text:
Deciding what textbook to read
I just enrolled in a CS course and the instructor gave a list of readings for the course. There is a total of 4 books and each book contains around 15+ chapters and around 2 thousand pages and all the chapters of the book cover our course syllabus. But I am now pretty confused about which book to read and how can I prepare for the course? All the books are somewhat similar but I have no Idea How to decide which book to read and How to read the book for the course.

What did your instructor say? I suppose they are in the best position to answer this question.

My instructor told me to utilize all the books because each book has a different kinds of explanations but he didn't show me How to read nor which book should I read for any particular topic

When it's time for the course evaluation, make a negative note that you did not receive proper guidance on the use of the (excessive) course literature.

@lighthousekeeper Sorry, this seems absurd to me. We shouldn't encourage students to give into learned helplessness.

@Arno We're the educators! If we give excessive literature recommendations to students, it's our fault if the students are helpless, unless the university has a dedicated training for students on working with such excessive recommendations.

This seems like about $500 in cost for books. Is that correct?

My guess is that you are not expected to read those books to prepare for the course, but you read what parts are necessary for you to understand the material in lectures/assignments.

Are the books on reserve at the library? Go look through them and see which seem to fit you better (or some are better in some area than others).

@lighthousekeeper This is preposterous. No one ever explained to me that textbooks are not to be read from cover to cover. Now it is possible that in this case the instructor could have provided more guidance (since the asker is quite obviously inexperienced) but "utilize all the books" is fairly clear, if a bit tautological.

@Denis Nardin: My guess is that the list of books is for what I describe in the the first paragraph of this answer. Or it could be that the teacher intends to assign selected readings out of the books without any of the books actually being read cover-to-cover (which in some fields, such as math, is extremely rare). Or it could have been that the teacher is simply trying to cover their bases for anything that might come up in class. The potential cost seems very problematic to me, however.

@DaveLRenfro: Hmm, I think that Denis Nardin was trying to make precisely the points that you also mention in your comments (that the books are obviously not intended to be read cover-to-cover, but rather in the way you describe it). By the way, what makes you think that the potential cost is problematic? I can't find information about this in the question.

@Jochen Glueck: I think you're correct, and it seems I didn't catch the intended meaning. (I'm assuming now that "ever explained" means something along the lines of "needed to explain".) As for the cost, at least in the U.S. that's been a major problem for STEM students in the past couple of decades (even longer, in fact), and for 4 books this could easily be $500 (as Buffy said). While the cost -- assuming it's very high -- may not be a concern for the OP, it's quite likely a concern for other students in the class.

@DaveLRenfro: Thanks for your response! I wasn't aware that textbooks are so expensive in the US (but admittedly, the books mentioned by the OP seem to be much larger than what I would expect from a typical textbook). I think I'll do some reading to understand this in more detail.

@DaveLRenfro Yeah, sorry for not being clear. I wanted to say that no one ever felt the need to said that we were not required to read the ~6 textbooks listed in the syllabus cover to cover - it was considered self-evident that the main material were the lectures and the textbooks were for reference only. I guess maybe students coming from different backgrounds do not find this obvious? Maybe it's a mismatch between the professor's expectations (students should be able to self study) and what students are used to?

It is ridiculous to assume there is anything of immediate value in a CS text.
Instead, you should read all of Stack Overflow, where the real learning is at!

(just kidding)
They undoubtedly mean you should treat the books as a reference to look up topics, not read them cover-to-cover, as might be implied, and may assign homework from select topics amongst them.
I'd ask the professor to clarify whether they intend to assign specific homework assignments from the books and also ask them or your peers for more specific suggestions of relevant resources.
Frequently books in scientific topics have wildly varying (sometimes comically high) prices and often little correlation between price and printing age to quality.
Even though they're normally "off-topic" and eventually closed, the Stack Exchange network has dozens of threads of great books in a particular subject.

The Definitive C Book Guide and List
...

I would also personally recommend if this is your first computer science course to approach books on the subject along the lines that most are broadly

mathematically/theory-based and may deal with a very specific theoretical language that is not in common use, but very elegant for the field
these tend to be extremely dense and unpleasant to understand at first, but enjoyable when you already have a good base and help with how to think about computer science and especially "formal logic" topics like lambda calculus
Essentials of Programming Languages (Freidman, Wand, Haynes)
SICP (Scheme Lisp)

deal with a particular language or subject (C, Python, C#, GNU/Linux, some particular database dialect) in-depth
these tend to be great references, but nigh-impossible to read end-to-end because most of it is irrelevant outside of a niche situation and therefore boring and needless to subject oneself to
Linux Programming Interface; Kerrisk

largely tutorials for a particular language
these tend to just be a collection of challenges and are best augmented by the above to help explain topics in greater detail
Automate the Boring Stuff (free Python text) http://automatetheboringstuff.com/
The Little Schemer (Scheme Lisp and Friedman (again))

First, read a little bit from each book (which you borrowed from the library) and see which one you like best. Whose explanations work for you? Which book is working on the level of detail you prefer? If there is no clear cut winner, just pick one. You can also consider factors such as availability in your preferred format (e-book vs paper).
Once you have chosen your primary book, read it. If you come across a concept you struggle with, consider reading the relevant part of other books. Something seeing explanations from different perspectives can help. If the lectures bring up a concept not appearing in your primary book, look for it in the others.

Additionally, if you're in the US textbooks are expensive. Check with your campus library to see if they have copies of each textbook and read them there first before committing to buying one. Then if you want a second opinion on what an author said, you can always check out one of the other books later in the semester. My library stocked any book that was >$100, or was for a class with 300+ students (or some such numbers)

@RobinClower People buy textbooks???


text:
Solo publication in a low-rank journal or co-authored with a famous professor in a high/medium-rank journal?
Is it better to have a publication in a high/medium-rank journal co-authored with a very famous professor or would it be better to publish the same paper solo, in a lower-ranked journal?
I am asking this considering the fact that sometimes, writing a paper with an expert in the field opens doors to more opportunities in terms of higher-level journals. Of course it is not always the case, but assume for this question that it is. What would be the best thing to do?

This is really impossible to answer since there is no way to define the terms. How "low" is a low ranked journal? How "famous" is that professor? Why would you submit to a low ranked journal in the first place? Why would a famous professor work with you in the first place?

I am not looking for a mathematical answer, but a general idea of which situation is more desirable. I am asking to try to understand how publication works: it is better to do things on your own even if the result may be less satisfactory in terms of the journal where you publish or is it better to "rely" on someone expert and famous professor in the field and to publish a research together, maybe in a more famous journal?

Define "better"!

I'd think that if your paper is good enough for a top journal, it should be accepted there regardless of whether there's a famous co-author. And if it's not, it should not. So if you are good enough to write a top publication on your own, try it alone at top level. (I am aware that some people even with experience think a top publication depends on having a top name on it, but that's not my experience - much peer review is with blinded authors anyway.)

Technically, this probably isn't an answer, but information that I hope will be valuable to you in your early career.
It isn't really a matter of either-or, here. But, you want to publish "good" papers in "appropriate" journals working with "helpful colleagues" when possible. What is "better" is better papers, actually.
Publishing low quality papers, in whatever journal, does you little good. The "fame" of a co-author might actually cloud your participation/contribution and might, when taken to the extreme, result in misconduct: i.e. "gift" authorship.
But collaboration is good. Not because it "puts points on the board" (which is IMO a foolish quest) but because it leads to better papers, deeper insight, and the faster advancement of a field. The collaboration can be, and usually is, among peers, though student/advisor collaborations are also common.
So, the advice is to write the best papers you can, collaborating as appropriate and as valuable, and submit to the best journals that you can. Think more about the fun of research and the advancement of the field and less about "winning" some imagined game.
Write a lot of good papers, singly or in collaboration, send them to good journals and your career has a good chance to succeed.

Exactly my dilemma many years ago. Moreover, I am from small european country which is not exactly well known for its scientific contributions. I thought that I dont stand a chance publishing in top tier journal.  The paper I was tried to publish was already rejected in top-tier journal in my field, however, I tought that reviewers didnt even read the paper properly. Adding renowned professor, who I am friend with, could have helped but I tought it was my responsibility. I thought that if I cannot publish in top tier journal all by myself that I do not deserve to be a researcher.
So I decided to try to publish my paper as the only author in the best journal in the world (at the time) for my research field and the paper passed like a charm. Reviewers were fantastic and had good ideas how to improve the paper. In the end, tha paper was published and it ended up better than I envisioned it because of the review process.
After that, the number of people who wanted to collaborate with me on similar topics increased, which resulted in publishing even more papers (in collaboration with others). In fact, I may say that I started to enjoy my life in academia, collaborating with other researchers and doing research itself.
Being brave sometimes pays off.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
My former advisor wants to publish a paper that relies on code that I worked on without giving me any credit. What should I do?
I was in a research group for my MSc. dissertation (computational work) during which I developed quite a bit of code that went on being used in a publication which I co-authored (no code was published at the time - I know how much of a bad practice this is, it was not dependent on me).
Now, without changing much of the code (I would say the bulk of the code remains unchanged), my advisor wants to make it publicly accessible as part of a new publication. My advisor does not want me to be one of the authors, claiming that I do not own the code and that the code is now owned by my advisor and by the institute where she works and where I did my MSc. dissertation work. The changes were done by people who are now members of this group.
For the sake of not going through too much trouble, I would be happy foregoing this whole situation, but as a matter of principle this really bothers me. I do not feel like I am in a position where this can hurt or affect me, but I fear it may happen to other people, too. What would be the usual thing to do? Is being confrontational about this worth it? Who actually owns the code in this situation and what would be the right thing to do?

Did the code have any scientific contribution (rather than just a particular implementation)? Then you have the right to co-authorship. The ownership of the code is a different issue. Typically rights to code at MSc level is owned by the university (but check the regulations, YMMV). Apart from the above, and unless the code is owned by you, you cannot stop them from using it, though.

@CaptainEmacs the code contained a few different analyses using pre-existing methods as well as ways to aggregate and compare this information in a rigorous way (this last bit would be the novel part). I thought that ownership of the code would play a part here but thank you for clearing that up.

@iliupersis The point being made by Captain Emacs doesn't have to do with what the code implements, but the source of the scientific contribution.  Did you implement their ideas, or did you create ideas while working on their project?  The distinction is subtle, but necessary to determine if you have publication rights.  Also, your code was written in pursuit of a Master's which 99.99% of the time means there's an agreement that the University has a free license to do with it what they please, even if you also have a personal copyright.  They likely "effectively" own  it.

@EdwinBuck ah ok, understood. My former advisor sent me a page for an analogous analysis and mentioned it could be an interesting addition to the work we were doing - that was the starting point of this analysis and then everything else was implemented/applied by me and added on top of this. So I ran with an idea they had forwarded me and expanded upon it. I hope this is clear enough

@DanielHatton I encountered this rule at many places. I said "typically", as that's my experience, but maybe it's "sometimes". Note that MSc project topics are in many places initiated by the supervisor, so if this rule would not apply, any MSc student that gets a serious project from the supervisor would have to sign some IP transfer form and I have never seen this happen; or else supervisors would hesitate to give their MSc students any important project ideas, so I am not sure how they handle that in places where the software IP remains with the MSc student.

@DanielHatton I didn't indicate the University would obtain the copyright, but rather that the University would have a free and clear license to do whatever they deemed permissible with the code.  There are many cases where the copyright no longer confers control over a written work by a different person than the author, when that work is explicitly licensed to that different person with a very permissive license.  If I write a program, and then license you to resell it, modify it, and rebrand it, then my copyright is effectively a name on the work only, not a means of control.

I'll leave aside the legal side of this, other than to say that I agree with other that the likely legal status is that the university owns the code that is not in the public domain.
Moving to the moral side of things. It is correct that if you developed a code base that is useful academically, you should be credited for this. But from your description in the original post it seems you have been - you were author on a paper that came out of your Master's work and that you developed the code for. At that point really the code should have been made public, even if it wasn't. At that point, by publishing, you relinquish your rights to exclusive use of the code (again, morally, not legally, and in all matters moral, only in my view). In theory anyone in the world should be able to use and build on your published work without including you as an author in the derived work (although they should cite your original publication). This includes your former advisor, and their future students and employees.
What complicates this is that is the advisor appears to have kept the code for their exclusive use so they can benefit - there is no moral case that they should benefit from exclusivity while you don't. Secondly, from what I can make out from what you say, they now do wish to make the code public (is this being forced by a journal they now wish to publish in?). If the code is made public in this second paper, but wasn't in the first, this will lead to that paper being cited if anyone reuses the code, and not you.
Given that the code was not made public with the first release, I think that ideal solution going forward would be for you to make the code public separately from the second paper with a license that identified you as the author and specifying that people wishing to use the code in academic work must cite your original paper. Your former advisor would then not include you as an author in their new paper, but would cite your original publication as the source of the code.

Your solution is spot on, I think that will be the solution forward. Thank you for contributing, it really is a situation where publishing the code in the first publication would have save everyone a lot of trouble.

The answer is "it depends," but I'll throw out some US-oriented answers that apply to me as I know it at UT Austin under US NSF funding now. The usual thing to have done would to have published the original code along with the paper and/or your Master's thesis (depending on how long ago that was) under an NSF-approved open source license, assuming that NSF funded the work. That code is probably owned by the institution you worked for when you wrote it (depending on their policies). There may be ways around giving your code away even such a situation, but that's how I'd approach it if this were my situation. Other US funding agencies take a similar approach. I would hope that you'd want to work with your former advisor to make this code open source, anyway.
Any recent changes would also be published to the same open source repository as a part of the ongoing publication process for the code and its working community (even if that's just the grad students of the PI of the lab that originally developed it). You would be able to use this code wherever you are now and others out there would, too, as well as ongoing use by the original lab.
Ideally, you would have been part of an original publication or so-called "marker paper" about the methods in used in the code when the repository was made public, and your thesis might have served this purpose, though I think a journal paper or peer-reviewed conference paper would have been better. Your advisor is being quite stingy with academic credit by not wanting to include you in the authorship of a current paper with a contemporary repository release. I'd fight that tooth and nail if you don't need a working relationship with her anymore. Your former university probably has an intellectual property page describing who owns what, and I'd bet money in Vegas that it's not your former advisor. She may be due a substantial cut of any licensing revenue that the university generates, but that doesn't seem like the worry here. At my university, the ownership is predetermined by who funded the work and the contracts that conveyed that funding. There's a lot of "it depends" that need to be checked.

Yeah, maybe checking with my former uni would not be too bad, I was trying to understand if there was a general guideline for this. I'll see. I agree that the code should have been released with the first publication but my former advisor was very keen on keeping it so it could be reused for future papers and similar analyses (I know poor of a practice this is but I was not really in a position where I could argue or call them out on their poor practices).

Publishing the code doesn't prevent your advisor from doing future work with it nor future publication. If the marker paper is highly cited and the code becomes popular, then that's great. Just look at libraries like PETSc, deal.ii, etc., their authors make hay out of their popularity to bolster their grant proposals and to further the ongoing development of their libraries. The authors of these libraries are also among some of the heaviest ongoing users of their libraries with many publications Your advisor just doesn't understand scientific OSS. Lots of use by others expands citation counts!

I whole heartedly agree, believe me! Just a correction - former advisor*. But they are becoming more open to this and I am happy to see it happening

Legal aspects depend on jurisdiction, but in general the following are points to have in mind:

in most countries, computer programs are literary works that are protected by copyright. In that respect, it does not matter whether your code has any scientific contribution, the moment you create it you have author's rights.
there's no such thing as "owning the code". Author's rights include both copyright and untransferrable moral rights. The latter, in particular, includes the right of attribution, as well as the right to the integrity of the work. So, even if the copyright for your code belongs to the university, them publishing it without your name on it would be illegal.
there's a fair chance that you actually retain the copyright, unless you have withdrawn it explicitly, or, in some jurisdictions (US but not most of Europe), were paid to do the work. I don't think being a Master student withdraws any of your IP rights.

That's the legal aspect, but there's also a separate question of scientific integrity, which I would say is majorated by the IP law - in the sense that anything that breaches someone else's authors rights is a major scientific misconduct, but not conversely. For example, ideas are not protected by copyright, but using someone else's idea without attribution is a misconduct. What your advisor attempts to do seems to be a major ethical violation, regardless of the copyright status. If they publish anything not created by the authors, they must attribute it.
In practice, it is likely that your advisor has no idea about IP rights and such - she just assumes, as many commentators here, that students and junior faculty have no rights. So, if you want to stand your ground, it may be enough to write her an e-mail saying that you created the code, you believe you retain the copyright as you don't recall tranferring it, and as an author you object to them publishing it without your name on it. Of course, that might be quite a nuclear option in terms of your relationship with her.

"So, even if the copyright for your code belongs to the university, them publishing it without your name on it would be illegal." - I don't believe this is true in any jurisdiction. There may be academic codes that are broken, but not laws. If you write code for Microsoft, they don't have to name you when they distribute Windows.

@BryanKrause, distributing Windows is rather different from publishing its source code, also I'm sure Microsoft contracts with developers contain all kinds of waivers. That said, the possibility to waive moral rights differ by jurisdiction (as you can see from the source), and I know of at least one jurisdiction (Russia) where such waiver would be null ans void. Of course, even if some programmers may sue Microsoft to put their names in credits, there's no point to that in practice.

Don't take legal advice from non-lawyers. Or even form casual contact with actual lawyers.

I feel like for a work to be protected by copyright you have to adequately license it; it doesn't come under copyright law on its own. But this was interesting contribution, thank you.

@iliupersis, that is not true. See, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_registration.

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


text:
A recently published paper seriously impairs the novelty of my dissertation. Which should be the purpose of the next meeting with my supervisor?
I am a second-year PhD student in management, and I've recently started working on my dissertation.
The topic I got assigned is a fast-growing one.
Nonetheless, I initially managed to ensure the novelty of my work by highlighting the fact that the extant literature has largely overlooked a class of specific predictors.
However, while I was collecting the literature to produce a systematic literature review on this specific topic (i.e., using these class of predictors in empirical models forecasting the occurrence of a given phenomenon), I found a well-written recently published paper thoroughly covering the same topic.
At the moment, the novelty of my dissertation, which was primarily related to highlighting this inadequacy of previous literature, has been seriously impaired.
Now, the supervisor I got assigned is not an expert in this research field.
When asking for suggestions, he can almost randomly point me in five different directions in every conversation.
Having double-checked his suggestions, I realized that he merely gives me random advice (e.g., he considers "novel" predictors that have been around for decades).
Considering that I only have a year and nine months left, I plan to schedule a meeting to discuss the issue. However, I was wondering which should be the purpose of the meeting.
Should I convince him to assign me another topic or incorporate his (random) suggestions into my research?
Considering the first option, should I approach the meeting with a potential research interest/topic already at hand?
Thank you for your time.

Discuss with your supervisor. You can't change dissertations without their approval anyway.

Dear Allure, thanks for your response. It made me think about the question, that I have edited. The issue is: when scheduling the meeting to discuss the issue, which should be my goal? To lead him to change my topic or to be ready to include his suggestions in my current research? I am afraid of receiving clueless suggestions; that's it.

A "dissertation" is much longer than a "paper". Suppose that paper removes the relevance of certain material from your work, but what about the rest? What was your plan?

If you're specifically interested in the purpose of such a meeting, the purpose would be to ask your supervisor how you should proceed. That's what your supervisor is for. Note that this question is different to the one asked in the title; you certainly can propose a topic change.

Dear @rg_software, thank you for your response; it is right on-point. I planned an empirical analysis and a theory-building section as well. So the thesis is certainly longer than the dissertation. However, much of my contribution was pointing towards that (once) novel research avenue. Knowing the rest of the work I was planning to perform, I can surely tell you that the novelty of the thesis has been severely impaired.

Dear @sleepy, thank you for your response. I've edited the question accordingly.

Are you in a time limited degree program? In the US, the second year would be considered early.

I think that "novelty" is just one of the criteria. A PhD thesis is supposed to be a comprehensive analysis of a certain problem, so even if you fall short in "novelty", you can still provide something valuable. In any case, I think that ~2 years is enough to refocus on some adjacent problem, but perhaps it would be tough to make a substantial change. Personally I think perfectionism isn't warranted in such cases, so if I see I can save a student's work by fixing it here and there, usually this is what I advise.

Dear @Buffy, thank you for your response. It is advisable to finish the PhD in three years. Usually, students start working on their dissertations in September of the last available year. However, I wanted to take advantage of the summer break, so I shared a research plan with my supervisor to arrive in September with at least the first chapter/working paper draft.

@rg_software I've read several dissertations from the previous years, and I realized that is true: novelty is just one of the factors. Nonetheless, I wanted to make the best use of my time to have at least the basics to develop a publishing trajectory for the immediate future at the end of my PhD.

(Sorry it is becoming a chat). I understand your point, but I'd keep these things somewhat separate. You can write a great (short) paper on a problem you like, but it is much harder to extend it into a thesis. Since you seem to be ready to additional work, one option might be to keep the thesis as is, but focus some of your efforts on writing good papers in adjacent areas without trying to turn them into something bigger. You'll benefit from your existing effort and publish something in addition. It's better than throwing away all existing work and starting from scratch, I believe.

@rg_software Thank you, your reasoning seems quite logical to me in this respect. This is surely an option, so thank you for your time.

Given the additional information in the comments, I'd suggest that you have a broad discussion with your advisor, but be prepared to switch topics.
However, it might not be required to switch much. Some closely related questions might remain. You have certainly gained some insight into the general area of the original question, so you are in a good place to be flexible. You might even find that the published paper is an opportunity to extend it.
But, as you have discovered, working in a hot area is inherently risky as you can be assured there is parallel research going on as you work. I was "lucky" enough to work in an ice-cold area, actually, and only a few people in the world were much interested or could really judge it (math analysis).
But your discussion with your advisor might be broad enough that you wind up with several option (several irons in the fire) so that you don't get caught again.
And, depending on where you are in the research, the paper might not affect your graduation. Your advisor will know the rules. I know of one case where essentially the same thesis by two students resulted properly in two degrees with the knowledge and assent of all advisors, the universities, and the research community in general. It did, however, delay their graduation while an investigation was made. Both went on to good careers. They independently answered an important question in computer language design.

Dear @Buffy, thank you for your response. Let me pose you this question: should you have a PhD candidate with a basic thesis (i.e., not that original or novel and with only an incremental contribution to the extant knowledge), but with more than one good publication on the side, and a PhD candidate with a terrific thesis, but no publications, which one would you recommend as a "good candidate"? This would help me understand the extent to which a thesis "weights" compared to the presence of good book chapters and papers.

Actually, I'd look to other factors and could recommend them both very highly, depending on those factors. I agree with @EthanBolker that the dissertation should have some "punch" but no one expects that your thesis will be your best work ever.

Let me add, both remarkable work and sustained contributions are highly valued.

Dear @Buffy, thank you, everything seems clearer now.

I think you have to think about what you want before deciding how to approach your advisor. Here are two extreme possibilities.

You are intent on an academic career in this area. Your thesis
will be your first piece of new work. You want it to be
well received as a significant contribution.

In this case you might well want a new topic.
Alternatively

Your PhD is just a ticket to a job in industry. What you really need
is an adequate thesis. Finishing the one you've started will suffice,
even though some of your ideas  have been scooped.

In this case simply put in the not quite two years and move on.
I suggest that you think about where your goal is on the continuum between these alternatives. Then prepare to convince your advisor that with his help (which seems to be somewhat casual) you have a way to reach that goal.

Dear @Ethan Bolker, thank you for your response. I want to pursue an academic career. That's why I'm seriously concerned. I want my dissertation to form the basis of a future publishing trajectory. Do you think should I approach my supervisor with a research interest/a topic at hand or not? I don't want to appear rude or unwilling to receive suggestions.

If you have ideas for alternatives then do present them. I'm sure you can do that respectfully. I suspect most advisors appreciate initiative in their students.

Thank you, @Ethan Bolker. This is sound advice.


text:
How to write an effective but very gentle reminder email to supervisor to check the Manuscript?
I had submitted my first manuscript to my supervisor in 2013. He checked it after one year and finally submit it to a journal in Jan 2015. After one major revision, it got accepted with a minor revision and due date was 30th June, 2015. I modified and corrected the manuscript. But my supervisor was so busy that he could not make a final check and could not submit it in due time. I reminded and requested many times to check and submit it at the earliest in his free time, but my supervisor always says that "Sorry, I am busy and wait until my check." Editor had also reminded couple of times and finally closed the file. One day my supervisor told me that we need to withdraw this paper, because it is too late. I got shocked. So my supervisor might had felt bad for his delay, so he withdrew it and submitted to another journal in the same day of Mar, 2016 without any check. Fortunately the manuscript got accepted with a minor revision with a due date as 29th July, 2016. I corrected accordingly and sent it to my supervisor. But again seems same situation that yet he has not submitted.
During this period, I was ready with another manuscript. When I requested him to submit that, he advised me to submit by my own to XYZ journal as he is very busy. I felt very happy and submit it to his recommended journal in Mar 2016. This manuscripts came with a major revision after 2 months. So I revised the manuscript and submitted in due time by my own and informed to my supervisor. Fortunately, this manuscript also got accepted with a minor revision and due date was 28th Oct 2016. I modified everything and supposed to submit by my own. But my supervisor told that he will check at least once before final submission. So I could not submit it by my own and still waiting for my supervisor's check.
So I am very much worried what to do in this situation. I have written and reminded many times. But as usual I always get a sorry reply. I am really worried how to write an effective but very gentle reminder email to him to check the Manuscript? I can't complain and be hard to break his faith on me.

A professor's view on this question: http://www.longwoodgenomics.org/2016/09/28/advisor-too-slow-in-revising-your-manuscript/

How about "RTFM" (where the "F" stands for "Fine")

I will just write how I approach the matter with very busy supervisors until now. It has worked without issues and our relationships has not been impacted at all.
The best thing is to take responsibility of the submission process (if you haven't done that already). When you have either the manuscript ready to submit or after you have done the corrections on the reviewers' comments, you can send an e-mail to your supervisor telling him/her that you have done all the corrections and answered to the reviewers (if applicable) and you are ready to submit.
Put a deadline for the submission (not the journal deadline, but yours) and ask him to send his comments, if any, by then. You are planning to submit it on that day, unless you have his comments that require big changes.
Also ask him if he needs to change the deadline, then he can propose a new one. But don't leave it without a deadline, as it could go forever.

My phd lab had a rule stating that phd advisors had to approve the final version of an article for submission. In this case, your advice would make the student break the rule (assuming his advisor doesn't cooperate of course).

This puts the student into a situation where the paper goes in whether the mentor signs off or not, which wouldn't sit well with the editorial staff.

I do like the idea of establishing a timeline, though.... perhaps setting up a two-hour meeting to hash the whole paper out would force this to a conclusion.

@T.Verron I don't agree that it breaks the rule. You give the chance to the advisor to read it within the deadline, and you give him the chance to set another deadline that fits his schedule. No comments on any of the two deadlines automatically assumes approval, as this is what you have agreed by setting the deadline. Of course, he could decide not to cooperate and say "I don't want a deadline", but since he feels sorry every time, I think he will accept the "terms".

@ScottSeidman I never had a problem with the editorial board with me (as the first author) being the corresponding author. Besides, all co-authors have to approve the version of the manuscript. The "solution" I propose allows a better collaboration and in all cases I had to "use" it, it ended with the mentor following the deadline. In the worst case, it could be an email, "it's ok. send it"

For this whole discussion, it seems implicit that the mentor does NOT want the paper to be submitted before he reviews it.  I think clicking any box that says "I agree that all authors yada yada yada" wouldn't be wise, and could cause conflict, possibly reaching all the way to the editor.  Interpreting a non response as "I believe you're OK with me submitting this" when every communication has said it's not is quite disingenuous.

@ScottSeidman What I proposed is supposed to organise things and make the communication more efficient. With busy professors it's good to be precise on what you need them to review and provide feedback. Of course it also depends on the field and your level (Master student, PhD student, post doc). But it's not meant to bypass them and trick them to accept something against their will. It puts some rules in the communication and adds some pressure on the responsibility the mentor has for his student. It also doesn't solve the personal problems the professor might have or if he hates his work.

Great answer.  I think this is the first time I've ever wished I had multiple votes to bestow.

"Dr. X:
Your inattention to this matter is impacting my career.  Can we please submit this paper?
Thank you"

If you start writing these sorts of e-mails, you'll never stop...

Sounds like the problem goes much deeper than finding the right wording for a reminder email. Maybe his priorities and time management are a disaster. Maybe he is repelled by your work or presentation style and postponing repeatedly is his way of avoiding an awkward conversation. Maybe you annoyed him in the past so he ignores you now. Maybe you ignored things that he communicated in the past. Maybe he has problems in his private life. Either way, something unprofessional is going on.
Your situation would never occur with a well-organized supervisor who is excited about your topic and presentation style.

Contact your department chair and tell them about your advisor’s behaviour, and ask if they could get him to prioritise his time so that it doesn't negatively impact your career.

Full-on passive/aggressive option:
Ask a specific question, about a specific paragraph. You may already know the answer, but that's not the point. The point is you have a specific call to action that is more obvious than, "Read a boring manuscript", and that more clearly needs a response sooner than later. Nevertheless, reading the boring manuscript is still the only way to answer the question.

X
I'm wondering if you had the oportunity to read the minor revision I made on the paper I sent you last month.
Thanks,
Y

This sounds exactly like the sorts of emails the OP has already been sending, and doesn't offer any argument for why this should be any more effective than the rest have been.

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


text:
Is it ok to write back when no response has been received from a postdoc application?
This may be a very general and subjective question, I know. But, I have applied to some postdoc positions, and after 3 weeks I haven't received any response yet. I suppose this is normal, because many people should have applied to those positions, too. However, I don't know if it would be ok to write back to the professors or PI to know if they have already a response for my dossier.
Does anyone could tell me if it is fine to do so? should I just be more patient and wait more time? after how much time should I consider my application as rejected?.
I would be very glad to read your suggestions, and experiences.
Update: In my experience I think that writing back is fine (there is nothing wrong about it), but it is likely no response will be received anyways. In general, they reply in two situations: 1) they are interested in your profile, 2) they have funding.

Do you mean they haven't acknowledged receipt of your application, or that they haven't told you whether they're interested in you? I read the question as the latter, and thought '3 weeks? Hahahahahaha'.

Was there a published closing date, and has it passed? If yes and no then don't worry yet.  If you mean 3 weeks since the closing date, you might expect to have heard something -- they were planning on processing applications then.

@JessicaB I am aware that for being accepted it would take more than 3 weeks, but I was expecting an acknowledged receipt.
There is no closing date as far as I can tell. So I think the position is open until the find the correct candidate.

@muammar Right, good. I can't help you there though. Ours are all automated, so the acknowledgement email is instant.

@JessicaB that's very good. I have applied to other positions where there is a tracking system. When it is a direct mail, if the mail doesn't get rejected by servers it means that it arrived. Then, if no ack one gets stressed. I am sure I sound anxious, but coming from a country where there is no future in researching makes me want to find a position in order to not stop with my scientific career.  Moreover, this would be my first postdoc position. Thank you very much all for replying. Once I get any response, I will update my question and select an answer.

@user37341 Experience would suggest even the most ho-hum universities do not bother with the tedium of writing such emails.  Even they will get hundreds of applications for any given opening.  At best there will be some automated email system, which may not even be very well implemented (or even functional).  No one actually writes these things these days.  For rejection you usually don't even get so much as an automated rejection email; maybe 5% of them in my experience gave me that basic courtesy.

I found this post: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18369/job-portal-of-us-universities-when-is-the-application-status-updated?rq=1 and for jobs posted in websites it takes ~8 months to hear back.

During academic job applications, I did not hear back at all from at least two places (in the UK), so I would not assume you will hear back. On the other hand, there was also the situation where I had not heard back from one of my top choices so I contacted them and they told me that someone was supposed to have contacted me two weeks earlier but somehow didn't. It wasn't good news, but I had been stalling on agreeing to another position so ultimately it was helpful to just ask, politely obviously. I really don't think it would hurt your situation, and as others have mentioned, may even help it.

It may not be such a good idea to call and ask for an answer on your application. However, you can call or send and enquiry email to check whether they've received your application and docs in full and everything is okay with your application.
When I was applying for MSc. I contacted them several times and they always said "you have to wait".

Once you've been told once that you have to wait, I think you really should wait.

The standard thing is that all applicants are informed at the right time. Quite commonly the "competition" decision is delayed, so I wouldn't worry too much.
Should you contact the committee? As other said, impatience may not be the best thing to do. On the other hand, I don't believe it will hurt you in any way.
Can you do better? You probably have contacted someone in the department where you apply before, right? The easiest thing is to write to them: "Please, the website says I should have been contacted by January 31st, did I miss something?" (or course, use appropriate level of politeness).

What I usually do in that situation is to call/mail them asking if everything is correct or if there is anything else I should do, also stating that I know that the process takes as long as it takes and that I'm not, in any way, pressuring or anything. Then, they usually reply with the current status/ETA.
I'm aware I'm not fooling anyone, but, IMHO, it is a bit nicer :)

In my experience (UK-based applications), I have always been informed whenever I wasn't shortlisted by means of a sad "we regret to inform you" email. The only time I wasn't informed straight away was when I was shortlisted but didn't get the job so I had to call them. If you are at the pre-shortlist phase, I think it's safe to assume you will get an email either case.

I guess it depends on country and field, but my experience is that 80-90% of professors do no answer a post- doc application at all if it is not a positive answer. It is especially true if you try to cold call a top laboratory.

Just like a job interview, take the first step. Call and check up. You want the position? Show them how interested you are :)

However, academic position applications are quite different from "job interviews", especially in the communications aspect.

From my experience, when applying for post-doc or professor job positions, most of the times, they will not answer if the answer is negative. Moreover, often, the decision will be delayed (sometimes, it may even be delayed by several months due to committees not agreeing on who to hire, professors being too busy, problem with funding, etc.). You can always send one polite e-mail to ask. But don't send many e-mails.

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


text:
Disclosing a proposal
My PI forwarded to me the proposal of a project I have to work on. Recently, a new postdoc arrived and he is supposed to write a  proposal by himself. He asked me to forward the one I received from my PI. The issue is that I am not sure if I should disclose it without having explicitly PI's authorization. This person told me that PI was OK with it (but I wasn't  present at that meeting). Am I being too paranoid?.
My rationale behind this is that I shouldn't be forwarding something I didn't write to anyone unless the author says is fine with it. Besides, this is an ongoing project... In any case, I have already written to PI to have his authorization, but meanwhile, it is uncomfortable to deal with the other person. I would like to know your opinions about this. Thanks.

I read the first paragraph three times, and I don't understand it at all.  I would suggest rewriting it with more care to explaining the details of your situation.

@PeteL.Clark I have updated it. Is it better now?.

So this person told you specifically that your PI OK'ed this but you don't believe him? I would've just sent it to him anyways, and assuming this is through email, copied your advisor. Maybe write a line making it clear that you thought this was according to your PIs instructions. I don't see any reason to doubt his words though tbh.. and sharing proposals is (or should be) very common

@ConfusedStudent007 When I was working in another institution I was told to never disclose anything about proposals/research plans without PI's explicit ack. What you wrote makes sense (and it is very practical), just CC PI and that's it.

@muammar: Yes, much better.

Since you asked your PI already I don't see any point in asking here - the answer only depends on the specific PI and there is no general rule.

Tell the other student as many times as necessary that you just need the okay directly from the PI and then you'll be happy to forward it.
I would try to steer the PI away from okaying the forward.  It would be different if you already knew and trusted this individual.
The germ of an idea for a project can be very important.  This is your baby and I understand your wanting to protect it.
(You need not explain that to the other student.)

Thank you for this answer. I don't think PI will take it bad. As I mentioned in another comment, in another research institution I worked, these things were very delicate.


text:
How to introduce a "general" area into discussion section
I am presently writing up a PhD with a very imminent deadline (next week!), so please go fairly easy. My thesis is of a technical nature.
In each chapter I have a results subsection which is divided into subsubsections (I'm using Lyx/Latex) for each topic within that chapter.
For example, I vary a bunch of parameters within a chapter, and have a results subsection for each parameter.
This is mirrored in the discussion section; within each discussion subsection I have subsubsections for each relevant result.
This has resulted in my discussion subsections being essentially more elaborate versions of the results subsections.
I'd like to have a more general area within each discussion subsection - after the individual subsubsections - that can discuss things more cohesively.
I'm not sure the best way to do this - another subsubsection for "General Discussion" is a little clunky. I don't have time to rewrite everything so am looking for a solution that I can add rather than rework.
This may simply be a question of finding an appropriate subsubsection name, or perhaps there are better ways to divide my discussion up without formalising it into subsubsections. I was thinking perhaps I could use some kind of break - like a few lines of empty space after the last subsubsection, any ideas would be very well received.
E.g. I have this:
Chapter N
- Methodology
- Results
* Variation of X
* Variation of Y
- Discussion
* Variation of X
* Variation of Y
* ?? How to discuss results of both X and Y

...Synthesis.

The word "Summary" comes to my mind for the subsection heading under Discussion to combine the results of "Variation of X" and "Variation of Y" to present a cohesive argument on your parametric studies.

I had discounted summary since that shouldn't introduce any new ideas, this is more of a general discussion that can still raise new points.

In that case, is it possible not to have any subsections in the discussion section? If you coalesce all the subsections into just one discussion, the last paragraph could be the one for general discussion. This will work if the discussion section is not overly long.

I am leaning that way, I could just remove the headers and the discussion is organised into subsections but not formally. I will keep this open and see if there are any other ideas, but I think this could be the way forwards. I do have one discussion section with 3 sub sections, one of those has 3 subsubsections and two of those each have 3 labelled paragraphs..

Three other possibilities I can think of: epilogue, postscript and closure. Of these, postscript sounds the best to me for a thesis of technical nature.

I'll mark this as closed and thanks to you hpc. I have a few suggestions and not sure which I'll go with, but each of yours sound reasonable.


text:
How to politely negotiate working conditions/expectations in an ongoing advisor/trainee relationship?
I have to decide whether I'm staying/leaving my lab soon, but would need a few changes on my PI's part to erase my doubts about whether it's a good idea to stay. Lets assume for all intents and purposes that my advisor really wants me to stay:

I need continuous advising. My advisor tends to have really busy streaks where she will basically lock herself in her office for weeks when overwhelmed (grants/papers etc). Although we still see her every day, it's just in passing, and she's mostly unaccessible. This has been at times detrimental to my project, which is also very exploratory. This is the most important thing for me, but I cannot think of a good way to "demand" it. Only good thing is that she makes it clear that she's also learning, and has asked for suggestions for how to improve.
I need constructive feedback. For better or worse, my advisor has taken to only praise me and give positive feedback. I'm here to learn though, and this is not helpful. I would like to ask her to teach and mentor me.

I also want to make it clear how important these are to me. If I stay and they are not met, I know I will end up dropping out instead of wasting my time, but that's definitely better unsaid.  So I have two questions: 1) do you think I should even have a conversation with her, and would you be offended if you students discussed "expectations" with you (I won't phrase it that way obviously. 2) Any advice on how to have this conversation effectively and politely?
Additional detail: I've never brought up any of this, and have just "sucked it up" with a smile. I can't continue doing that though, as it will be wasting years of my time.

For point 1, I suggest you to ask to have a coadvisor too.

"it would be helpful if changes could be made to make it better" - To avoid the question being closed, I would suggest that you cut out all the personal details and focus on the underlying question given in the title.

I'm not gonna lie, hoping that your advisor will be able to be there and give you super-strong feedback each and every week may be too much to ask for. Just like you have weeks where you can't make substantial progress on your research due to other work items, she too has times where she just has too much on her plate to deeply think about and help you with your research.

I think you should absolutely have a conversation with your PI.  I also think that you can discuss your needs in a mature, polite, and straightforward way such that there is no ultimatum and no negative feelings.

Step 1.  Email your PI requesting a meeting for this discussion specifically. "Hello PI, As you know, I have to make a decision about transitioning into the PhD program by March X.  I was wondering if you could meet with me to discuss this. Thanks, Azzzzzz." This will eliminate the surprise element regarding your conversation with her about these non research related things. That is, if you unexpectedly brought this all up during a regular meeting, it could catch her off guard and lead to a less than positive outcome.
Step 2. Be open and honest with your PI. But do so in a way that leaves room for your PI to be the mentor.  That is, your post has several hints of arrogance and also suggests that you are really worried about there being a potential for confrontation. That is not the right mindset.  You need to focus on what you both want. Your PI is a mentor, and as such wants the best for you, but you have to actually allow her to mentor you. The tone of your conversation should not be: "I need this and this," but instead, "I'm concerned about my growth in this program and so I want to get your insight about these things..." Be open and honest and humble. Keep in mind that you are on the same team.
Re: continuous guidance. Ask your PI to schedule weekly or maybe 2x weekly meetings with you. This way you have a dedicated timeslot with her regardless of how busy she is. Again, do not present this like, "I want weekly meetings," but rather, "one thing that would really help me is if we could dedicate a time for weekly meetings."
Re: constructive feedback.  I once worked with an amazing PI who would often withhold feedback. But a trick I learned is that if I asked them, "Would you do it like this?" or "What do you think can be improved on XX?" Once I specifically asked, they gave it to me! I appreciated that I had some independence to make my own mistakes and learn from them, but at the same time, whenever I needed a little more guidance I just had to explicitly ask for it.
Re: constructive feedback (part 2). In addition to using the above method in a more day-to-day kind of way, you could also just tell your PI that you want more constructive feedback. Your PI sounds pretty open to suggestion.  It's entirely possible she doesn't know that you feel like you aren't getting enough. Have this meta conversation with her. Again, frame it in a way that does not point fingers at her for not providing it, but instead in a way that humbly asks for more of her input so that you can grow.

This really shouldn't be just the one conversation.  You should use this initial discussion as a starting off point where you can be more open and honest about what your needs are and what expectations your PI has. When something comes up address it sooner than later, don't suck it all up with a smile--no one benefits from that.
A final thought is that if you are harboring thoughts related to pay and job offers while in a PhD program, it's possible that pursuing a PhD is not the right fit for you. Even more generally, thinking about "what could be" or "what if" seems unhelpful at best and detrimental at worst. Still, having these thoughts might be a hint about what is the best decision for you.
I hope this helps. Best of luck.

Thank you for the thoughtful response. We do have regular meetings, but when things get busy it's usually rushed and I don't get much out of them. We also have a annual meeting set up to discuss feedback (both ways), which is when I'd like to bring some things up. I just hope I have enough in me to get through it without bursting into tears haha. The PI you describe sounds like mine at times. I guess I have to learn to ask for guidance, which I tend not to do as I don't want to bother her when she's busy.

As for pay: I love what I do, and it's a dream job. However, my field is competitive and I also can't bury my head in the sand and pretend money doesn't matter. In the ideal world, I can be "successful" enough to make a career out of this. I would love for that to happen. But if I know I won't have to support I need, I also cannot waste years to chase an unrealistic dream. Not here anyways. I'm hoping I can make this work for everyone though, because again, I love what I do.

I don't know whether you should stay or go somewhere else.  However, as you are weighing your options, it might be helpful to explore where the "somewhere else" might be.
To improve your working relationship with your current advisor:

Ask not what your advisor can do for you, but what you can do for your advisor.  For example, can you help with putting references into some bibliography software for her?  Format an illustration for a paper or grant proposal?  Proofread something before it's submitted?  Update a web page?
Consider using email more often.  When your advisor is holed up cranking something out under a deadline, she may have an easier time turning to an email from you for 5-10 minutes than interfacing with you in person.
Learn to streamline your writing.  Be succinct.  As long as you are not arrogant, there is nothing wrong with skipping the niceties in an email.
Write up what you have done each week, or every other week, and email these reports to her.
Learn to knock on her door to ask if she can spare you five minutes, without taking offense if she says no or gets flustered.  I don't mean you should be a pest -- but you could try again two or three days after one unsuccessful attempt.
Spread the mutual constructive feedback out: request and provide feedback more often, instead of trying to pack it all into one annual encounter.
Express your needs as "I-messages," for example, "When I go three or four weeks without checking in with you, I tend to get stuck, and it's frustrating for me."
Learn to tolerate more uncertainty.  If you are doing original research, and if you are the one doing the original research, you can't expect her to constantly guide you.  If she did, then who would be doing the original research?  She would!
Ditch the smile (unless there is something genuinely charming or funny that you are reacting to).  Your studies are serious business.  You are not in your program to demonstrate that you are a nice person.
Balance out the exploratory work with some work that is not so exploratory.  If you have several irons on the fire, then when you get stuck on the exploratory thing, or if your advisor is on the dark side of the moon for a while, you can turn to another project and make some progress there.
As previously mentioned by someone else, develop a relationship with another mentor, so that you are not so dependent on just one person.  In the same vein, develop collaborative relationships with people at your level.  (Some of these may be remote collaborations.)

Some of the ideas here are really good: when I was grad student I often made a deal with my supervisor that I do some of his routine or clerical work (such as programming or trying out some simple idea, or shuffling the papers to the secretary) so he could get more time to focus on supervising me.

1) Unfortunately, this is the same situation that happens with many the  professors, and probably most of the high-ranking ones. Professors/researchers are expected to write grant proposals, sit on committees, etc. In my opinion as a professor, this is the single most annoying and wasteful aspect of working as university professor/researcher. I too did not get into my field to push papers, and I feel my time and talents are wasted by doing clerical work (grant proposals are sometimes 10% of innovative work which needs me, and 90% of the stuff that could be done by (talented!) clerical staff, but often we are expected to do all the work.
So the answer is: all the good supervisors will have the same problem, so the best option is to ask your supervisor to assign some of her junior colleagues (postdoc or senior PhD student) for day-to-day supervision tasks. Of course, you will have to return the favor to this person by including him/her as a coauthor of your papers, because his work will be in them as well.
2) This is personality issue. I don't think there is way to change that (I assume you are not her first PhD student). But this can be addressed by you - when you discuss your work with your supervisor, alert her to possible problems and explicitly ask her whether she thinks something should be changed, adapted, given less or more prominence, etc. She will have to think and answer when directly challenged.
There is also a small probability that she does not care, in that case she is a very bad choice for a supervisor, so run away.

Thank you. Although I'm not the first phD student, I'm the second. And in this case I think that difference matters little. Normally I would totally agree, but it's just not possible for someone else to mentor me. I find myself in the situation where as a new grad student, I need to drive a lot of the productivity.. I've learnt a lot in the process, but it's extremely confusing as you can imagine!


text:
Are teaching assistants responsible for grading assignments not in their course?
I am currently a teaching assistant for a lab course. I've been told to grade part of 1 of the 3 exams for the associated theory course. (There are multiple lab TAs and each is assigned one of the three exams.) The problem with this is that the theory course has its own TA, and best I can tell my responsibilities only cover the lab course.
In the past I was a TA for the theory course as well, and I had to grade almost everything (weekly homework, weekly quizzes, and 6 exams) for about 200 students in two separate lectures with two different professors. One professor offered to grade 2 of the 3 exams in his class to lighten my load, but I didn't request this. I am told my experience TAing the theory course was very typical (no help from the lab TAs). It was a lot of work, but it was manageable, and to be honest I'd rather be a TA for the theory course than the lab.
From what I hear, the theory course this time around has more than just a TA. The homeworks (easily over 1/2 the grading effort!) are graded by undergraduate graders to reduce the workload for the TA. Given the reduced amount of work for the theory TA and that I don't see these exams as part of my responsibilities, I am considering refusing this request as simply ridiculous.
After speaking with my advisor, he agreed that this is highly sketchy. He talked with some of the people involved and indicated this would not happen in the future, but for now I need to do what I was told. I get the impression that some department politics are involved and he doesn't want to step on more people's toes than necessary. But those people are stepping on my toes, and I honestly don't have the time to grade these exams.
I am meeting with the professor for the theory class soon to get the exams to grade. How should I bring up that I don't think grading these exams are my responsibility, and that I don't want to grade them? Any other ideas about how to handle this situation would be appreciated.
(I asked my advisor if he could figure out if there are any extenuating circumstances involved with this, e.g., the theory TA being ill. I could be accommodating in that case. While I did not get a direct answer to that, what my advisor told me when we last spoke about this indicates the answer is no. I do not know anything about the theory TA otherwise.)

This is likely to be well within the scope of duties of a TA at your particular institution.  You could try to talk to your direct supervisor or to someone higher up in the academic department about it, but don't be surprised if you get told to get back to work.

my advisor...agreed that this is highly sketchy, but recommended that I simply do what I've been told. ... He doesn't want to step on too many people's toes — Stepping on toes on your behalf is a core part of your advisor's job.  You might consider finding a new advisor that has your back.

@JeffE: I may have not given my advisor enough credit. I edited the original question. He was able to get a concession (this won't happen again in future semesters absent extenuating circumstances), but not one for this semester. I trust that this is the best he could do.

I'm assuming you're getting paid to TA? And that the position was somewhat competitive? If so, I'm sure there may be loads of other people who would grade everything just to have the experience of being a TA. I would just do what you're told because you're not yet in a position to "complain". Sorry if that comes across too harsh...

@Michael C.: Yes, I am paid, and the position is at least mildly competitive. However, just because others might want to be in the same position does not mean that I should do whatever I am told. I believe I can improve the situation in a way everyone would be happy with.

Do you keep a log of your hours?  If your hours go substantially over the expected level (in many places this is 20 hours per week) for several weeks, then in my opinion you would have a valid grievance, otherwise not.


text:
Why don't Universities provide staff/post-graduate with stationery?
When I worked in industry,
I had unchecked access to a huge stationery cupboard.
As did hundreds of other employees.
Full of useful things like:

Files, folders, binders
coloured pens, mechanical pencils, markers
BlueTack, bull dog clips, coloured masking tape
index cards, A3 sketch books
postage paid envelopes

and the list goes on. We got some more exciting stuff as it was Agile company.
A friend of mine working for the tax office had similar access to stationery, though without the extra Agile arts and crafts supplies. She did get all the pocket calculators she ever wanted, though.
I'm sure some companies even treat USB drives as disposable.
Point being in industry, the disposable tools you need to do your job were provided to you.
What I have found recently working as a research assistant is that nothing disposable is provided. There is no stationery cupboard to raid.  When I need paper to throw together some math, I often end up using the back of a journal article I printed to read.
I can understand not supplying undergraduates, there are so many it is impossible to keep track of them. But there are a lot fewer staff/postgrads.

Is this normal for universities?

Is there likely to actually be a stationery cupboard (or fund) that I have just never noticed, and that I should ask my supervisor about?

If this is normal practice, what is the history/reasoning behind it?

It is not so much a issue of cost, it is tax deductible (for staff at least), and the pay (for staff) is generally high enough to dwarf these expenses, but of practicality.  The same cost vs payrate, and tax deductions are true in industry, but big (and small) companies judge the productivity gain of no one spending 20 minutes going down to the store to buy a pen worth the costs (I guess).

I think your first question is so minor that it's worth just doing it.  You don't even have to ask your supervisor, you could just ask someone around the office (another postdoc, a grad student, a staff member).  They might not provide you everything, but at the least I would imagine there's a printer or copy machine with paper that can be nabbed in a pinch.

My experience is that private universities do have all of these things. State universities seem to be overseen by legislative bureaucrats that secretly or not so secretly suspect us of being just as corrupt as they are, and so we are not trusted with the likes of free stationary and the likes. Heck, if it weren't for their vigilance someone might take home a free pen for the kids or the spouse.

You probably need to ask around for it or find out where it is. Stationery is a business expense. Can't have a random person accidentally wasting 80 sheets of stationery with a research paper because someone forgot to unload all of it after printing 5 pages of letters, after all.

I'm missing something here: why don't you just buy the stationery you need with yours or your supervisor's funds?

I'm not convinced that either your academia or industry experiences are necessarily universal, or even representative of a broader trend.  The universities (private and public) where I've been have provided all needed office supplies to employees (in one case it had to be signed for, in others not).  And there are certainly businesses that tightly control office supplies (though perhaps less so in some industries than others).

All universities that I worked at had this. The private company that I worked with didn't. Everything is relative.

@MassimoOrtolano because that is one of the things overheads are for.

@StrongBad: well, yes, and that's how it works in my university (however I can buy stationery with my own funds, if I wish) and in the others I know of. However, I visited a couple of times a government research institute in the US (not university), and there, afaik, research groups buy the stationery by paying with their research funds. But maybe is just an isolated case.

Stationary products, with the exception of prepaid postal envelopes, are not reimbursable from most grants and needed to be provided by the university as part of its infrastructure. How the university provides the stationary products is up to them, they can of a closet full of the required supplies, be willing to order them at no cost to grant holders, or provide grant holders with a sufficient portion of the grant overheads so that stationary products can be ordered. Every university I have studied or worked at has had a closet full of supplies and the office staff were willing to order special supplies within reason, but this doesn't mean other models do not exist. You just need to ask.

Looks like one does probably exist, somewhere in my department. I'll have to find out where it is/how it works.

Why would prepaid postal envelopes constitute an exception? I luckily didn't have to rely on paper mail lots of times, but while the universities I saw were usually very generous concerning any other stationery (no locks, no counting, no tracking forms), anything involving postal fees (stamps, though prepaid envelopes would probably qualify as well, if they were offered here) was usually a medium hassle.

@O.R.Mapper I assume postage is an allowable research expense since some research depends on mass mailings. My department covers non-research postage, but if you tried to mail 1000+ surveys you would get told off.

At my  large, elite, private R1 university with an endowment in the billions of dollars, all stationery purchases (copy paper, letterhead, name cards toner cartridges, staples, pens, paper clips) must come out of our individual faculty research accounts.
It was not always this bad, but our current and past provosts in their infinite wisdom used the recessions of 2008 and 2001 to cut down the operating budgets of departments to the absolute minimum. No crisis gone to waste. Now, everything must come out of faculty research or external grant money.
We dream of a future where the endowment growth will mean the return of free paper clips, but no one is holding their breath.

There is a difference between faculty (both continuing and fixed term), sessional (casual staff) and students.
At my university, the stationery supplies closet is in the photocopier room. Only faculty (continuing/fixed term staff) have access via their staff ID card. Sessional staff (teaching assistants, research assistants, casual lecturers not considered faculty etc) are not given access unless there are extenuating circumstances. Students, regardless of whether they are undergraduate or postgraduate, are expected to supply their own stationery.
When we take stationery, we actually have to record it on a sheet with the staff id and so on. It's a bit pedantic but I think it's to avoid losing heaps of stationery taken by students. I don't think it used to be in a locked room but this has since changed.
This may, or may not be the case at your university. If you are not continuing/fixed term staff (so considered part of faculty, you would know if you were actually part of faculty) then you might not actually have privilege to access stationery. Be worth checking.

It sounds, from the other answers, that not having access to free office supplies is not unheard of. Based on my experience, I would not call it "normal" either.
I have been in three departments (engineering and social science) in major research universities and I have always had stationary provided for free. Every single thing on your list has been available and more. This includes two private and one public research universities. I just asked a colleague with experience in two different universities (both social science departments) and he said that staff and faculty have access to office supplies as well.


text:
What would be the difference between the public and private graduate schools in US?
Okay, so back in my country, the difference between private and public colleges is pretty visible. I have worked in biotech labs of both kinds and know that there's a lot of restrictions on using costly instruments in private colleges whereas we get a lot of liberty to get hands-on lab experience in public ones and sometimes they even encourage the person to conduct independent research without any external interference and to let the person fall and learn. In an internship at a private research lab, I had to ask them multiple times (more than 10 times) to let me use a PCR just once (as I needed it in my project thesis) during my stay there for a good two months. They were doubtful about "someone new" manhandling the instrument despite me having been rigorously trained to set-up that machine in the past (You'll be able to comprehend the annoyance if you have a biology background.) This was one incident and I certainly do not wish to rant about the other ones here. This year, I would be applying to US universities for doctoral studies. I have never been to the US, but I have applied to both category. Should I be concerned about such incidents occurring there in private institutions? Also, here the government institutions are highly reputed and have a very stimulating environment much better than any private institutions.
I have found a similar question before here, but I feel that people mainly talk about funding issues here.

"there's a lot of restrictions on using costly instruments in private colleges whereas we get a lot of liberty to get hands-on lab experience in public ones": I'm not sure this is an inherent difference between private and public institutions.  Couldn't it be that the institutions in your experience simply had different policies or cultures, that just happened to coincide with their public/private status?

@NateEldredge While you may find it difficult to gulp it down, this is the the general case in my country and I think it's mostly because of the funding issue and lack of proper maintenance that has been and still is prevalent in most private institutions here. I do not have any official evidence though as such, just that 99 % of people have told me such instances which has further reinforced my belief in it, combined with my own experience.

For graduate school, there are generally few differences. A couple potential factors:

Funding and other resources may be easier to obtain at private schools. On the other hand, there are rich public schools and less well-off private schools. The other factor is that public schools are often larger, so they sometimes have better shared resources (e.g. computing clusters).
Probably the biggest difference is the undergraduate make-up, which only affects you indirectly. At larger public schools you are more likely to TA as a graduate student, which is both good (easy to get TA funding) and bad (may be harder to avoid TAing).
Some public schools have unionized graduate students/teaching assistants. Almost no private schools have these unions. Whether this is good or bad is an open question.
In very rare circumstances, public school funding can be affected by political winds. There was one recent high-profile case where a large public university's budget was severely cut over a couple of years, but I can't think of any other recent cases. This is extremely unlikely, but possibly a factor if future cuts are being discussed.

The type (public/private) of the graduate program you go to is unlikely to make a major difference in your experience. What matters much more is the quality and characteristics of the program, which is largely independent of public vs. private. Each department is unique, and it's worth closely researching both the research being done and the culture that exists there when choosing where to apply to and where to go.

In addition to the excellent points that Roger Fan makes, there are huge differences between American schools that are often bigger than the difference between public and private institutions.  For example:

There are wide differences in the quality of the undergraduate students that institutions attract.  Quality includes:  intelligence, prior preparation, and motivation to succeed academically.  At some top-notch graduate schools, the average undergraduate is smarter than the average graduate student, and knows more math.  At the other extreme, some schools deliberately recruit students who could not get admitted anywhere else.  This will affect your experience as a Teaching Assistant.  (Many public schools are known for high drop-out rates, compared to similarly prestigious private schools.  This suggests that either these public schools are not vetting their admissions as thoroughly, or that their support for marginal students is worse, or both.  I have seen examples of both.)
Some schools rely on "weeder classes" to identify which undergraduates are best suited to particular majors.  I have heard that being a T.A. in a "weeder class" -- which sets up under-prepared students to fail -- is a particularly unpleasant experience.  (The worst T.A. experience I have heard about was in a private school, but public schools are more likely to rely on "weeder classes".)
Some schools have great funding, from research grants, tuition, endowments, and/or government subsidies.  At the other extreme, some schools are "operating on a shoe-string budget".  (I have heard about both public and private schools with shoe-string budgets.)
At some schools, you can take the courses you need to take, in the quarter or semester you want to take them.  In smaller schools, courses might not be available every term.  In overcrowded schools, you might be forced to postpone classes due to overenrollment -- or never allowed to take a course that is offered by a particular department.  (Even within a single school, some departments can be "small", and others "large".  The overcrowded schools I have heard about were public, not private.)
Some schools make a point of encouraging students to live on campus, or nearby.  These schools tend to keep their dormitories open year-round, including over holidays.  Other schools have dormitories with beds so narrow that it is impossible to roll over without waking up, and force students to find other housing three weeks per year.  (The schools I have heard about with great dormitory systems were private, not public.  The schools I have heard about with poor dormitory systems were public, not private.)
Some schools make a point of having strong programs (outside of their majors) to develop students' skills in math, technical writing, speaking English, giving presentations, drawing, organizing business plans, et cetera.  Other schools have mandatory "writing" classes that encourage students to emulate badly translated writing, and prohibit using real-world examples in essays.  (The school I have seen with the terrible writing program was public, not private.  In general, private schools have better reputations for encouraging networking and entrepeneurialism than public schools.)

Hardly germane.


text:
Inviting a likely reviewer of a rejected manuscript as a co-author
Researcher X is well known in area Y for the past five years. He finished his PhD about 4 years ago and now has over 1600 citations. In area Y, he has been the first author of all published survey and tutorial articles. Now someone (researcher A) writes a survey on area Y, narrowed down to a particular aspect in the same journals where Researcher X publishes. He submits his paper and got a rejection. Thus, A thinks the paper would highly benefit from researcher X's experience. The problem is there are strong indications that Researcher X is a reviewer of A's paper. Since A would like to resubmit to this journal, how could he write a convincing letter to Researcher X inviting him for co-authorship. For instance, does this look fine enough?
Dear Researcher X,
I am writing you with respect to my manuscript titled: 'My Title'. I will like to add more value to this paper to meet reputable journal G's standard. It is pertinent that I mention that the paper has been previously rejected from this journal with an opportunity for resubmission. I am thus requesting your assistance and co-authorship to improve on the quality of this manuscript.
I anticipate your response

@DSVA You basically said what I posted as an answer, but more clearly! Feel free to create your own answer and harvest the upvotes.

Definitely, you wouldn't add an author because of a chance of publication. He has to significantly add value to the strength and message of the paper. You invite him as a co-author because his experience and insight into what the paper of such kind should really  look like. Then one can benefit from his experience and technical knowledge in that area during the course of one's study

Two points.

It's actually irrelevant, if X was the reviewer of the paper or not. If you want to ask them, do it. It does not matter, if X knows the paper already or not, but assume they don't.
I would appeal more to the professional interests of X in the mail. Like, "this paper focuses on the weight distribution of spherical cows in vacuum. My coauthors and I think the paper might benefit from your expertise on spherical horses in low gravity".


text:
Are assignment submissions on paper obsolete?
When students turn in papers, are they electronic? or do they turn in physical paper copies?
Perhaps there is one answer for high school students and another for college / graduate school?

There is one answer for each student in each course in each department in each university in each country in the world. I don't think this question can be answered.

what do you mean by student printers? Also, the tag "paper-submission" does not refer to homework submissions. It refers to journal submissions.

Context: US universities. My daughter started 5 years ago now, taking her ink jet printer. It never got used - the small liberal arts school had lots of public printers in libraries and other buildings, with a page allowance that more than covered whatever printing needed to be done. Many professors took pdf submissions. Now at a large state school for grad work, nobody wants paper submissions.
Son just moved in as a freshman, no printer in tow.
Bottom line: universities have printing options available, usually with some pages included in your tuition, most profs take pdf submissions.

Datapoint: I've been teaching for the last 10 years, always strongly encouraging digital submissions. They're easier to check for plagiarism, easier to handle, and more environmentally friendly. If I really need hardcopy (e.g. because they're more convenient to read), I can always print my own. None of my colleagues accepts hardcopy submissions only. But preferences certainly differ.


text:
How much time should you spend on reviewing a paper?
A German colleague once told me, he reviews 4-6 papers per year, and for each, he spends at most 15 mins.
It is no good for him to review a paper. It is better to save the time for writing his own paper.
Personally, I myself recommend all papers  falling onto my lap for publication regardless of the quality. The quality of a paper is up to the readers, not the few referees.
On my side, I also notice that for most papers I got to review, I have not really the expertise to judge the 'quality' of the paper. It seems that the editor sent the paper to me just because I had some paper sharing some keywords in common with that paper. I do not think the second referee is more suitable than me if I reject to review the paper. It is quite random!
Post-publication review is the choice for today's communication technology. You review it if you are interested in it.

You're both doing a really bad service to the physics community. Please, stop reviewing if you cannot do a decent work: no one is forcing you to review papers, and there are already enough bad papers around.

I agree with Massimo Ortolano and want to add that this is not a good question for this site.

The quality is not up to the readers. It's your job to ensure that the papers are scientifically valid. The readers place trust in you, which you and your colleague are abusing.

@henning I can tell you a story. Once I had some idea and told that to a colleague. He was not interested at all. Minor problems. Then I found two papers on a top journal doing that that problem. Then he was quite interested. Many people judge the quality of a paper just by the journal.

@wdlang Many people judge the quality of a paper just by the journal. That readers should be critical doesn't imply that referees should be sloppy.

FTR, I don't think this question is opinion-based, at least in the latest version. In my answer, I gave an objective criterion, namely that the time should be appropriate to the task.

I wonder if asking" how long does average academic spends reviewing a paper" would make this less opinion based. I bet there is data out there on this.

@Ian Sudbery that's a good question, too. Perhaps you'd like to ask it?

I take it you are asking how much time a reviewer should spend on reviewing an individual paper.*
You should spend as much time as it takes to ensure that the paper satisfies the fundamental criteria for scientific inquiry that apply in your field. This is the minimum. Some journals or conferences also ask their reviewers to assess the novelty of the contribution and its topical fit with the venue. Personally, I believe a reviewer should go beyond a pure quality check and make constructive suggestions for improvement, if the paper has potential.
How much time is "as much as it takes"? This varies depending on your practice, on the paper, and on the discipline. From what I hear, reviewing math papers can take many working days. In political science, which is my own discipline, a thorough review takes me the better part of one working day. This is a mean with a large dispersion around it.
15 minutes are not enough time to read a paper, let alone to apply even a basic quality check, unless the paper is very obviously insufficient. Rubber-stamping every paper is not enough; arguably, it is even worse, because you don't even pretend to do your job. Both "approaches" simply bypass and sabotage the peer reviewing process.
The editors and readers, i.e. the scientific community, entrusts you, as reviewer, with the task of upholding the scientific validity of the research that is being published and disseminated. You and your colleague are breaking this trust. You are doing the community a big disservice. Please stop immediately to take on any more reviewing tasks.
If you are concerned about the time reviewing takes away from your own research, do less reviews rather than more superficial ones. Peer reviewing builds on reciprocity. If you want to publish in a refereed journal, you should "give back" and review. Since most journals require two reports, reciprocate by writing at least two thorough reviews for every paper that you publish in a peer reviewed venue.
If you are concerned that you lack the expertise to write a review, tell the editor that you aren't qualified, and they will find someone more suitable.
*An earlier version of the question asked how much time do you spend. Nobody is interested in how much time I or any one individual spends on reviewing a paper. Perhaps you're interested in some general patterns across many individuals, but I'm not aware of any research on this.


text:
How can I introduce a new theory and avoid self promotion making a presentation at a national conference
Recently, I was accepted to make a 30 min oral presentation during National Conference, and are a little concerned how to avoid self promotion in my attempts to explain or announce a new theory of cognition to serve the mental health field with new therapies.
Point being, we find everywhere people and professionals talking about needing new approaches and repeating the problems with mental health, this research is offering solutions.
Is the National Stage the place to announce this, or will it be viewed as self promotion?

What kind of people are attending the conference? Have you submitted an abstract for the talk? Why do you view self promotion as negative?

Am I correct in assuming that you are talking about a hypothesis and not a theory in the scientific sense?

Please do figure out how to not give the signals of crackpottery, if you want people to take you seriously. The implicit premises of your question already verge on an attitude that would be perceived by many more-senior people as necessarily unreliable. Report the science, not your ego.

@Nathanael Farley, It is a mental health conference so there will be all sorts of professionals there, and I did submit an abstract, and I have always heard self promotion is never viewed as a good thing.

@Gerhard, I would have to say that it is a theory although tested informally it can be reproduced.

@Rcarnt: that still makes it a hypothesis (at best).

@paul garrett, thank you, I have tried a few times to answer your question without sounding egocentric.  I assume you are of the "more senior" people you mentioned, and if there is a chance you can contact me, I feel your advice would be immensely helpful.

@Rcant, if you'd like, send me email to the address on my user page here. Mostly I would reiterate comments of others. The tl;dr is "make it be about the science, not about you". And, if it's an idea without much follow-up, then it is probably premature to present it publicly. People like evidence, especially if an idea is against the grain. E.g., don't claim "here's a wonderful idea I had", but, rather, something like (this might work in math) "Consider the following hypothesis. Here are several examples that illustrate the plausibility of..."

@paul, Thank you for this but I am not familiar with this site and do not fully understand how to send you a private message, I visited your profile.  Is there even a private message option here?

@Rcant, my "profile" links to my web site, and there you can see my university email...

@paul, Okay I have sent you an email, thank you again Paul.


text:
Where to learn math and physics?
I have been looking around to find a place where I can advance my knowledge of these two subjects, so far I have found most places suggest "Khan Academy" but I am really bad at learning from videos and I can never get the hang of it.
Do you know any other places I could go to?

"Shopping questions", i.e. asking for program recommendations, are off-topic on Academia.SE.

You are not alone.  Some people do NOT do well in this kind of pedagogical environment.  For such people, there are colleges, universities, private tutors, and textbooks.

http://academicearth.org/
Similar to the Khan Academy, Academic Earth’s vision is to offer “a world-class education for everyone on earth“. The site offers free online classes and in-depth online learning through video lectures from university professors. Interestingly, Academic Earth has partnered with the same universities as Coursera and many more. In addition to Princeton, Stanford, and Berkeley, you will find video lectures from UCLA, Harvard, and Yale. Moreover, Academic Earth has partnered with the Khan Academy.
https://www.coursera.org/
Coursera has partnered with top US universities to provide some of their courses for free. The site offers lectures on computer science, healthcare, social sciences, and economics from universities like Princeton, Stanford or Berkeley.


text:
Is a "Scientific Journal Impact Factor" of around 4 or 5 good for a philosophy journal?
I am considering (for a variety of reasons) submitting an article to a philosophy journal, which happens to have a Scientific Journal Impact Factor of 4.699. This would be my first submission.
Is this considered to be a decent impact factor?
Or should I try a higher ranked journal?

"Scientific Journal Impact Factor" sounds an awful lot like something from one of the fake impact factor scam companies.

Do you read this journal?  Do you cite papers in this journal? Does your advisor/mentor recommend submitting to this journal?  If your answer is yes, then why do you care about impact factor?  And if your answer is no, then why do you care about impact factor?

Why not check the impact factor (or similar metrics) at a well-known, reputable source, and then compare it to the rest of the field? I've never heard about Scientific Journal Impact Factor (this one: http://www.sjifactor.inno-space.net/?), but it sounds suspicious and it doesn't list several well-known journals (at least in biology). The "original" impact factor comes from Thomson-Reuters, but in case you do not have access to it (you library should have it though), there are also free reputable services that offer similar metrics. SCImago journal rank or Journal metrics from Scopus comes to mind. Compare the journal you are thinking about with others in the field using one of these services. If the journal you are considering cannot be found there, I would consider this a red flag.
A journal ranking list in philosophy from SCimago can be found here. If you order that list by "Cites per document (2 years)" you will have a very close approximation to the Thomson-Reuters impact factor. From what I can see, an impact factor of >4 would be off the charts for a philosophy journal, which makes me even more sceptical about the metric that you have been looking at.
What's the name of the journal you are considering?

IFs vary dramatically in different subjects. For Mathematics, for example, IF of 4.7 is huge. For Physics it is probably somewhere in a medium or higher band. As I heard, for Biology or Pharmacy the IFs are typically much larger.
I am not really aware of a situation in philosophy, but 4.7 seems to be a huge IF for a journal in humanities. Consider asking your colleagues (or your supervisor if you have any), if this is a reputable journal (and check that it is not a scam or predatory journal).

The question is not about Thomson's IF.