to" these records and that I probably should have a copy of my records be "beglaubigt" ("notarized").
I then contacted someone at the university in charge of Beglaubigungen, who offered to do so if I send them a copy. However, they have not responded directly to my request to have them sent in a sealed envelope directly to the institution in question.
I called the Zentrale (central hotline) and asked what I should do in this situation. I was then told I should contact the Studierendensekretariat ("registrar").
I have literally spent the entire afternoon trying to call multiple different numbers for the Studierendensekretariat and they do not answer the phone. I have sent them an e-mail, but, based on my previous experiences with them, I do not expect them to answer timely or even at all. I am currently over 1,500km away from the German institution in question, so dealing with this in-person is not possible. While I was at the university, the only way things could actually get done is by going to the office you need during their opening hours (which are only a few hours and only on certain days) and then waiting for an extremely long time. Sometimes, the office would close before you get a chance to talk to anyone†.

† Yes, this is a lot of circumstantial information, but this is, according to my experiences, fairly normal for German bureaucracy. Hopefully, however, these details will at least be useful to show at least what I've tried which hasn't worked.

Just to make sure: Is the issue that you need a sealed transcript (i.e., a copy of your transcript with an officially notarized seal) or a sealed envelope (i.e., one that has provably not been opened by anyone except the sender and the recipient, in particular you)? If it's the latter, the university is under no obligation to do that (and it seems like an unreasonable thing to insist on). It might also help if you stated which country the other institution is in.

@ChristianClason the institution in question is in Canada, but I've had similar requests in the UK as well. In fact, I got sealed envelopes containing transcripts very easily from said British university. I have been in contact with the Canadian institution and they have confirmed that they have gotten what they need from German universities before, so this isn't entirely unheard of.

That might be something to mention, then -- "this is the way it's being done" is a strong argument in any bureaucracy... (It'll help if you can name the universities, sometimes that'll appeal to local pride.) In any case, the international office (meaning the actual person) is indeed your best bet.

@ChristianClason yes, I saw the comment but also saw it got deleted and so I deleted my now-obsolete response as well. No worries! I'm rather happy to see that this thread is so far staying professional and to the point.

Another thing that might help is contacting your former Masters advisor and explaining the situation to them. Professors are usually quite keen on getting their former students placed in foreign institutions, and they a) are on site and b) may have more leverage over the administration. (Or may not; but possibly could ask their secretary to send the envelope.)

@ChristianClason sadly, those days are long behind me (which isn't directly relevant to the OP but of course makes things even more difficult).

Have you tried asking them for permit a39? On a more productive note, if they worry about you tampering with the transcripts, some (or at least mine) german universities allow for verification by digitally signing the transcript or by handing out a code which allows people to view it directly on the university homepage. This would kind of be the digital equivalent of what the other university wants, so they might accept it.

I had similar bureaucratic adventures recently when I had my Finnish PhD degree evaluated for a US visa. The evaluation agency didn't consider the sealed envelope requirement a big deal, because they assumed it's a standard practice for universities everywhere.

If the Prüfungssekretariat does not have access to your transcripts, something sounds off. They were the right people to ask. Next step I would take is to contact the head of the Prüfungskommission. In case they are unhelpful, there are students in that commission as well, which are there to make sure the rights of students are protected and their needs are met. If the head of commision is unwilling to help, contact one of those student members and let them present your case.

Sounds like it's time to try and argue with the evaluating institution to relax their requirement!

Have you tried contacting the International Office at the university? They probably have to deal with this sort of thing fairly frequently for visiting or international students, and may be able to help you sort through the bureaucracy. (They should at least be able to tell you who exactly you need to call to get the transcript issued!)

Unfortunately, the responsibilities of the "international office" seem to be held by the Studierendensekretariat... so you can see my problem here...

Yes, the Studierendensekretariat may be the one who actually has to issue things, but the International Office may be able to tell you what you need to do. You might be missing out on some alternative method (maybe there's a web form somewhere, etc.).

Okay, I will try to find the persons directly responsible for international studies and try that... thanks for the tip in the meantime.

@errantlinguist Do try -- the Studierendensekretariat is a huge department of the administration, and even though the internation office is part of it, the people working there can have completely different ways of helping.

This is a common problem. I graduated from an international masters program at a German university. You are issued with a diploma and a signed copy of your academic record at graduation and the expectation is that you provide a notarized copy to whomever requests your transcripts.
I had to make copies of the transcripts, along with a prepaid envelope addressed to whatever institution was requesting my transcript, and mail the entire package to the graduate office of the program in Germany asking them to sign and mail directly to the requesting institution.
The graduate advisor obliged a couple of times, while letting me know each time that it's not a tradition in German universities to send transcripts and that this wasn't part of his job.

If you can contact your academic advisor or director of undergraduate studies, you could ask them to mail the transcript themselves with a sealed university envelope.

"your academic advisor" - I don't think such a thing exists in German universities. Or maybe I'm not seeing the analogy to something that does exist here? Likewise, I'm not sure a "director of undergraduate studies" would have access to any student's transcript - that's usually something only the exam office is priviledged to. Of course, the student might be able to fetch the transcript from the exam office themselves and then bring it to that "director of undergraduate studies" (or whatever is equivalent) and ask them to send it.


text:
How to get letters of recommendation when you work alone
There are a number of questions on this site about lacking (good) references from people who know your work, but none seem to address a situation where you lack references because there never were any people who know your work: Due to the nature of the department and especially the projects my supervisor is responsible for, I work entirely alone. This means that after one year I have no one whom I can say "knows" what I can do. Whom do I turn to for references in the case that I work entirely alone and I'm too new for anyone to be familiar with me?
On a given job application site, for example, I have to provide not just one but three references. In my case, even getting one is uncertain because my supervisor is only aware of my work on a superficial level. My previous degree was finished 5 years ago, so I doubt that my supervisor from back then could provide much of a reference, either. The job I held before starting was also for only a very short period, as was the one before that...
Addendum 29/10/2017: I am leaving the department, so I do not have much time to cultivate any possible sources of recommendation letters; I have to make due with the relationships I currently have, which are very few.

As you may understand, if the sense of your "working entirely alone" is such that it leaves you with no recommendation-letter writers, then (long-term) you truly need to change that... because you need letter writers to get jobs, if not to do the literal work itself. One may reasonably view "cultivation of letter-writers" as an artificial add-on to the work itself, but it is in fact a necessary task.

Some journals/editors offer to write letters of recommendation when you have published there. Basically everyone who knows something can write a letter - the letter writer doesn't necessarily have to be your supervisor or collaborator.

Really? Nobody knows what you’re doing? You don’t give seminar or conference talks? You don’t publish papers? What are you doing, then?

@JeffE basically firefighting for huge problems; see my other posts on this SE.

@DSVA Read and you shall find.

@errantlinguist I don't think you should expect those who help you to go through your other posts in order to understand your situation.

@Mark writing an explanation of "what I am doing" would require likely 5+ comments' worth of text and is not relevant to this question, hence me summarizing with "basically firefighting for huge problems" if people don't want to read the previous questions. I see no offense taken on anyone's side other than your own. If, on the other hand, you are referring to my response to DSVA, the answer to their question is in the OP, so they are simply lazy.

I think the elephant in the room is that, in your case, your issues finding letter writers is merely a symptom of a much deeper problem. You not only fail to collaborate in your research (which, in many disciplines, would be a severe career hindrance all by itself), you appear to not even communicate what you do sufficiently. I understand that situations come up where collaboration with the faculty in your own university simply does not happen, but if literally nobody (inside or outside your institution) is aware of what you are doing and how it is going, then why are you getting paid a stipend to do it in the first place?
So to answer your question:

This means that after one year I have no one whom I can say "knows" what I can do. Whom do I turn to for references in the case that I work entirely alone and I'm too new for anyone to be familiar with me?

Change this immediately, not primarily because you don't have somebody to turn to to write a letter, but because you will not have success on the job market anyway if nobody knows what you do. Network internally and externally. Give talks. Go to conferences. Actively look for collaboration opportunities. If you are just one year in, you have plenty of time, but now is definitely the time to start becoming more proactive.
Note that a letter writer does not necessarily need to be deeply embedded into your daily work to write an effective letter. If an experienced researcher has broadly observed what challenges you work on, how you work, what your best research contributions were, etc., they will be able to write you a letter. You don't need to meet with a letter writer multiple times a week - just seeing you give a department seminar twice a year and chatting occasionally in the hallway may already go a long way towards being able to write a letter, if no more suitable options present themselves.

Thank you for the helpful insights: it seems my interpretation of "knowing" what someone does is different from that of others because I do talk to colleagues informally about my work; I'm unsure if that means they "know" what I'm doing or not. I will not have many years to fix this, however, because I'm quitting... hence asking for recommendation letters.

@errantlinguist Usually, the interpretation for "knowing the work of someone" is knowing from a professional point of view, that is, someone knows your work when they have read your papers, collaborated with you or discussed the details of your work with you.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to impress a teacher so you can get a PH D despite bad qualifications?
how do ask for a teacher to let you do a Ph D thesis despite your qualifications are bad ?
a) invent a new formula (even a useless one)
b) to solve an unsolved hypothesis : this is the hardest option
are there any other options ? i would like to do a thesis i have a master degree (FISYMAT) and a degree on physics but my qualifications are 'bad'  1.45 of 4
what can i do ? i have had some ideas and formulae that could be interesting :http://vixra.org/author/jose_javier_garcia_moreta
but they are not groundbreaking :( so what should i do ?

You might search for vixra on this stack to see how it tends to be viewed in this community.

A teacher won't just let you do a PhD thesis - you need to go through the application process.  Do you mean to say your GPA is 1.45? If so, your chances are very low unfortunately...

Since you have a Master's, I would have a chat with your advisor about your current options.  I wouldn't upload more to vixra, which has a bad reputation.

well can not publish into the elitist arxiv.org :( so i have to upload there

also which forum would be a respectable site to speak about math ? i am currenty at physicsforums.com

@JairTaylor: Do you want to say that this is true all over the world?! In my country, your teacher could just accept you without such process.

@user111955 Ah, I only know the US process.

@JoseJavierGarcia I'm not sure about physics, but MathOverflow is the most respected Q&A forum for math.  But it's not a place to put out original research unless it's in answer to a question.  Since you have a degree, I'd think you could get endorsement for the arxiv via your institution.

Surprised that you found physics SE but not the maths SE? https://math.stackexchange.com/  MathsOverflow is better and if you do well there, people might be able to provide options and suggestions.

Sorry, I see you are in Maths Overflow and have 4.2K in the Maths SE group. Are you able to build a strong portfolio of issues that you have tackled and argue your professional mathematics competency? Why are you not performing as well in MathsOverflow? Some professors do respond and give you complex problems to solve to demonstrate your skill.

I don't think inventing a useless formula will help.

Btw, it is far better to produce mathematics PDFs via LaTeX than Microsoft word, if only because that's the "current industry standard". In particular, non-TeX documents already raise a small red flag in the minds of many.

also i am forty years old :D now is this also a handicap ?? :D

I will assume in my answer that when you say "qualification" you mean GPA. I am not familiar with the University of Granada - all my experience with academia has been in the US and Europe - so keep that in mind.
As already noted, PhD candidates are not expected to produce a work which will shake a field to its core. I see it more of proof that you can think critically and creatively, and that you have the stamina to deal with a major research project. In that way, it is more about jumping through hoops than creating your magna opus...
The application process in most Tier 1 universities has at least two parts. First, most universities have a "graduate school" which will make sure that all candidates meet some set of general requirements. Second, each department will usually have their own additional requirements. This is handled somewhat differently in  different schools, but in my experience the graduate school will generally use a GPA/GRE/LSAT cutoff, while the department will take a closer look at subject grades, letters of recommendation, statement of purpose, etc...
With a low GPA I think you would have to do a few things as faculty support on its own might not be enough:
1) Take a good look at how the universities you are considering set GPA requirements. Do they consider cumulative GPA or graduate school GPA? Do they take all your years in school into account? Do they look at courses relevant to the degree?
2) Do well on standardized tests. What weight is given to standardized tests? Would a high GRE/LSAT/GMAT/etc weight out a low GPA?
3) What role does faculty have in this process? Can you find a professor or two in your preferred schools with whom you could work? I find that strong candidates usually reach out to faculty before applying, but faculty do not necessarily have the power to push a candidate through the process. So this can help, but it is not the deciding factor.
Finally, make sure that your motivations for pursuing a PhD are clear. Do you want to pursue an academic career? Research? Consulting? Private sector? It is vital that you find a faculty mentor who understands and is sympathetic to your motivation (not just your research question). It is even more important that you know why you are pursuing a PhD. It is quite different from a masters in content, context, and outcome.
Good luck!

so what should i do ? i could send all the PDF with my ideas to some teacher and hope he/she gives me a help ? how i could convince him/her to proof that i could perorm a thesis if the math are not so higher ? , could i submit my PDF to teachers to see that i can have some new ideas :( and wait for a response ?

Isn't Granada in Spain? Also, apart maybe from the UK, there seem to be very few universities in Europe that have dedicated graduate schools.

If you do send ideas to anyone, rather than discussing motivation and, I hope, why your standardized test scores are higher than your GPA, I suggest sending a carefully selected small set of your very best ideas, not a general dump.

and not out of the blue!

I agree with Patricia and Fabio: be careful what you send and don't just mail your work to people. I would suggest doing some research on the faculty you want to reach. Have a look a their resume, their publication history, their LinkedIN profile, etc... First ask for an informational interview and ask questions about their program, university, research, living in their city, TA/RA opportunities, and the like. Then follow-up and ask if they would be wiling to look at some of your work and explain your situation. Make sure that you have a good story and be ready for questions.

Science isn't about groundbreaking discovery, those are sci-fi movies.
Real science is about boring consistency. You don't need to solve the Riemann hypothesis, you need to demonstrate you can churn out a few good enough papers a year with minimal supervision. Include some funding proposals in there, bam MVP :)
Unfortunately for you, grades are a reasonable proxy measure for boring consistency.  The reasoning being: good grades imply that you can understand new content and have the discipline to put the hours to get a decent grade doing boring work unrelated to your interests. So you would need to demonstrate with papers, which is significantly harder (and takes a while), and this idea will backfire if the papers aren't good enough...

I would argue that grades in undergraduate exams are a terrible proxy for  research ability. However, in the absence of other information, they are what academic staff and funding bodies have to go on, and when inundated with applications they make a good filter.

That's why I said they indicate 'boring consistency'. If you can do well in boring (almost) unrelated courses, you probably have enough discipline to do well in research, even if you are not brilliant. That's what I meant.

My experience is limited to certain countries in Europe.
I was in a similar position when I was applying for PhD's. My grades have never been good, so I had to set myself apart in other ways.
My advice would be to talk to your master's supervisor about trying to publish something. That would help prove that you are capable of doing research and developing it into a story.
I would also (as others have suggested) recommend researching PIs in your field of interest and sending them e-mails. You don't need to wow them in that email, just introduce yourself, say what your masters topic was, say why you want to do a PhD in this field, and then ask if they have any openings. Even if they don't, I found that many people were happy to pass me on to someone who did have money for students, simply because they could see that I was interested.
Good luck!

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


text:
Has there ever been a discussion about the nationalization of academic publishing?
I have read a few articles in the last couple days about several problems with academic publishing. To me, the primary critique is that oftentimes, research is funded with public money, in public facilities, then researchers sometimes have to pay the academic publisher to have an unpaid, third-party peer-reviewer to scrutinize the work, before the academic publisher "publishes" the work, primarily electronically, behind a paywall; they then sell subscriptions to institutions and organizations at high rates, and put individual articles up for grabs for about $50 an article.
To add to it, their profit margins are outrageous. To provide some context, according to here, the consumer staples sector profit margin 5-year average is 6.5%. The energy sector is at 4.9%. The health care sector at 10.4%. The financial sector is at 15.8%. The wildly profitable information technology sector is sitting at 21.5%. And, the most profitable sector tracked by the S&P 500, the real estate sector, has a profit margin of 34.7%. So, what are the profit margins for the academic publishing sector? According to a New Scientist article, their profit margins sit around 40%. Which seems to be taken from this journal. New Scientist calls it the most profitable business the world.
And there is something about keeping mankind's knowledge behind a paywall that doesn't sit right with many researchers. Personally, as a hyper-curious layman, I FREQUENTLY am forced to shell out money for articles that my curiosity will not allow me to do without. And, all you have to do is Google "academic publishing money" to get scores of articles scourging the academic publishing industry, so it made me think, why not nationalize academic publishing?
When I Googled "nationalizing academic publishing" on Google Scholar, all that came up were papers talking about nationalizing science, which is a completely different thing. You can collaborate with other nations in your science projects and still peer-review and publish them via a federal academic institution. The first government agency that comes to mind where this academic publishing department could be located is the National Institute of Standards and Technology. I really feel like somewhere at some point, this conversation had to come up.
So, my question is there any literature (preferably recent, i.e., within past 10 years, but if not any literature) on nationalizing academic publishing.
To be clear, what I mean by nationalizing academic publishing is creating a single, federal government publishing office who would peer-review and publish ALL academic works in the country, then provide that information free to the public. It could be paid for by taxes on corporations, alcohol, cannabis, sporting events, or by fees paid by academic institutions.
The answer I am looking for is the one that includes a well thought-out discussion of the pros and cons of nationalizing, the structure of such an organization, the costs involved, and discussion on obvious issues such as how to prevent undue government influence.

Pushbacks against the most profitable publishers is certainly a thing, but it's not clear why nationalization would be a better solution than, for example, funding non-profit publishers such as SciPost. Publishing run by a government agency would likely become inflexible and eventually go against the "by scientists for scientists" preference of e.g. DPG. And by the way, there actually used to be a "The Journal of Research of NIST".

I am not here to argue the merits of this. I just want to know if it has been previously discussed. As for your critiques, NIST and NIH, among others, operate just fine. That being said, I can think of a TON of potential downsides, such as undue political influence. This is the reason for the question. I am hoping people smarter than myself have openly discussed this pros and cons of this option, or even how this entity would be organized/staffed/etc. I am not suggesting this is the only, or even the best solution. Again, I don't know, thus, the question.

Similar question: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/129763/why-does-academia-still-use-scientific-journals-and-not-peer-reviewed-government which was closed as a duplicate of: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86686/why-are-journals-used-in-modern-scientific-academic-research

Note that some funders, like the US NIH (possibly all US federal funding? I'm less familiar with other sources) require all papers published with their funding to be publicly available within 12 months after publishing; other funders elsewhere have similar or stronger mandates. Publishers still make money on this model, of course, but it mitigates your complaint about having to pay for articles as a reader. Preprints are also widely available and are nearly identical to the "published" equivalents, if they exist.

How about just encouraging faculty to put their papers (without worrying about refereeing or not) on-line, on their "home pages", at their universities? This seems to literally "publish"... although dodges the gatekeeping aspect that has become somewhat entrenched in academia world-wide.

@BryanKrause While appreciate these prior questions, neither of them suffice. The one that was closed, wrongfully I believe, is basically arguing that a government funded method of academic publishing would be better than our current model, and the answers tend to point out bunch of what I believe to be minor issues. Like New Scientist said, they are letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, and they ignore the fact that the profit margins for this industry are among the highest, if not the highest in the world. My question is specifically asking about pre-existing literature on the topic.

@BryanKrause The reason the original answer does not answer my question is because it is only asking for the utility of peer-reviewed journals, not the pros and cons of a government-funded method versus private sector method. Both of those answers touch on the gripes I have made, but neither points to existing literature on the topic.

@paulgarrett If I understand correctly, the issue with publishing everything on a home page means that massive amounts of material will be published and everyone will have to read everything. Knowing something has been peer-reviewed means it, at least, passes the smell test.

@BryanKrause as far as the consolation prize of having the research available after a year, that's no good. Cutting-edge research needs access to the most up-to-date information. I am not saying that nationalizing academic publishing is the answer. I don't know what the answer is. All I know is charging $59 an article, even if the research was privately funded, should be criminalized.

@JimmyG., I'd think that tenured faculty at genuine universities have already passed enough gates and gauntlets, and have enough personal reputation at stake, that they'll not put crap on-line. And, if we can all just calm down and not pretend to judge each other by paper-count, there'd be less incentive to generate "stuff", in any case. And-and, nowadays, journals specifically say to referees that it's not their job to ascertain correctness, but, rather, fundamentally, "appropriateness" for the journal. Prestige/status stuff.

@paulgarrett I would agree with everything you just said, but I am not a part of that world, so I understand my opinion matters little. But, everything you just said makes perfect sense to me.

Why nationalize? Feel free to make your own based on governmental funds.

Which country should do the nationalizing, and how will other countries respond? Nationalizing isn't free. Why should the taxpayers of country Y subsidize research in other countries?

@MaartenBuis I think you misunderstand. Nationalizing academic publishing would simply create a central federal government publishing department or agency that would peer-review and publish all of the academic literature in the country and makes that information free. Not sure how it would be funded. I can think of a couple ways. One  would be taxes. Another would be with fees paid by academic institutions like they do now. But it would NOT be a single country publishing all of the world's literature.

How would publishing the results from international collaborations function? Most publishing in my field goes through international associations. I would consider it a bad thing if these were broken up and we withdraw back within national boundaries.

What you propose would create new big bureaucracies. Of all the things a politician could do, do you think this is going to win the next election? So now you know why politicians have not made that decision...

So it is undesirable both from the position of the scientists and the politicians.

"New Scientist calls it the most profitable business the world." Let's put a bit of context: the strongly despised daily mail is actually the publisher of New Scientist, which often has interesting articles.
On the other hand, the highly revered scientific publishing is born from the mighty intelligence of Robert Maxwell. He created journals with "international" in the name, so scientists, the most gullyble people on earth, believed in the importance of these journals. He is also the father of the infamous Ghislaine Maxwell: did her father's contacts have nothing to do with her life?

Nationalization is not necessary because government owned publishers already exist.
Peruse a list of university presses and you will find many which are publicly owned.  There are other government-owned academic publishers, such as

https://www.publish.csiro.au/
https://www.nist.gov/nist-research-library/nist-series-publications
https://crsreports.congress.gov/Home/About
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres.htm
https://ec.europa.eu/info/research-and-innovation/strategy/support-policy-making/support-national-research-and-innovation-policy-making/research-and-innovation-paper-series_en
https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-products
https://www.iaea.org/publications

The main issue is that these publishers have limited funds.  The presses of public universities in the United States have undergone a substantial contraction caused by budget cuts.
Naturally, many government owned publishers focus on research topics of interest to governments, like policy and economics.  They also have a range of quality control processes, limitations on authorship, and limited prestige.
If, for some reason, you want literature, here are some examples:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=0&q=decline+of+university+presses&hl=en&as_sdt=0,11&as_ylo=2018

What does this have to do with nationalizing academic publishing. Having a select few government owned pressed is NOTHING like nationalizing academic publishing. Is the argument, because some university presses have been underfunded recently, I should stop looking into the nationalization of academic publishing? But again, I am not here to argue the merits of it, but every issue everyone brings up are relatively trivial issues that could be fixed with robust laws. Surely Russia or China has nationalized academic publishing. Has it never even been considered here?

One can argue that most “society publishers” are pretty close to the governmental funded publishers. Funny enough most societies are not able to figure it out without the help for-profit publishers (party showing the limits of non-profits and academic societies)

@JimmyG. It is up to you to explain the difference between what exists and what you want.  "I am not here to argue the merits of it" I do not believe you.  Personally, I would be totally fine with nationalization of for-profit publishers.  Nationalization is much more effective in industries where there is a large barrier to entry, like railways.  Governments have very low barriers to entry for academic publishing.

@AnonymousPhysicist I really am not here to debate the merits, because I don't know the merits or demerits. I know that I can easily think of fixes to what seems like everyone's seemingly knee-jerk reactions to immediately associate anything government with bad. My hope is that someone has studied this possibility and has numbers of what it would cost, what the structures would look like, how to maintain scientific integrity, and, hopefully, even case studies of countries that have done this. I'm a curious layman, I have no ability to debate this issue.

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


text:
Enough for Grad School?
I just finished my 3rd year in a combined pure/applied math program at a Canadian university.  I have been leaning towards pure math, but I'm not sure if I'll have done enough to go to grad school for it.  I've taken Real Analysis (single-variable, metric spaces, basic function spaces and topology), a standard course in complex analysis, and an introductory abstract algebra course (mostly rings and fields).  I've also of course done the basics in single/multivariable calculus, linear algebra, probability, and ODES.  Next year I was planning on taking measure theory, general topology, mathematical logic, and group theory, as well as some applied courses.  In addition I'm planning on working through Munkres' Analysis on Manifolds this summer.
Will this suffice for grad school, or do I need more higher-level courses?  Also, I've never written the Putnam or any other contests, or did research.  I'm probably not going for top grad schools, but would an average school admit someone on the basis of coursework, or do they expect more evidence of research potential?
EDIT: My question is specifically about my math background and math grad school, I don't see how this is really answered by the other question.

Regarding your request for a more personalized assessment: only somebody who knows very well both you, your situation, and the situation of the departments that you are applying to will be able to give you a more precise answer than the linked question.  Such highly personalized assessments do not fit well with the SE model of reusable questions and answers.

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


text:
Has anyone had any experience with Editsprings?
I received the following email from a company called Editsprings:

Dear Prof./Dr. XXX,
It is our great honor to write you this email. Here is an invitation about working as a part-time editor from EditSprings. This is a remunerated position. Your responsibility is to help non-native English speaking scholars to improve their English writing and the overall quality of their manuscripts.
Our company, EditSprings, is an academic service provider established in China, and we hold offices in Wuhan China and Boston US. Our aim is to help Chinese researchers to publish their academic research papers in SCI, EI and SSCI journals by providing services such as translation, English language editing, academic editing, peer review and journal recommendation. More than 500 editors/reviewers, working as doctors, engineers, scientists or university instructors for reputable institutions across the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia and so on, are collaborating with us to help a continuously increasing number of researchers to overcome their English language barrier. Meanwhile, our company has helped more than 10,000 Chinese researchers to publish their papers in diverse English academic journals.
Programs for your choice
You can work on one or more programs listed below.
Language editing: revise the manuscript for language-related aspects only, such as grammar, vocabulary usage, spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, etc.
Academic editing: revise the manuscript regarding academic logicality, content organization, result analysis and language; make sure the manuscript meets publication standards
Peer Review: assess the overall manuscript and provide opinions/suggestions to each section; evaluate the manuscript’s suitability to the author’s intended journal and recommend three journals most suited to the manuscript if possible
Journal recommendation: assess the overall manuscript based on criteria like research significance, novelty, preciseness and language quality; recommend three journals most suited to the manuscript
If you are interested in this position, please fill up the following registration form and send us your CV. Also, please specify which program interests you the most.
If you want to learn more about our company, please feel free to consult this website, and here is the link: https://www.editsprings.com/en/
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or concerns. We are looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Thank you very much.
Best regards,

As the email says, this company is retributing researchers for providing some help with manuscripts for their customers. Honestly, I wouldn't mind getting paid for reviewing papers/helping to improve the quality of papers, since I review papers for free all the time. However, I don't know if this company is legit/reliable. Has anyone had any experience with them?

It should be spam, be careful.

I am also curious about this, have you followed through with them?

@HermanToothrot no, I sent them an email asking for some more information and they never replied back

Just received an email from them but I immediately thought it was a scam


text:
Big List Request Of Comparisons To The 2019 College Admissions Bribery Scandal
Dear academics and scholars,
Since the primary purpose of the Stackexchange academic community is suppose to be creating a reliable internet resource of easy to access facts;  this "Big List" request for similar cases from around the world should, in my humble opinion, be "compelling" enough to be expanded upon.

Questions asking for a "big list" of examples, illustrations, etc. Ask only when the topic is compelling, and please do not use this as the only tag for a question.

Recently, in the US;  the "largest-ever" college admissions bribery scandal was exposed in the news.

"The case is the largest of its kind to be prosecuted by the US Justice Department.[14]"

How does the scale and scope of this particular  case compare with these types of scandals in college admissions exams in other "third-world" and European countries?

Without a lot more detail this is hard to say. First, we don't know how you want to compare them. Second, determining how common anything like this is anywhere is very difficult. This scandal itself only came to light due to a somewhat convoluted set of circumstances. Actually telling how common something is is not easy. Also, cultural differences may be relevant: what is bribery in one culture may be not treated as bribery in another.

It may not be the largest -  as others may not have been caught yet... Typical journalist hype...

How does what compare?

One thing that you seem not to realize by insisting with this question is that around the world, in particularly in Europe, there's almost no "college-culture" as in the US. In particular, most of the universities have low-admission barriers because many countries think that education is an investment for the country. This essentially means that most of the sufficiently motivated students actually enter in their university of choice and, moreover, the entrance fees are reasonably low. Why would anyone want to bribe in such conditions?

Oh boy, this was so cute when they mentioned it was the biggest scandal in the US history. It happens around the world more frequently and at a larger scale. Here is a brief summary of these kinds of scandals around the world.
Here are a couple from my home country of India. This one was at a large scale in the state of Madhya Pradesh called Vyapam scam. It was big enough that they made a wiki page for this. I remember it was in the news for too long when it happened. "It involved scamsters including politicians, senior and junior officials and businessmen systematically employing imposters to write papers, manipulate exam hall seating arrangements and supply forged answer sheets by bribing officials." Wikipedia
Another one from same Indian state called Dental and Medical Admission Test (DMAT scam).

"biggest scandal in the US history" of its kind. I'm pretty sure Watergate was a bigger scandal.

Many universities accept all students who apply.  At these institutions, nobody pays a bribe to be admitted to the university.

we call it a "fee" instead.


text:
I like my supervisor but not how he does things; What do I do?
I've already got a little experience doing self-led research but not in doing setup for the domain in which I work. I really enjoy talking with my supervisor about actual research topics, but I don't enjoy the workflow he suggests.
For example, there is a particular software development toolkit I've been told† to use, but it's constructed in such an unorthodox way as to be unusable outside of a certain development environment in a very specific way (in Eclipse IDE) and isn't compatible with development conventions which are nearly ten years old (Maven). I only found this out when it was too late and have had to jury-rig everything as I go, and now, due to having thrown together a bunch of weird stuff together without testing it properly (having been given the green light by my supervisor, respecting his decision that it would work fine), I've spent six months collecting data which is messed up to the point of being unusable. My supervisor was also surprised, admitting that he didn't expect any sort of problem like that (which is why he recommended throwing the said things together).
I like and respect my supervisor but can't help but feel the whole project has gone sour thanks to "just doing it the simple way" which has turned out to be unbelievably complicated and now it's very likely I spent all that effort for nothing. What can I do when I respect my supervisor's research advice but don't like doing things the way he does? — What kind of "workflow" can I form where I take his research advice but still do things "my" way... or at least to know what implementation advice I should take with a grain of salt? Obviously it works well for him, so I feel even more disillusioned that I'm the one with all these problems. I feel that just saying "no, your software doesn't work" would not be constructive, because it does seem to work... for him.

† Being more sure of the nature of the working relationships at the department, I now feel that I could have politely declined at the time without offending said person as long as I was confident and produced results.

Welcome to adulthood, where not everyone will do things the way we'd like them to.

Are you trying to decide whether to ignore your advisor's advice in future?  Whether to pretend to follow it, but then ignore it in practice?  Whether to switch advisors?  Or are you trying to decide how much to kick yourself for having followed your advisor's advice? // I'd like to hear your thoughts regarding what you learned from this experience and how you hope to avoid these pitfalls in future.

@aparente001 I really have no idea what to do. I could post a ton of related questions right now, e.g. "should I throw everything away and start from scratch?", "how can I convince my supervisor that doing stuff his way might not be best?", "I just wasted six months of my PhD; What do I do now?"...

What can I do when I respect my supervisor's research advice but don't like doing things the way he does? -- You can say no. But you already know that, so I don't think that's your real question. I suspect your real question is "How do I move forward from here?"  I recommend editing your question accordingly. (I would seriously suggest restarting the coding project from scratch, lessons learned.)

I apologize if I expressed myself in a hurtful way.  I'm going to delete the offending comment now, because it really wasn't my intention.  I do hope, though, that when you're ready, you'll consider my list of options, cross out the ones that are non-starters for you, and add some more that may occur to you.  I find that brainstorming is often the best first step when one is feeling stuck.

One important part of being supervised is to learn to know when you are likely to know better than your professor. You can expect him to know the broad field better than you, and be a good judge of whether a broad strategy is likely to work, or if it has been tried before and failed.
You should be the better expert in your particular dataset, instrument, etc. You are the one working with it, you know the problems and the technologies, you are the one that calls the shots.
I have had to reject all sorts of ideas of my supervisors because the data was too noisy, too biased, the idea would solve the wrong problem, or they misunderstood something. Sometimes, this lead to a second round of ideas that corrected the original problem, or me ignoring the idea and going on with my choice. (In fairness, I have also rejected ideas that were actually good, but that is the cost of learning). With time, we all learned what each other is better at, my supervisor gives me more advise on the areas that I need, and I can judge better when the ideas are applicable.
There is one sentence that raises a concern:

having been given the green light by my supervisor, respecting his decision that it would work fine

I don't know how your workflow is, but I know that my supervisor is not familiar with the details of my code. His way of finding bugs is by looking at the results, and comparing with what he would expect. If there is a mismatch, he will ask for further analysis to either bound the problem, or convince himself that the results are correct.

First, research doesn't come with a specification with all details ironed out.  In most cases, many things are undefined and unknown; hence, it is called research.  We could change direction at any time, especially when we realize there is a better problem or the problem at hand is rubbish.  Consequently, the code in academia is pretty bad, poorly designed, and ad-hoc as compared to what you find in the industry; although codes in the industry can be one bowl of spaghetti too.
On your question, think about the problems at hand.  Try to plan them out as best as you can.  Collect evidence to justify the strength and weakness of a given tool/solution.   Bring these pieces of evidence to your supervisor.  If he/she is rational, he/she will either side with you or give you better reasons to not go a certain way.

Supervisors are not superhumans. Their knowledge and experience might fail them like yours does you.
If you are doing a PhD, now is the time to start being an independent researcher.
I tend to expect more independence from bachelor students than I probably should, but I still give them way more guidance than I receive myself.
Yes, sometimes you would need more guidance. But in a PhD thesis it is not your supervisors job to know beforehand how exactly everything has to be done. It might be for a bachelor thesis (but leave a good student freedom, if you trust they can handle it). It is to some extend for a master thesis (but already here is normally some venturing in the unknown included). But definitely not for a PhD.
In a healthy environment it should be perfectly fine for you to go to you supervisor (regularly) saying something like "I tried/researched what you suggested but it is not a good option because of A, B and C. I did some more research and here are options D and E that I found. I would prefer to start with D, because it sounds more promising and Someone et al. used it in a comparable setting. Are you okay with that?"
This behaviour should be a strong positive in your supervisors eyes, not a thread against their "supervisorness".
It did not sound like your supervisor brought you in this situation knowingly, neither did they so far say anything blaming you on it, as I understand from your post. The blame and the possibility they will (knowingly?) fail you again is something you seem to suggest yourself. If that is not the case and there has been fighting and name calling, the situation is of course rather different.

Sounds like you feel your contributions are not valued, which very well may be true. When we look at how our actions are or are not being addressed it can be easy to loose sight of your true goals.  If you feel the situation is unhealthy have a face to face conversation away from any snooping coworkers and break down how you really feel. He will respect you more for it.


text:
How to respond/reply to a reviewer who doesn't seem to "get" the paper
I've receiced double-blind reviews of a paper I submitted a while ago. However, it seems that only one reviewer actually seemed to "get" the point of the paper: They showed flaws in my work but also appreciated some parts and the review was in general very helpful to me.
The others, however, complained about many things which seem nonsensical to me. For example, they complain that paper is "difficult to read" but simultaneously complain about me corroborating my empirical results with seminal studies from 20 years ago: They seem to either be  ignorant of these works and their significance or just don't understand this kind of analysis even though it's in a big section with lots of graphs (i.e. a lot of time was devoted to it)... or they just don't care enough to try to understand.
From their tone and the fact that these reviewers missed main contributions even though they were enumerated in the submission metadata, I fear that the last possibility is probably the main factor: not caring or not taking interest in the paper.
How do I address these reviews which are negative of my work but are in fact not very "good" reviews in themselves due to a lack of expertise and/or caring? The paper has not yet been either officially accepted or rejected but has very poor evaluations from all but one reviewer; There is a very short response period in which I can address the reviewers' points in writing to the reviewers themselves (I think it's to them, at least), but I'm unsure of what exactly to write to them.

Related, at least partially a duplicate: Responding to a reviewer who misunderstood key concepts of a paper

I had the title previously mentioning the reviewers being possibly "ignorant" or "uninterested", which more accurately summarizes the question but might be inflammatory; should I roll it back?

To be precise, duplicates are not about the similarities of the question but of the answers, so changing your title changes little. The best you can do is to look at the suggested duplicate, see what part of your question it already answers and then focus your question on the parts it doesn’t answer (and mention the duplicate for reference).

Okay, thanks for clarifying. Will look at it ASAP

I like the answers you got.  It is not clear what you are asking by "how to respond". No one can write the resubmission letter for you here.  Go and dismantle the referee points one by one.  Or go to a specialized venue as for another comment by you suggests that perhaps the journal might be not the more appropriate.  Something very interesting on " ir spectroscopy of conjugated polymers " can be totally not interesting for a general chemistry journal, and surely out of the scope on a " dyes and pigments" one.

Given the length of some of your sentences - perhaps the reviewers lost the thread of what was being discussed.

Having a reviewer fail to understand even the general point of your work is a frustrating, but common, experience. Do you have a chance to respond (i.e. has it been returned for revision, or just outright rejected?). If you do I would attempt to explain, in calm, measured language each point made by the reviewers and why it doesn't make sense and hope the editor sides with you rather than them.
You might like to consider however, that if the reviewers are failing to understand, it is likely that a large section of your audience will similarly fail to understand. In other words, if the venue is broad, then you will benefit most if you write in a way that will be appreciated by the broad audience. Otherwise the editor may reasonable argue that the paper isn't suitable a their "broad-audience" journal, and would be better suited to a more specialised publication.

Yes, there is a formal response period, which is why I'm asking explicitly how to "respond" to them (as a formal procedure). The fact that they don't understand is indeed alarming in itself, but the venue is a very large, general purpose one with many subgroups: This means that although there is definitely someone who can understand this paper, it is possible that it was given to the "wrong" people (as opposed to when submitting to a smaller, more focused venue).

@errantlinguist just respond in a way to be understandable to reviewer. I always follow RCS guidelines for such a situations

@errantlinguist: if the venue is broad, then you will benefit most if you write in a way that will be appreciated by the broad audience. Otherwise the editor may reasonable argue that the paper isn't suitable a their "broad-audience" journal, and would be better suited to a more specialised publication.

@IanSudbery thanks: that last comment was also quite helpful. I added it to the answer because it definitely addresses "how do I respond",

Advice here is to think about what made him/her take a wrong turn.  Put yourself in a hasty reviewer's shoe.  Did you misuse a word? showed a confusing figure or made a remark that cause him/her to jump to a wrong conclusion?  If you can find these 'triggers', then you respond by saying you believe the misunderstanding is due to X,Y and Z.  Revise the paper accordingly, and explain to the reviewer the correct story of your paper.

If the referees -- especially more than one -- are not "getting" the paper, then there are just a few possible reasons why this can happen.  In order of least like to most likely:

The reviewers are not expert enough
The author is submitting to the wrong journal
The author is not telling the story well enough

The first is rare, but not rare enough.  The third is very common.
The proper response to the first two, but for different reasons, is to resubmit elsewhere.  For the first, you'd be looking for a journal with a better referee pool.  For the second, you're looking for a more appropriate audience.
The proper response to the the third, bluntly, is for the author to write better.

Yes, those are valid claims, but this doesn't actually answer my question, namely on how to respond.

@errantlinguist,  I'll edit

I'm sorry, but you still don't understand; read the question again, especially the concluding paragraph. It's about a response to the reviewers.

@Keelan yes, that would address the question directly, but this answer sadly doesn't include that, hence my original downvote given that the question had been edited to make "response" less ambiguous. I've now removed the downvote after their edit because it's indirectly useful but still doesn't answer the question directly.

You talk of the referee pool as if it's a fixed set of people. In my experience, a good editor will search the appropriate people and invite them as reviewers, even if they haven't reviewed for the specific journal before. Unless the paper is completely out of scope for the journal, which, in a well-managed journal, would lead to a desk rejection anyways.

@lighthousekeeper -- exactly -- RARE.  That said, there are bad editors, and bad journals.


text:
How do I deal with Academic dishonesty when the university does not have an Academic Policy?
I am a junior student at a private engineering college. The amount of dishonesty I have seen in the last 3 years is tremendous.
There has not been a single assignment which hasn't been plagiarized by the entire class. Usually a couple of people do it early and everyone just copies it from them. This is not even considered cheating but rather treated as real work. Some of my friends think that this is the way assignments are supposed to be done because this is the kind of culture they have heard about from their friends in other colleges and even from lecturers' description of their years in college. It does not end here.
I have seen the entire class cheating in exams. Almost every time, there are people who are carrying the entire book in their pockets to cheat from. They generally get the textbook copied to A6 or A7 pages. Numerous times I have seen invigilators either actively passing around answers or mostly just letting everyone and anyone copy answers from each other.
Our course grades are decided 80% by the final exam and 20% by mid term examinations. I have seen very few(hardly 3-5 course instructors out of the 36 courses I have taken so far) course instructors who did not manipulate the 20% mid term grades heavily. Each semester has a certain number of labs and these grades are also rigged.
There have been exams when every single person in the university knew the question paper in advance. It was reported in the newspapers but was plainly brushed aside by the university management.
This has effected the quality of my education to an unusual extent. It is very lucrative to cheat when you realize that you are failing the course and a single peek can pass you. I do not think I will be able to stand against this alarming tolerance for dishonesty any longer.
It makes me question the authenticity, if there is any left, of my degree and the value of my education. Can I do anything at all to change the status quo? How should I go about collecting facts around this and document my findings as something concrete that will likely create an impact?
Edit:
I should make an important distinction between my university and college and clarify that my university is an Affiliating University. There are 128 engineering colleges in the state, both public and private, that operate directly under it. If you were to pick say 5 colleges in this sorry mess that attract the most employers, my college will certainly be in that list. Yet, that says nothing among the quality of the jobs offered which are both low-paying and disappointing.
I have sat and talked about this with my parents and professors. A lot of answers suggest transfer or a fresh application to a different institute. I am, however, reluctant to go for either of these for a variety of reasons.

There is a serious lack of such institutions in India. I have talked to a lot of people from all parts of the country and the academic dishonesty is omnipresent. I would not be surprised if a link is ever found between academic dishonesty and bureaucratic corruption. A handful of institutions which still uphold the standards of formal education (by my perception) do not have undergrad programs or they are terribly tough to get in.
The financial burden of a fresh application or more expensive tuition at a different institution will be huge. Most of the scholarships offered in India are based on GPA or Entrance Exam scores, the rest are only for applicants of certain castes. Neither do I boast phenomenal test scores nor am I from those castes.
Physical classrooms are a very inefficient method for delivery of information and ideas. A fair share of what I have learnt comes from the freelancing and the internet. I have varied interests in a lot of subjects. For that reason, I have rarely been doing anything for longer than a month or two. I have been a huge supporter of OpenCourseWare movement and MOOCs for a long time.
The only reason I have not dropped out yet is because I do not know what will I do if I drop out and secondly, I find college an amazing place to interact with a lot of people.

Don't walk. Run. Transfer somewhere else.

@JeffE transfers do not exist at my University. Even then if you are to judge from the number of employers a college attracts, my college attracts a lot. It ranks among the best colleges in the state. This is rather an example that things are much more worse at other colleges and that colleges that attract the creamy layer from entrance examinations have an edge with the employers.

transfers do not exist at my University — Then submit a fresh application to somewhere else. — It ranks among the best colleges in the state. — Move to a different state.

@Volis: "It ranks among the best colleges in the state." - you have been witnessing severely fraudulent behaviour by several of the parties involved and in several parts of university life for several years, and yet you assume the indicators reported or collected in some way to establish a comparative ranking are trustworthy?

In your comment above you state that your university "ranks among the best colleges in the state", while in a comment below you state that "the university does not have any credibility left". How could it rank as one of the best and why trust or, even, pay attention, to that kind of ranking?

I can only support what Jeff says. For anyone knowing the situation in your university, a degree from it would mean nothing.

If there is as much academic impropriety going on as you say there is, people in the profession and in industry will know about it and the likelihood is that graduates of this institution will have a poor reputation and therefore poor employment prospects.  Even if you can't transfer, you should still give serious consideration as to whether it's worth throwing another year away on this school, or whether starting again somewhere else might be better.

Sounds like extreme case and very difficult situation. Assuming the situation is in India based on link in OP's post.
To answer your specific questions:

Can I do anything at all to change the status quo? How should I go
  about collecting facts around this and document my findings as
  something concrete that will likely create an impact?

I would advise to save yourself a lot of time and frustration and not challenge the established system. I agree with previous posters who also advised against this. If the system is complicit and the practice exists in spite of widespread awareness of it, then you are facing an uphill battle that should not be where you need to invest your time as a student.
An exception might be a situation that nobody (or only a few accomplices) is aware of, in which case whistle-blowing might yield results with minimum adverse impact for you. As it stands, even if you step forward, you will likely face retribution and will lose more than you will gain, except a clear conscience.
Instead, I would suggest to speak up through your own example and action: take whatever knowledge you've learned with you and move to another place where you can enter a more reputable institution. Once you are safely established in another university, write an (anonymous) but public, open letter to the administration of the "problem" university outlining your reasons for leaving in relation to the cheating practice.
To make it count, you might consider publishing your letter as an anonymous (under a pseudonym) letter to the editor of a more progressive local newspaper in the city where this university is located, in print and/or online (especially online, where it cannot be forgotten the next day). Public shaming can be a powerful weapon, especially in the East/Southeast Asian cultures...
What you are describing does indeed sound like a waste of your time in a formal education environment.
Therefore, I'd say to cut your losses while you still have time, enroll in a better school (transfer credits from this school if you can) and finish your degree there.
In the end, this is about principles, and what your education and future is worth to you. It is easiest to think short-term: "hey, others are still studying here and seem to be graduating and getting OK jobs, why should I be different?" Such short-term thinking might give temporary comfort.
But the long term cost of such near-sightedness will be high: foregone opportunities, low reputation of your degree, limited job prospects, and a different self-image and identity as a result. To me these factors seem important enough to seriously evaluate other options.
Even if a better choice may be more difficult in the short term (finding/moving to another area and enrolling in another institution), the long-term wisdom of such a decision is not to be underestimated. It will pay dividends with better education, better career prospects, and a brighter future. You will thank yourself for it soon enough. Good luck!

From the link in OP's post, it looks like this is in India. I would have to agree with the suggestion to transfer. However, from some past posts (here and elsewhere), the academic dishonesty does not seem to be all that uncommon, so I am not sure how much of a difference a transfer will make.

Those last 3 paragraphs.

There really isn't much that you can do to change the system, especially if it actively turns a blind eye to the issue. If that is the trend at your university over a significant number of past generations, the credibility of the university might already be damaged. That can hurt you chances with employers. If this trend is relatively new, the bad reputation will come, albeit hopefully well after you graduate.
You can do something how you tackle your education. You should try to learn more than you're required to pass the exams. Browse other programs' curricula and see what the differences are and then try to fill those gaps. Find internships to get practical experience. In other words, try to acquire much more expertise than your peers. Although a university's reputation goes a long way as a recommendation, in the end it is your skill level that defines your worth.

I have talked with various alumni and this trend is old enough. The university does not have any credibility left if I am to judge from the quality of employers it attracts. This makes me consider dropping out from time to time. If it will be only about my skills in the end, why pay tuition?

@Volis "transfers do not exist at my University — Then submit a fresh application to somewhere else. — It ranks among the best colleges in the state. — Move to a different state. –  JeffE May 16 at 17:56"

I do not think I will be able to stand against this alarming tolerance for dishonesty any longer.

I think what you are saying is that you are feeling yourself starting to give way and succumb to participating in the cheating at some level.
Here's why I think you should continue to resist the temptation.

I doubt you need to cheat.
Cheating would corrupt you and change you into a different person.


text:
Alleviating Dunning-Kruger effect without running into impostor syndrome
This is a question generally in decision making.
Is a balance between the Dunning-Kruger effect and the impostor syndrome possible for students? As a student one is generally graded on a regular basis, the marks may vary however, depending on the professor (at least where I come from). Is there a strategy to avoid the aforementioned two extremes or is academic life a balance act between both - occasionally hitting one or the other.
I'll give an example specific to my case: I have to decide whether to take a M.Sc. thesis in theoretical physics which will require me to do a lot of mathematics. It's interesting and I have passed math exams geared to physicists with (very) good marks, same for the lecture in physics which would be vital in this case.
Alas! Due to the (perceived) variation in the level of the exams I am not sure whether my knowledge is actually sufficiently deep to try. Especially as the real math (mathematics for mathematicians) results are not so good.
Simply: evaluations suggest "yes" while my gut tells me "meh I think you may be overestimating yourself a bit." (though my mind then responds "f*ck it all, do it just to prove you can!")

Is a balance possible?  Sure.  But what you actually want is to avoid them both.  Impostor Syndrome and Dunning-Kruger both start from a lack of self-awareness and an exaggerated fear of failure. The bitter truth is that neither you nor anyone else knows whether you can get an MS in theoretical physics.  The only way to find out is to try.

I think pursuing an advanced degree in physics is beneficial whether you are good at it or not.  Instead of considering how well you will perform, consider what you can do to increase the benefit of the opportunity to yourself or to society.

niveau -> level

@Eric: thanks, fixed it (brain-bug on my part). anon-phys: increasing benefit to oneself: sure. To others: that's altruism and I think it should be avoided at all costs.

You should also consider that the so-called Dunning-Kruger effect does not exist. See for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect/Archive_1#paper_critique

A very important fact to be aware of is that Dunning-Kruger is a a cognitive bias that is about skill, not intelligence or ability/capacity to learn. So for instance a person who is a terrible driver may not know they are so bad because of Dunning-Kruger, but none of this tells us absolutely anything about their ability to improve their driving skills with practice and dedicated effort. The Dunning-Kruger effect on the unskilled makes it harder for a person to become aware of their shortcomings, but it says nothing about what happens when they realize they do in fact lack skill! On the other hand, the effect on the skilled is that they falsely believe that what is easy for them is - or should be - easy for others too.
The Impostor syndrome, by contrast, is about how a person assigns causation/responsibility to their own achievements and abilities. A person with Impostor syndrome doesn't say, "I'm at least above-average", unlike the unskilled person under the effects of the Dunning-Kruger bias (who doesn't necessarily think they are great, but just believes they are above average). Nor does the highly skilled person with Impostor-symptoms say "this is just easy, anyone can do this" - because that would actually be acknowledging they are in fact good at something other than fooling people into thinking they are good at something! No, the Impostor thinks everyone else is wrong in thinking they are good or intelligent or did something great.
So while both poles of the Dunning-Kruger bias and the Impostor syndrome are commonly experienced in academia, they don't actually exist on a single continuum where one is forced to try to balance between them. Therefore you actually have the possibility to live relatively free of both of them.
How do you do that?
Um....I'm not sure that I know?
...well, I suppose the best place to start is taking some time regularly to expand your circle and be around a variety of people. Volunteer in community programs (not merely academic ones!), spend some time on a sport, etc. In short, don't spend 100% of your time with students and professors, because you will get a warped sense of what everyone else in the world is really like and you'll tend to get some really unrealistic self-images going. It's the intellectual equivalent of getting your idea of normal physical appearance from fashion/exercise magazines and television. You don't want to get your perceptions all pretzel-like, basically.
There are also specific things you can do - like if you think you are just an idiot and you are just fooling everyone, read some YouTube comments for awhile; if you don't get the feeling that you are actually smarter and more reasonable than a lot of people in the world, seek immediate professional counseling because that's a real problem.
You can also develop some strategies for "sanity checking". For instance, you have taken previous classes and did well, but I'm guessing some of those classes weren't easy and you could have done better in some. Based upon the available evidence, doing a thesis as you propose probably won't be easy. There is also no evidence that you aren't capable of it at all - otherwise you'd have failed all those other classes. Chances are, at your level of math there are no free points for putting your name on the paper - if you got a score higher than 0, you know an awful lot more than you realize.
So you face a challenge - or a threat - depending on how you look at it. If you are interested and excited and don't feel it's a ridiculous impossibility (like, say, being drafted by the NBA) then you have a potentially interesting challenge. Can you do it? It's a distinct possibility, sure.
So now I'd advise the usual general decision-making strategies - pros and cons, risks and Plan Bs if things aren't working out, etc. In short, what you can try to balance is between the extremes of mindless confidence (Leroy Jenkins!!!!!) and constant impending doom (I am so screwed...). And I think that is pretty much just the challenge of life in a nutshell, so if you can master it before you die (or maybe just within a few thousand lifetimes) you'll have done something pretty darn amazing.

Thanks for the clarification! It seems I had a garbled understanding of both. The idea about getting a warped understanding of the world whilst being with professors did not really cross my mind. In retrospective I completely agree with your suggestion. Thanks for the "Plan B" suggestion, too. I haven't thought of making those - in all the 6 weeks of long decision-making walks. Also: no threats - only different levels of challenges.

Learning is also a skill that can be improved with practice and dedicated effort. Arguably, so is "intelligence".

Nor does the highly skilled person with Impostor-symptoms say "this is just easy, anyone can do this" — Actually, they do say that. Being good at something easy doesn't count as actually being good at something.

refering again to wiki. The description there permits a "third person" interpretation. To be precise: "[...] dismissed as luck (having done more drill-exercises and having one or two very similar in the exam), timing(similar exams bunched together), or as a result of deceiving others (ta/examiner, rather subjective) [...]" (my additions). Specifying "everybody" as others strengthens the condition. I agree w. JeffE on the "easy" part. I've seen people fail en-masse in exams I thought were easy - I could never understand why they couldn't make it.


text:
Conflict of Interest statement for journal submission
Does anyone know what "Conflict of Interest" is? I am submitting a paper to a journal, and they ask me to attach a Conflict of Interest. Is it the same as Cover Letter?
Thanks in advance for any help!

A conflict of interest statement is revealing that you have some relationship with the journal, or, for example, its editors. It can also be a statement in which you reveal a relationship to some company or product that you discuss, analyze, or recommend in the paper.
Some papers are written as propaganda on behalf of individuals or products, for example. They want a statement that you aren't doing that, of if you have such a "conflict", exactly what is its nature.
A serious enough conflict can lead to rejection. But if your Mom is the lead editor of the journal, it is still a conflict, though it can be resolved by assigning the paper to someone else.
Anyway, there are a variety of things, but they mostly come down to the question of whether a careful reader would question your conclusions based on external factors other than what is actually written in the paper.
A cover letter  is just for introducing yourself and your paper to the managing editor with a bit of information that will help to assign the paper to an appropriate editor. Quite different.

Thanks Buffy for your perfect answer.


text:
I found a mistake in my manuscript that is already under review - what to do?
Recently our group has submitted a manuscript with me as the leading author. The manuscript is about computation and modeling, which involves lots of data analysis. Right now the manuscript is under review.
Today I just found that my manuscript has some errors and should be corrected, and some key figures should be revised, too. Even if the final conclusion wouldn't be affected, I still believe I should correct these errors. So at this moment, I really don't know how to proceed. Should I notify the journal and ask them to stop reviewing? Or should I wait and revise everything once I hear back from the journal?
I believe research integrity and honesty are critically important, and I hope I can make it up properly!

Are they just minor errors?  What do your co-authors think?

If your subject is math, this was already addressed on MO.

Your second paragraph is so eloquent, I would include it (before the questions at the end) verbatim in my letter to the assigned editor.

Tell the journal now. They can cancel the review process and return the manuscript to you for revision.
It's better to make your revisions now than after they have made a formal 'revise' decision, because it sounds like the errors are pretty major, in which case you don't want to waste your reviewers' time. Comparatively, if for example there's a typo somewhere with no material impact on your results, you can fix that during revision.

I agree that the description in the question sounds "major". Still, if the editor judges the errors to be sufficiently minor based on OPs more detailed description, they can also decide to go on with the review process and have it dealt with during revision. In any case, it's up to the editor to decide, so +1.

I disagree on one point: They should discuss with their co-authors, or at the very least let them know, before contacting the journal.

I just checked again. It is not that serious, but still needs to revise two figures. I will talk to the corresponding author. Thanks for your advice!

Don't worry about it for now. It is not published yet. Fix the problems during revision. It is unlikely your paper will be accepted as is. If so, I would be worried about the journal you are submitting to. Otherwise, during revision, fix the mistakes even if the reviewers did not query them, and inform the reviewers and editor of the changes so that they pay attention to your changes when you resubmit your paper. If the paper is rejected because of your mistakes, then too bad. Go to another journal.

I think it is difficult to judge from the information we have available whether the reviewers can reasonably be expected find out the mistakes by themselves. Maybe 'I would be worried about the journal if they do accept your paper' is a bit too harsh?

Perhaps you should re-read what I wrote.  I said a journal that accepts a paper 'as is', meaning no revision.  The only journals I know of that do so are predatory journals.

I agree with this answer. Perhaps the referees spot the problems. But either way: In each round of revision, one typically writes a letter to the editor and an answer to the referees. There, you can explicitly say that you found these errors,  and explain how you corrected them for the new manuscript.


text:
Pursuing a PhD in applied math with a large amount of student debt
I'm 36 years old and work as systems administrator and lab instructor for a computer science department at a small liberal arts college. I'm also an adjunct math instructor for a community college. I have 1 BA and 2 masters, all from Ivy League Universities. I started college late, at the age of 25.
I always wanted to have a PhD in applied math and do research, but after undergrad, I felt burnt out and instead chose to work so I could pay off my student loans, which did not go well for me, because the economy was terrible in 2012. Two masters and several jobs later, I landed my current position, which I enjoy more than any other full-time job I've had, but would still rather be a full-time mathematics researcher/professor.
So I began applying to PhD programs last December. I was offered two TAships. I'll be attending the one I chose starting this Fall. It's at an R2 university. I'm excited but I'm now experiencing cold feet, because my current student loan balance is about $150K. I'm now beginning to think getting a PhD isn't such a smart idea. In fact, if I don't pursue a PhD, I could pay off $65,000 in about 3 years.
My plan prior to last December was to work at my current job for about 3 years and then find a full-time professor position at a community college or technical college, or to find a full-time lecturer position at a four-year college. I'm thinking I should forego the PhD and stick to this plan instead. Sure I won't be a researcher mathematician as I would love, but it's the smart and safe option. And maybe I can pursue a PhD once my loans are paid off. I'll probably be in my mid-40's by then, but who cares. I don't have kids and I'm not planning on having kids. My girlfriend of 6 years, who I'll probably marry, is unable to have kids anyway.
Any thoughts/advice? Thanks.

Seems like you know the pros/cons well enough, only you can decide. My 2 cents: "[I] would still rather be a full-time mathematics researcher/professor" -- so would everyone else. Such jobs are insanely competitive; allowing your tab to accrue still higher to pursue such a long shot seems very unwise. OTOH, if there is a more realistic job you would like that requires a math PhD, that's a different matter. With two masters degrees already, though, that seems unlikely, most industry jobs in my experience consider MS + 5 years experience equivalent to a PhD

From my own perspective as an about-to-finish grad student I wish I had saved up more money before starting. I thought you can be a community college professor with a Masters. Before you do a PhD you should have a backup plan of what you will do afterwards. What if you don't end up finishing? Someone in my grad program started grad school in his forties. He didn't have much money saved, and he never finished after several years. When he left he was 50, with little in savings.

About being a full time professor... Do you have any data how much time you will be able to research and how many percent other duties? Maybe check it out.

First, taking on a large amount of debt at this point could be a big problem. However, several candidates for president are currently discussing forgiving student debt, a good thing to do in my view. It will be seriously discussed over the next 15 months, at least. It may be that your debt problem will get erased. Whoopie.
Second, spending your life doing something you aren't happy with is a terrible existence, but you say you are relatively happy now. There is no guarantee that you will land something better, but having already gone to ivy league places that seems like less of a problem.
Third, ignore any issues about age. You will (hopefully) reach 45 with or without your degree in any case. Graduating after 50 is an accomplishment, just as is graduating at 30.
My suggestion, worth about two cents, of course, is to continue on applying and see what happens. For a degree program in applied math you probably don't need to make an unbreakable commitment and can keep flexible as you see what happens, both in the general political/educational scene and in your life personally.
Of course your future spouse has a say in how she wants to live her life, so don't forget to factor that in as well.
But none of your impediments seem to be actual blocks. Be your best.

Thank you for your comment, Buffy! I really appreciate it!

My advice is to maximize income and reduce debt.  Not do more schooling.  You only have so many productive years.  Your energy will not be as high at 50 as it is at 35.
The only place they really need Ph.D.s is if you want to be a professor.  And who would want that.  Oh...and many are called but few are chosen.  Just look at all the physics postdocs.
Go get a job with the NSA instead.  I am not joking.  If you are smart, you can figure out the applied math stuff without formal schooling.  And they hire non Ph.D.s often and have good internal training.
[This is going to seem like a troll...but you need to consider iconoclastic viewpoints.  Also realize that many people on a site called Academia Stack Exchange may be biased by their affiliation...just look at all the encouragement to kids to get Ph.D.'s when they know the graduates struggle to land jobs.]

There's nothing iconoclastic about either ageism or the idea that you can learn on the job.

It's the discouragement of schooling.  Or at least considering to not do it.  "just look at all the encouragement to kids to get Ph.D.'s when they know the graduates struggle to land jobs."

Thanks for your suggestion! It was very helpful!


text:
I'm applying for a faculty position; should I mention that my research interests align with those of the department's faculty (stating their names)?
I am applying for a faculty position. I am very familiar with the works of two professors in that department and we share similar research interests; Also, I have them cited in my articles. As I'm writing the supporting statement, do you think is it okay to mention how my interests align with those of these professors (mentioning their names)? stating something along the line of : my research interests are in alignment with those of Professor A and B.

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/29667/19607 and https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/32337/19607

Try 'align' instead of 'are in alignment'. Much shorter!

There's nothing wrong with mentioning that.
However, you should be careful in which way you mention it, and how much weight you assign to it.
First and foremost, you should make clear that your research aligns with the advertisement, in case it is specific about the profile sought for.
Then, you should take into account that there are two competing interests when hiring people: First, the department might want to strengthen a certain research area, which maybe is, or should become, a focus area of the department. Second, the department likely wants to complement existing expertise in the field.
So it really depends both on what the profile of the position is, and whether the idea is that the position should strengthen or complement existing expertise in the field - likely, a mixture of both. Part of this might become more clear from the advertisement.
So I'd say, make clear where you see synergies with people in the department, but also make clear how your expertise differs from theirs (complements it). Saying "my research interests are in alignment with" certainly does not convey the latter.
Keep in mind: Why should they hire someone who does exactly the same as the people they already have (unless that person retires soon, or they really want to strengthen some very specific area)? Even if they want to strenghten the field (in which case your alignment with their research already follows from the fact that you are a fit for the advertisement), it will be important that you bring in new aspects.

I think writing that is fairly common. I would also recommend separately emailing the professors, saying something like, “Dear X, I wanted to let you know I applied for position Y, and would very much enjoy the opportunity to work with you.” You never know if one of them may end up being on the hiring committee, and even if not, they may have a vote in the end, or they may feel inclined to mention to the committee they’d be interested in working with you too.

Don't be too quick to assume that those other professors are doing great, as you may be interviewing for their positions and as a replacement.  Stand for your own research and views.  Show them what lead you to those concolusions so you can share how you think and that you can solve com


text:
Will taking a temporary staff position between post-docs end my academic (tenure track aspirations) career
I recently was given a job offer for a ([edit] research support/IT support) staff position at a university in a city I have been trying to relocate to for family reasons but I am concerned that if I take the position any chance I have of getting a tenure track position will be over. My background is in computational physics and I have a successful post-doctoral appointment currently (multiple first author manuscripts in some high impact journals within the short time, 1 year, I have worked), but the location is not-ideal for personal reasons.
My question is: if I take this job will it look poorly on tenure track applications? If it helps the position is fixed-term and much better pay than my current post-doc. I have always been told in graduate school that if you get off the tenure path, you can't get back on.
EDIT: I should note that the IT position is listed as a Research position, where I will be providing research support for the supercomputing center by leading/developing workshops, presenting work at HPC conferences, and still writing manuscripts (just in more of a CS/IT domain instead of physics) and the position is only for about 4.5 Months. Didn't know if that would change anyone's responses, but thought I should clarify that it is not help-desk/sys. admin work.

If you temporarily leave your postdoc to join an exciting start-up in your field, I could see that this might not necessarily be held much against you. If you leave to become IT support, I find it hard to believe that this will not damage your tenure track chances. You should discuss this with your adviser/PI, and any mentor; but I would certainly not do this if you are serious about tenure. Obviously, if you are exceptionally brilliant, you could join a circus for a few years and come back, so in that case it might not matter.

Although, if he is just doing the IT job while applying for a second post-doc, that probably won't be held against him...but the IT job should be very temporary if he takes it at all.

@Hobbes: Your edit is indeed significant.  I wonder though if I am the only one who is confused by the confluence of the facts that your "(non-research, IT support) staff position" is "listed as a Research position".

I would think it's not advisable to take this position unless you already have a research position lined up for a local university in the near future (under a year at least). At least in my field, getting tenure anywhere at all is hard. Unless you are particularly in demand (which seems unlikely from your described position so far), if you want tenure you have to put that above location (even to some extent country, not just city), and then apply at every opportunity to move to something where you want, in the hope that one day you will get it. It's not a good situation, but there are too many people for the number of jobs available.

Sad but true. Academia is in general not for people who want to live where they want to live...

Your edit puts things outside my experience. My guess would be that this is possibly a job worth taking as something you'd be interested in and is where you want to be (and perhaps less stressful), but you would still be unlikely to move on from there to tenure.