text:
How does academics form discussion & study environments efficiency and effectively?
As a student, I often read & hear academics meeting in workshops to discuss problems in their fields with their colleagues, or with academics in other field etc.. As a Physics & Mathematics student, I know how beneficial and enjoyable is discussing ideas with a fellow student, so I'm aware of the importance of such meetings.
However, whenever I (with other student) tried to form such a discussion groups, meetings, it always failed. Most of the time, we didn't have any specific problem at hand, and there was nothing to discuss. I mean after all we were learning the subject, and try to understand it; not to solve some particular problem. Of course, one can try to solve some "exercises" as a group, but most of the time those are just to verify we understood what we've learned, and their solutions are in web, so to a Physics/Mathematics students, there is almost no motivation, nor any joy, in solving or talking about them.
Similarly, I've seen various "study groups" in my department (within PhD student, PhD student with his/her advisor etc.) studying some topics together. Up to now, I always did self-studies alone, so knowing that doing this with a second or a third person would be much more beneficial, I also tried to implement such a study group, it also did not work, somehow.
Question:
How do academic meetings for discussions & studying managed themselves in a way that it is useful for everyone, much more efficient compare to doing the same thing alone, and enjoyable ?

Let me suggest that there isn't any magic answer. Certainly not for efficiency. But a few things can help.
Many (most?) such groups have some leadership. Often it is a senior professor and the group consists of other professors and some students.  Often the subject of the group is the main research interest of the senior professor and others are looking for their insights to help in their own research, likely in the same or a related area. Here the leadership is fixed and the cohesion of the group is guaranteed by the stature of that professor.
Student groups are a bit different. If you can include a professor as leader, then you have a seminar, and many/most of the ideas come from the prof. That can be both stable and productive.
Some student groups are driven by fear. In some universities, students that don't band together to study will likely be unable to understand everything needed in the course. Some law schools are like this. See the movie Paper Chase for a dramatic example. These are pretty stable and are a way for a group to share out a huge amount of readings and provide summaries for everyone.
But if you want something more informal, what you need is someone to get it started with some ideas to study and also some commitment from a group of people. Of course the commitment needs to be sustained and that depends on the "work" of the group being mutually interesting. One way to manage the leadership issue is to pass it around. One way to do that is to have people contribute ideas for what should be discussed at the next meeting(s) and then vote among members on what should be pursued next. Whoever contributes the idea becomes "leader" for the discussion of the idea. That person probably has some commitment and the voting may add a bit more. But it is especially helpful if the proposer of the idea can give an initial outline and list of tasks before the meeting(s) at which the idea will actually be discussed.
This, of course, isn't the only way to do things, but leadership and commitment are, I think, the two essentials.


text:
What is the proper way of searching for a reference whose type is unknown?
In the article, Stability of quantum motion in chaotic and regular systems, Physical Review A, 30, 1610 (1984), in the reference section these two references given:

[11]M. V. Berry, in Chaotic Behaoior of Deterministic Systeins, Vol. 36 of
  Les Houches Summer School Proceedings, edited by G. Iooss, R. H. G.
  Helleman, and R. Stora (North- Holland, Amsterdam, 1983).

and

[13]A. Peres, in Quantum Chaos, edited by G. Casati and J. Ford (Plenum,
  New York, 1984), and references therein.

However, when I search for these two publications, for the first one, I can only a single volume - 16th - and the for the latter one none at all.
It is clear from the title that the first publication is a Proceeding of some summer school held, but the the second one, I cannot even speculate what it is from the way it is referenced ("in ..."); a book, an article, etc.
Question:
First my second question: what type of publication the second reference references ?
Secondly my first question: what is the proper way of searching such documents.

Plenum publishes books.

You could start with a reference librarian or maybe email the authors or editors or a list server.

MathSciNet turned up the first one.

North-Holland is/was a journal publisher. If not still independent, it likely is part of Elsivier. Librarians to the rescue!

I came across this browsing the list of questions with no answers. You have likely found the source publications since posing the question, but it seemed worth addressing for posterity anyway.

First my second question: what type of publication the second reference references ?

The inclusion of the keyword 'in' typically means the reference points to a contribution in a book or similar, which in this case supposedly was edited by Casati and Ford, and published by Plenum. The reference does not tell us whether this might be the type of edited volume where the editors invite different authors to provide chapters or if it might have been the proceedings of a conference.

Secondly my first question: what is the proper way of searching such documents.

The general advice would be to consult with a research librarian if your own searches don't yield anything useful. The second thing to keep in mind is that people sometimes make mistakes in references, so it can be worth trying a variety of searches including only part of the reference to not constrain the results too much. This can take some trial and error, but has the advantage of working whether you know the type of document or not.
In this case, I think it's likely that your second reference should actually point to A. Peres, in Chaotic Behavior in Quantum Systems, edited by G. Casati (Plenum, New York, 1985), available here. This book is the proceedings for a 1983 conference on "Quantum Chaos: Chaotic Behavior in Quantum Systems, Theory and Applications" that was organized by Giulio Casati and Joseph Ford. It is easy to imagine that Asher Peres (the author of the article you found the reference in) would expect the title to be "Quantum Chaos", both organizers to be editors, and that there might have been a publication delay from 1984 to 1985. Peres' contribution to the proceedings, titled "Regular and Irregular Energy Spectra", also fits in the context of where it is cited.
In this case, I found the 1985 volume by noting that G. Casati most likely would be Guilio Casati, and then looking for works he edited published by Plenum. Alternatively, you could search a database like WorldCat for publisher and title. Even just a Google search for "Quantum Chaos, edited by G. Casati and J. Ford (Plenum, New York, 1984)" is fuzzy enough to reveal the presence of the 1985 volume.
For something like the first reference, which has a unique title, it is often useful to search for the title itself. Since it's also part of a series, looking for the series can work too. Where to search, you ask? Well, since Les Houches is one of if not the most famous summer school in physics, it is a good chance that your local well-stocked university library would have a physical copy, so searching their catalog makes sense. Alternatively, especially for more obscure titles, it can be worth searching it at WorldCat. In this case, doing so reveals that Archive.org has a scanned version you can borrow if signed in.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Why are we not teaching university student how to learn/study?
Question is simple:

Why are we not teaching university students how to learn/study ?

Motivation:
I've seen many university students who does not know how to study something, or learn something by themselves or by taking classes. I consider myself as someone who knows the basics about how to teach something to myself; I've various self-study experiences.However, all my experiences about topics that are well-localised, such as linear algebra, or analysis etc. However, for example, when I want to learn Analytical Mechanics with all of its mathematical backgrounds (starting from smooth manifolds), I get lost; I need to do both mathematics and physics at the same time in a rigorous sense, and the task has many faces, so regardless of how experiences I'm on self-studying, I don't know how to teach myself this particular subject.
Considering the fact that some student even cannot how to learn something even at the end of their second year in university, naturally this questions comes to mind.

I would argue that in most courses the primary learning goal is teaching students how to learn and study.

Given the large variation in learning styles, are you suggesting a required class on learning? Or what?

@BryanKrause My whole university education experience claims the opposite.

@JonCuster Anything that works is fine; I'm not suggesting any method in particular.

Isn't the topic of "how people learn" still a large discussion? traditional v holistic approaches...

University is "higher education". I suspect most universities expect that you have learned the basics about learning and self study during school, at least during the final years of high school or your local equivalent.

@skymningen According to my own observations, that assumptions is hardly valid in reality.

I didn't go to university to learn how to study. If I wanted lessons in learning how to study, I would have done something different. It would have been super annoying, and a waste of my time and money to "teach me how to learn." That's what high school and/or community college is for.

I think you've gotten some good answers to the question "Why are we not teaching university students how to learn/study?" but I think your actual question is just a complaint about your own experience with learning one specific topic.

@BryanKrause A complaint ? to whom for what ? The example I gave is just an example.

@onurcanbektas I thought you were talking about undergrads?

What are the reasons for the closed votes ?

Because, when they first get to a university, they have already been studying for the past 12 years of their life and they should already know how to do it?

You seem to be mainly aiming to discuss the expectations put on (PhD) students. Their abilities might vary. But that is not the universities fault. The student by that time had plenty of time to learn how to learn or realise they need to do that outside of school if it is not provided.

Why are we not teaching university students how to learn/study ?

Historically, professor profess rather than teach and it was not considered part of the university's job. For example, this PhD comic makes fun of that. Thus, the onus in the student to learn rather than the professor or instructor to ensure learning. This includes both the college-level study skills and the ability to teach themselves new materials beyond their coursework.
Pragmatically, many universities (at least in the United States) recognize new students (e.g,. freshman) do not have these skills and do teach them. For example, my undergraduate school offers courses such as Wildlife 100: Wildlife Profession and Preparation that:

Provide a background on careers in the wildlife field and an overview of skill development necessary to work in the field. Exposure to opportunities in research, internships, and extracurricular, as well as guidance on creating an effective program of study.

Furthermore, many universities in the United States offer tutoring or learning centers to help students develop study skills for their current courses (e.g., Texas Tech, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Yale).

Well, all of them seems about how to study for a course effectively. Note that, that is not comment throughtout universities, as far as I know. Also, what about how learn a subject by yourself ?

+1. For the first paragraph, I would add that we really expect students to have already learned "how to learn" during high school, the same way we expect them to be able to write an essay and do basic math.

We don't teach students to learn because we don't know how to and many of us would probably be really bad at it. The argument is that being a student at a research intensive university provides (1) opportunities outside the classroom that a student wouldn't have at a teaching focused college and (2) that the faculty expertise in their field offsets the lack of teaching skills.
Given many faculty at research intensive universities lack teaching skills and of those, a significant proportion don't care, asking them to teach material they don't know or care about is probably a bad idea. Now whether a university should employee someone to teach learning skills is another issue. Historically, the idea was that students entering university should have the fundamental reading, writing and study skills needed to be successful. While that may not be accurate, universities seem to take the approach that they should be able to learn those things on their own.

I'd go a bit further. There's an abundance of educational and neuroscience research about effective teaching and study techniques, but most faculty are either ignorant of it or don't try to incorporate it into their teaching.

This is a complex issue with many contributing factors.
Not every student needs to learn how to learn at the level you are teaching. They may later, of course, and some students do well for a long time and then hit a wall when things get hard. Some struggling students go farther than some early superstars because they learn how to work at it and the superstars found it too easy and don't understand why they are now having problems.
Many faculty members, I think at the beginning of a career especially, don't realize that their students are not like themselves. They get doctorates because they can learn relatively easily in the environment in which they were taught - usually lecture and exam in many places. But their own students may not do well it that same environment (what ever it is) and so don't have any easy tools for teaching those students.
Furthermore every student is different in how they learn. And many students don't know when they have learned something and so make unfortunate assumptions. Some students read something and think they have learned it, when they have not. They have only a short term memory retention of what they read, not a true understanding.
Generally speaking we learn through reinforcement and feedback. Learning requires that we re-connect synapses in the brain, physically changing its structure. See The Art of Changing the Brain by James E Zull for a run-down on the science behind it.
What to do
I think that every faculty member has a responsibility to teach their students to learn as necessary. This means being always aware of what is happening in their course, getting sufficient feedback on student learning and making sufficient course adjustments so that anyone with the desire to learn can do so.
Sometimes the most effective way to teach a subject, say computer science, is to interrupt the course and spend some time teaching the students how to learn CS. If you can make them more effective learners then everything else will be much easier.
For example, students may not know the value of taking notes, nor of summarizing their own notes. They may not know the value of always carrying something from which they can study (book, notes, index cards, ...). It isn't hard or especially time consuming to teach people the value of such things. I ended class periods with a call for the (say) three most important ideas of the current lecture. I sometimes asked students for the most important idea of the previous lecture. It takes a couple of minutes to do this and sets the stage.
So, I think that the presumption made by the OP that this doesn't happen isn't necessarily true. But the need for it isn't universally recognized, when IMO it should be.
In fact, you can teach people to learn your subject if you just require them to do tasks that give the necessary reinforcement and you also give them the required feedback. Don't assume that they have learned anything because you have lectured on it. Give them some sort of exercise or project that will induce the necessary changes in the brain. Then give them some feedback on how they did. Even better if you can let them re-do assignments to correct misconceptions and give better and more positive reinforcement. This can be done instead of any formal teaching them how to learn and can be just as effective. Maybe more effective, actually, as it is more organic.
In particular, active learning methodologies results in learning as it requires the active participation (reinforcement) of the student. The student doesn't need to "learn" how to learn the subject matter. The course activities themselves provide for the required learning changes to the brain.
I'll note that the Pedagogical Patterns project has spent quite a lot of effort on the issue of teaching technical subjects (especially CS) to people  who have different learning modalities. So, it isn't that the issue has been ignored.

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


text:
What is the most logical course of action if your P.I does not write you a letter of recommendation in time even though s/he said that s/he would?
Context:
I am an undergrad, and working in a research group over 7 months now. I have asked my P.I (group leader) whether he would write me a recommendation letter one month before the deadline of Master's programs, and he said that he would.
Now, the deadline was yesterday, and he haven't write me any letter. I have reminded him the letter regularly via email, and he responded positively, and when I reminded him again just one day before the deadline, he said that he will write it after finishing a report, and still there is no letter.
What is the most logical course of action in this case?

You have already done the right thing.  Keep reminding him.

I'd say your best course of action is to notify the institution that you are applying to that there has been a delay, and to find someone else who can write you a recommendation within a week's time. The admissions department is likely to have a little bit of grace period for you to work with, but probably not more than a few working days. That said, they may not accept the late recommendation, but it is worth trying.

If you worked closely with a senior postdoc or graduate student, you can ask that person to write you a letter. While they would not have the name recognition that your advisor does, they would be able to provide actual examples of your research skills, problem-solving abilities, and writing that the actual PI probably cannot match.
Admissions committees have seen lame PIs before, and would like to know if you can do the work.


text:
Side tracks that come up during research
During the development of a research project, often one faces many possibilities - different methods one can employ, different ideas one can try, different problems one can try to focus, etc.. To be able to prevent the project losing its focus, we need to make certain choices. However, it would be interesting to note these alternative routes, as one can later need to come back to them.
What I usually do is to simply make a note book of these alternative routes, alternative methods/ideas I have to a corner of my lab book, but the issue is that I never come back and read my notes because I usually don't need to. And since I don't remember what kind of ideas I had in the past, it would be time-consuming to come back and read all my notes every single time.
Also, at the time I made a choice between many options, I would like to remember why I did one particular choice and not the others.
What are the best practices that I can use to record and remember these alternative routes, alternative methods, etc.?

I understand the general direction of this question, but not the specific issue/question. Are you looking for a more structured way of representing the choices, so that you don't need to read through a lot of unstructured text? "I would like to remember why I did one particular choice and not the others." Why don't you write that down as well?

@lighthousekeeper because in the end there will be a lot of text and idea spread over the whole document. I can't figure out how to make them more organized.

Have you considered having a table instead of plain text? For example, with the columns "question addressed", "options", "chosen option(s)", "reasons for choosing".

@lighthousekeeper not flexible enough to accommodate different types of needs. Plus, with the citations etc. it is not much feasible in terms of the presentation of the information. In a research project (experiments + theory), it is quite easy to get lost even on a table.

What kinds of needs? What is the issue with citations?

I keep (for a pretty long time) my ideas, notes, excerpts, etc using Zettelcasten knowledge management system (electronically, using Obsidian).
This allows me to create notes and links between them, organize hierarchically in several ways, represent in various fashions, revisit them in a structured or unstructured manner. I found this method to be very productive for both keeping the information in an accessible form, as well as to form and materialize new ideas, which often come from research & development side tracks.
This method also works well together with reference management systems, such as Zotero.
For completeness, about zettelkasten from Wiki:

A zettelkasten consists of many individual notes with ideas and other
short pieces of information that are taken down as they occur or are
acquired. The notes may be numbered hierarchically so that new
notes may be inserted at the appropriate place, and contain metadata
to allow the note-taker to associate notes with each other. For
example, notes may contain subject headings or tags that describe key
aspects of the note, and they may reference other notes. The
numbering, metadata, format and structure of the notes is subject to
variation depending on the specific method employed.
A zettelkasten may be created and used in a digital format, sometimes
using personal knowledge management software. But it can be and has
long been done on paper using index cards.
The system not only allows a researcher to store and retrieve
information related to their research, but has also been used to
enhance creativity.

I use index cards, actually. Electronic versions have the potential downside that the can become obsolete. You also need a solid backup protocol. And anything in the cloud is subject to vanishing instantly. Paper endures.

@Buffy yep, solid backup control is crazy important if relying on electronic. But it gives a benefit of being able to use the system while in cafe, in a parc, or in another city. For me, it outweighs the downsides, and I sure pay a lot of attention to backups.

You can carry a small deck of index cards actually. See Hipster PDA here: https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/a/1168/1293


text:
A Student turned in an essay answer to a question I haven't asked yet. What to do?
A student turned in a bunch of homework assignments, poorly organized and many not labeled.  One of them was on a topic for several weeks from now.  The student turned in a short essay for the assignment, which I have not given.
Notes:
Most of the course material was prepared by someone else and is normally used by several of us adjuncts.
I've taught this course prior.
English is not the student's primary language (interesting since the essays turned in are in very good English...).
Since I haven't given the assignment, is it plagiarism?  (What was turned in is straight up a copy of an internet source.)
Do I report them to the Chair/Dean for plagiarism?

"What was turned in is straight up a copy of an internet source" - isn't it plagiarism just because it copies an Internet source without attribution? the stuff about not having assigned it yet is not even necessary.

Just as this does not appear to be explicitly stated here yet: Answering a question that was not asked yet is not plagiarism of its own (and it does not even necessarily constitute any misdemeanour at all).

@O.R.Mapper, answering a question you haven't seen yet either constitutes precognition or some kind of cheating. So yeah, I'll go with cheating.

@Matt Not really; it's possible to have the assignment instructions from previous years and still write the assignment yourself.

@Matt: That does not match my experience. I see students anwer other questions than the ones being asked all the time. And every now and then, those questions that were answered happen to be questions I was actually going to ask at a later point. (And even if we are looking at cheating, plagiarism is of course only one out of many forms of cheating.)

This is clear cut plagiarism. And not only is it plagiarism, it is also very poorly conducted plagiarism, which is a bit worse in my book, since it indicates that the student does not even takes studying seriously enough to read through the assignments and understand what he/she is plagiarizing.
Your university surely has guidelines. If you don't know the guidelines, you can ask the person responsible for undergraduate education at your institution, which will probably also be the person you should report to.
And let me just add one final thing: You don't do the student any favors by not reporting. Plagiarism exploits the mutual trust there always needs to be when teaching, and this is harmful for university education as such. Plagiarism and cheating should therefore always have consequences.

No. The plagiarism part is irrelevant here. You report them for cheating on their homework by copying it from the internet.
And after that, you seriously consider changing your assignments from year to year, even if slightly, to avoid this problem.

Copying homework from the Internet and passing it off as your own is plagiarism.

It's (hopefully) a violation of your institution's academic integrity policies. The precise word you use to describe that violation--"cheating" or "plagiarism"--really isn't important.

@ff524 I agree with you that it is plagiarism; I never wrote otherwise. What I am saying is that we are stressing too much attention on the plagiarism, when the elephant in the room here is the student submitting an assignment they didn't write. If the solution ended with a note (c) 2016, Some Guy on The Internet, then the problem would still stand. Plagiarism, as in "wrongful appropriation of someone else's work without citation", is a secondary issue in this case.

@FedericoPoloni: It was only after reading "If the solution ended with a note (c) 2016, Some Guy on The Internet, then the problem would still stand." that I got your point (that I fully agree with). Maybe you could add something to that extent to the answer? As it stands ("(...) plagiarism (...) irrelevant (...) report them for cheating (...)"), the answer sounds a lot like "It's not an apple, it's a fruit!" ;)

@FedericoPoloni what confuses me, and other people as well, I think, is that you say "the elephant in the room here is the student submitting an assignment they didn't write." That is plagiarism. Granted, we can all agree that it's wrong, regardless of what it's called. But why would you say plagiarism is irrelevant, when the issue that you identify as the central one is a case of plagiarism? I guess you must be using a different definition of plagiarism than the rest of us?

I am using them with these meanings: Cheat, 3. to take an examination in a dishonest way, such as by having improper means of getting answers. Plagiarism 1. the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.

Anyway, I realize that I might be missing some nuances, since I am not a native speaker of English and I am not familiar in the way these words are used in the US. Probably it is better if I just delete this answer, since many people find it confusing.

@DavidZ: At first, I thought so, too. But I think what Federico is distinguishing is (1) the act of pretending to be the author of something written by another, by concealing the identity of the true author (plagiarism), and (2) the act of submitting a solution for homework that the student did not create on their own, irrespective of whether or not the true origin was concealed (indeed, I wouldn't call that plagiarism). The two misdemeanours are certainly linked here, but (1) is about misrepresenting the author, whereas (2) is about manipulating the skill evaluation process.

Given the recent sentiment about retention from many administrators, just make sure you have a very solid case.
It is cheating, and should be treated as such.  If the school/university/department has a policy, follow it.  If not, propose one.  Mine goes like this:

The first instance of cheating or plagiarism receives a zero on the assignment
After being warned, the second instance is a failing grade for the course

While the first instance may or may not be reported to the administration, the second one will.  This may lead to disciplinary action up to dismissal from the University.
As an adjunct, you have to be very careful, ask for the chair's opinion or at least a TT colleague.

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


text:
How long does it usually take to hear back for academic positions? Why haven't I heard back and when should I follow up?
This is a special community wiki 'canonical' question that aggregates advice on a frequently-asked question. See this meta discussion. Please feel free to edit this question to improve it.
I submitted an application, had an interview, or otherwise applied for an academic position. It has now been several days, weeks, or months, but I still haven't heard back. Have I been rejected? How long will it take? At what point can I follow up? If I do follow up and they say something like "we enjoyed meeting you and will be in touch with our decision," is this a good sign or a bad sign?

As noted above, please feel free to make edits to this post directly. For more major suggestions or discussion, please post on [meta].

Short Answer
Timelines vary widely. No one on the internet can tell you whether you got the job, how long things will take, or whether an e-mail would be perceived as obnoxious. Do not waste time trying to read the tea leaves (e.g., "Hmm, they said 'we will let you know'...is that a good sign?"); this is fruitless. You should continue your job search until you have accepted a written offer.
Can I inquire about the status of my application?
…if I have another offer?
If you have another offer on the table and need to make a decision soon, it is absolutely appropriate to contact all departments where you have had a full interview (also known as an on-campus interview), tell them that you have such an offer, and ask about the status of your application.
…if I do not have another offer?
As stated here, this is pretty similar to habanero sauce: use it judiciously, and very sparingly, and it's often best not to use it at all. In particular, "demonstrating interest" will not make much difference at this level. If you do inquire, it's very unlikely that they will reply "Oh! Didn't we tell you? Yes, you're hired." Rather, you will almost certainly get an inconclusive answer, no answer, or a negative answer.
Still, If you were told to expect a response by a particular day, it is probably reasonable to follow up a week after the deadline. If you were not given any timeline, then following up a month after your last communication is likely appropriate. Your mail should be clearly-written and concise; there is really no need for this mail to be longer than a sentence or two.
But why haven't I heard anything?
As written in this answer, there are three likely reasons that you haven't heard anything:

They don't want to hire you, but forgot to tell you.
They have offered the job to someone else, but are keeping you around as a backup in case the first person turns them down.
They are still interviewing candidates (or have encountered other delays), and won't decide for a while.

It's therefore unlikely that you'll get a useful answer just by asking (unless you're in case #1, in which case you'll get the bad news).
Especially in Europe during the summer break, many faculty members will be on vacation and do not answer their email (or only select emails) and it can take longer than expected to hear back from them. Sending multiple emails will not help in this case.
What's the typical timeline?
Varies from days from many months.

For US faculty positions, interviews are often held over a few months. It can then take much longer for a decision to be made and finalized such that the candidate can be contacted.
For UK faculty positions, interviews are generally held with all candidates in just a few days. Even so, decision timelines can range widely.
For most post-docs, and also for European graduate admissions, decisions are made by a single professor. But even here, interviews may be scheduled over several months, and the professor may be waiting for funding awards or for other factors outside their control. And so, timelines can still vary widely.
For US graduate admissions, most decisions are made between mid-January and mid-April. If you haven't heard anything by mid-March, it's probably not good news, but some students do get admitted later, even after the April 15 deadline.

What can I do to improve my odds?
Not much. After you complete the application process, there is nothing to do except check your e-mail. Sending frequent follow-ups is unlikely to impress anyone, and will probably come across as desperate. Don't try any "tricks" like asking for additional interviews, setting arbitrary deadlines, or contacting HR; these will hurt more than they help. On the other hand, if you have real "news" that affects your candidacy (such as a reduced timeline due to a competing offer or a new source of external funding), it's appropriate to share this.
At what point do I give up and assume I've been rejected?
As above, there is no real answer to this. If you haven't heard anything after several months and your requests for updates have gone unanswered, then your prospects are indeed bleak. And yet, we cannot say that your odds are zero. But in any case, it does not really matter; you should never assume that you have a job until you've accepted a written offer.
Please feel free to edit this answer to improve it. Please add content to this answer rather than posting additional answers.

"If you have another offer on the table and need to make a decision soon, it is absolutely appropriate to mention this." Not only is it absolutely appropriate, it is almost essential. It can have a drastic effect on the response to your inquiry -- going from a negative/noncommital answer to generating serious follow-up and interest in getting you an offer. Particularly if the offer you have is for an equal or more prestigious position.


text:
I need resources regarding the history & meaning of a PhD
I am taking over the position of program director for a relatively new PhD program, at a college which has only one PhD program (mine).
The students are generally mid-career public health types, all are post-masters.
I'd like to expose them to something about the "meaning' of the PhD, its history, roots, something like that.... I remember in my program we got a lecture about the monks in medieval times, protecting knowledge and books, something like that. It had quite an impact on me at the time (long ago now).
Does anyone have any ideas about a resource, perhaps readings or other media, that I could assign to them which might instill this same value?

Didn't you get anything here? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy

Obligatory reading for your students: The illustrated guide to a Ph.D.

Massimo - many thanks that is great, I had not seen it before...

You can see, breif history of PhD and a series of paper in Nature, Nature 1, Nature 2, and Nature 3.
Also, this paper is helpful, Changing PhD.

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


text:
Is choosing to study algebra during a math PhD riskier than studying analysis?
I've noticed that some algebra / number theory / geometry students seem to come to a dead-end in mathematics and tell me, "yea, no more math for me, no way, can't wait to be done with it", while the ones who specialized in analysis and PDEs, who don't have a future in analysis or PDE theory, seem to fall back nicely on theoretical CS, data science, machine learning, optimization, and other numerics-type of mathematics.
Is focusing on algebra during one's math PhD significantly riskier and generally not advisable?
Thanks,

The labels/distinctions in the hypotheses of the question are not really accurate... That is, not only do those broad "areas" not classify mathematics, but also the "numerical/not" aspect is manifest/not throughout mathematics. Also, describing "theoretical CS, data science, ..." as "numerical" is comparably dubious. Maybe you should not take your acquaintances' descriptions as being reliable accounts of how things work.

Currently, there is a net upvote of 3 votes.  Can we reopen the question and give someone an opportunity to answer?  I realize that this may be a sensitive question for those in pure mathematics, particularly in Algebra / Number Theory (although, as @paulgarrett notes, I may not have the classifications all correct) but perhaps someone is willing to discuss - and to be non-PC about it.  Thanks,

the sense of the question seems to be firmly based in a fairly naive conception of mathematics and its applications outside of academic math itself. E.g., it is not the case that "algebra/number-theory" makes much sense, since, among other reasons, number theory involves many, many things that are "not algebra" (by any standard), ... and modern crypto and coding are significant instances of "applications". But, yes, there are traditions in which "applied math" is literally a synonym for PDE and maybe numerical solution thereof ... even when not applied... :) ...

... [cont'd] One could perhaps reasonably argue that most applications of mathematics to the external-to-academic world prior to 1940 were about "mechanics", and, thus, PDE. But cryptography, and error-correcting codes in the last several decades change that. The advent of category-theoretic ("algebra"?) ideas in computer science in recent years? The REAL point is that the academic and other job markets are currently tougher than at some other times. The relative "risk" of any general direction is entirely swamped by the quality of one's thesis work, one's advisor's sensibilities, and so on.

... [cont'd] It may be true that some "summer research programs for undergrads" are misleading because of their pose as having very low prerequisites, and then kids think that they're already on top of the game... and call it "algebra" or something else... thus corrupting the sense of that label, which already was vague. But, yes, then, if the true sense of the label is "low-prereq, no-heavy-lifting", well, sure, that's not good preparation for much of anything, and ... disillusionment that one is not, in fact, already expert? Tsk. Much noise in opinions of scarcely-informed people...

The whole "algebra versus analysis" distinction, though often convenient, should be taken with a large pinch of salt in my opinion. Contrary to what @user001 seems to think or imply, this is not because of thin-skinnedness, but because those of us who specialise in pure maths sometimes feel that the distinction is based on limited experience with the whole wide world of mathematics. (E.g. I am usually labelled as an analyst, and that is how I think of myself, but much of my work involves a functorial point of view coming from category theory and homological algebra.)

I don't object to the question in any way, but the assumptions it makes and the connections it draws just don't make much sense to me. E.g. TCS is not inherently more connected to analysis or PDEs than it is to algebra or number theory...and it's a branch of mathematics, so if you were an X-person before and switch to TCS: okay, now you're a TCS-person.

If the OP is suggesting that people who like and then don't like algebra/number theory leave the mathematical sciences entirely while people who like and then don't like analysis switch to some other branch of the mathematical sciences: nope, I haven't seen any such trend (and presumably I have a larger sample-size than the OP).  Bottom line: if you want to plan for a non-academic post-PhD career, plan for it in a positive way -- learn skills now that would be valuable in such a career.  Don't choose your academic specialty based on what a few people who decide not to do that go on to do!

Excellent advice, Professor Clark -- thanks so much, @PeteL.Clark :)


text:
Can I address my professors by their first name?
A couple of my professors always signs off on their emails with their first name only, such as, "best, Simon".
Does this mean that I could write my emails to them with, "Dear Simon" or "Hi Simon" ...and also say to him in person "good morning, Simon"?
Or, should I stick with "Professor "?
Should I ask for permission, e.g., "can I call you Simon?" ?
(Not sure whether age matters, but both of these professors are very young...)
Thanks,

You haven't said anything about your relationship with these professors, but depending on the extent of that relationship we've covered this from many angles already:

If you are not sure, ask. Otherwise, I generally stick to calling people whatever they choose to call themselves in the last mail. So if he signed with "Best, Simon" I would address him as Simon.

Should I call my adviser by her first name?, Is it acceptable for me (an undergrad) to call professors and other research professionals by their first names?, At what point can I call my professor by their first names?

I have closed this as "unclear what you're asking" in the meantime because you haven't specified anything about your relationship with these professors. (Are you a student in their classes? a research student in their department? are they your advisors? something else?)

Regardless of the relationship, though, I'm pretty sure this answer also answers your question :)


text:
Why is the CV needed for graduate application
Why do graduate schools ask for a CV to be included in the application? Do they look for anything else besides publications and work experience?

Publications plus work experience (of one kind or another) is the lion's share of most CV's, no?

Yes, but what if I don't have work experience and publications? Is there anything else they'll be looking at?

The CV of a prospective graduate student can be very short: probably a single page should be sufficient.  An academic CV is not a "resume", by which I mean it's not a big opportunity to score points.  You just need to provide all the standard information.  If you're in doubt of what is the standard stuff to go on such a CV, you should probably ask that instead (after searching the site a bit: that has probably already been addressed).

P.S.: In academia, your schooling is essentially viewed as your pre-PhD work experience.  So you should make sure to list dates, academic degrees received, GPA, major...that sort of thing.

What about skills and abilities such as painting, programming, or languages spoken?

See Is listing non-academic interests on academic CVs important? and Should academic CVs include reviewing, non-academic service, hobbies and languages?

A CV is the academic equivalent of a resume, providing all of the relevant details of your (academic) career to date.  Graduate schools ask for this information for the same reason that businesses ask for a resume when you apply for a job: it is a terse summary of your qualifications as a candidate.
In addition to publications and (research-related) positions held, a CV also should include your undergraduate and graduate degrees, service, any awards, and any other academic-relevant information about you.  A nice summary, with links to additional guide material can be found here.

Think about it like this, CV is an official paper to introduce yourself for others.
At least it has the basic information about you and your achievements.

We want to know who you are, who is the best fit as supervisor/advisor, what is the best fit as a topic?
A better question is why we ask for a proposal - you are not generally in a position to write a proper proposal till 6 to 12 months in once you've done a full lit.review.
What else do we look for beyond the formal education/publication part?
Work experience tells us about what you can do, and what discipline you've been experosed to. Also hobbies, languages, clubs, sports and community involvement are important to mention. Were you on the chess team, the debating team, the school paper? These also complete the picture of who you are, what you can do, and what you could do!
These days everything is interconnected - technology has applications, sport and art make use of technology, science studies both the inner world of mind/brain and society (social/life sciences) as well as the external world of physical entities and devices (physical/biological sciences) and the way everything relates to everything else (information/cognitive sciences).
From you community involvement I might get insight into your aims in life, you leadership ability, your willingness to work alongside other people and health.
I'm not interested in a statement of purpose or some other nonsense that sounds more like something out of a fortune cookie than the kind of evidential data that belongs in formal curriculum vitae.
From your interest in languages or writing, your experience in debating or the school paper, I will gain ideas about how you'll go writing a thesis or dissertation, whether you will understand the literature, whether you can work on particular interdisciplinary or application-oriented parts of the research.
From your interest in music or dance, sports or photography, I might find connections that relate to (say) projects in computer science or engineering, in signal processing, image processing, speech processing  - or extend them in new directions to song recognition or music transcription.

Please do not "recycle" answers verbatim between different questions.


text:
Why are there not fewer, better funded PhDs? (In the UK)
This may seem like a naive question, but its one I've had on my mind while working through readying my applications for a PhD in the UK. It seems bizarre to me that PhDs here are not funded by default - from my point of view, a PhD is effectively a job. It is a sort of long term graduate program for working in academia. From this point of view, it seems absurd that one could end up being in a situation where they might actually have to pay to pursue one.
One possible answer is that universities are simply admitting more students than they are capable of funding. If that is the case, then why is it the case? Surely having fewer, better funded doctoral candidates would not only improve the lot of many "students" (employees, in my view), but it would also have beneficial impacts on the employment prospects in academia for PhD students after they finish, since there will be fewer people competing for the same number of openings.
What are the incentives and cultural motivations here that keep the system as it is? How different is it in other countries? (I have heard, but been unable to decisively verify, that many European unis treat PhDs as the jobs they are).

Are you thinking of particular areas within academia? STEM? humanities?

You went wrong at 'a PhD is effectively a job'. It is for the person doing it. It isn't for the administrators who look at the uni finances and who set promotion (or even retention) criteria for the academics.

A naïve answer but PhD students are essentially customers to the UK higher education system.  UK is one of the largest exporters in the world in that sense. Ibelive this is driven by the colonial history of the UK and that many international students obtain  scholarships from their home countries. PS: I did my masters at Imperial college,  but couldn't do my PhD there for funding reasons.

@JessicaB This is a very country-specific opinion. In continental Europe, most people will disagree. Around here, it very much is a job - an entry-level job with a counsiderable on-the-job training component, but a job nonetheless.

@YemonChoi Mathematics, so thankfully I'm in a better position than those in the humanities, at least

@Nethesis Yes, I could see this from your profile. I was just attempting to point out that your question title and the question itself are written with an implicit universal quantifier, which I really don't think applies.

@xLeitix The question asks specifically about the UK!

@YemonChoi Given that I am in one of the subjects where I can be more optimistic and I still find myself asking this question I feel it is actually quite universal.

@Nethesis How can you claim it's universal when you don't know how PhDs in other disciplines (e.g. humanities) work, how funding bodies in other disciplines (e.g humanities) work, what the job markets and career trajectories are in other disciplines (e.g. humanities)? These are all utterly different from e.g. a DataScience or OperationsResearch PhD

@YemonChoi My argument is that I am in a subject which is better funded than most, and I feel the funding situation here is problematic. Therefore, the funding situation is problematic for most subjects.

Universities themselves fund very few students. My faculty (which has 7 departments I can think of off the top of my head, and probably over 250 PhD supervisors) funds 2 students a year. These are used as strategic investments, either in a particular area the faculty wants to expand in, or more often as part of the start up package for a new academic.
So in answer "why not fewer, better funded PhDs", the answer is that any fewer would effectively be none.
In STEM subjects, a large number of PhDs are funded by external funding bodies, such as the government funded research councils. For example my department get 4 or 5 students a year from a Biology and Biotechnology Reserach Council (BBSRC) Doctoral Training Program (DTP). Importantly, government funded PhD studentships are only open to European (soon to be only British) citizens. Then there are CASE studentships that are financed jointly by government and industry. In both these cases the university has no say in how well resourced the studentship is; but they do earn the tuition fees that are paid by these outside agencies.
After our DTP and CASE studentships the most common way for a student to be financed is by a foreign government. These studentships generally are very well resourced because the university can more or less ask for as much as it likes. However payment of the student's stipend is down to that forigen government.
Finally if the student REALLY wants to do a PhD (so they can have a career that requires it one supposes), the university doesn't really care where the money comes from, as long as they get their £18k a year, they are happy and will tell supervisors to supervise them. Depending on the institution and the rank of the supervisor, various levels of compulsion might be applied to encouraging the supervisors to supervise a fee paying student. Supervisors are also often happy to take foreign students because the research funds they bring can see the rest of the a research group through a tough patch.

Why Universities admit students without funding? The Universities will profit from this both directly (tuition fees) and indirectly (research made by student).
Why supervisors supervise non-funded students? Whether student is funded from the University budget, from the grant, or self-funded plays no role in supervision process. The research produced by self-funded students may be not that good as the results produced by highly skilled student who got themselves a prestigious grant funding. However, considering that the number of students supervised to completion plays a major role in promotion process many supervisors will have to take all PhD students almost irrespective of how well they fit.
Why students will do this work without being payed? I don't know exactly. Maybe, because some UK Universities are so well recognised, that students believe having a PhD from such University will pay off later in their career. Maybe they want to live in the UK, because it's a nice place to live. Maybe they want to work with this particular professor in the UK. Reasons vary. What's yours?

There are enough people willing to trade off bad payment for, firstly, an extent of self-realization they wouldn't have in most regular jobs, and secondly, future career prospects. This keeps the supply of PhD candidates steady. Thus there is no incentive for universities to introduce better funding, unless these incentives are set by regulation or collective bargaining contract (like in some parts of continental Europe).

Ok I did earn my PhD in the UK, and I got fully funded position which covered my tuition and living; so I’m eligible to answer this question.
Timeframe: Just keep in mind that I was searching for a position in the middle of my master degree, and 12 months passed by till the day I put my foot at the uni as a PhD student.
Teachers: I could say based on my experience, some university professors are basically teachers. This means, they teach the slides and have no interest in research. Obviously you can’t get PhD position from them because they have no research funds, and if you do you are a fool because they are just not interested; and your PhD will be a living hell.
Cashing machines: some university policies are based on money and only money. They focus on bachelor and master degrees. These entities have no interest in research and  if you get the PhD position there, your life will be living hell. Good luck asking for conference trip and so on.
High Quality professors: high quality professors are easy to find and hard to get a response from. They have the funds and they give it to you if they will feel you will bring something to the table.
Upcoming  professors: I did put my bet in this category and you should too. They don’t have the fuss the high quality professors have and they are happy working with you to get the funding. These are individuals in the road to be on the top and you should be part of it.
To conclude yes there are not so many fundings, but not everyone should be a PhD student either. If you work hard enough you could still secure a fully funded PhD position.


text:
I have an opportunity to do internship at the cost of a gap in my academic year. Should I accept it?
I have just completed my B.Sc in Physics and I have a unique opportunity to do internship in my field of interest for more than 6 months. If I choose it, I may not be ble to start with my Masters' courses this year and this academic gap will be reflected on my CV.
I would like to know how will it affect me and my career. My aim is to become a good researcher.

It isn't a gap if you do something productive with the time.

You will have to weigh the pros/cons for yourself. There is no right answer to this and will vary for everyone.
Potential benefits:

More time to build your CV to apply to better universities
Real-world experience
Far higher income than graduate assistantships (at least in STEM in the US)
May provide you insights into your future research directions
Possibility of publications and patents if the organization does research
Networking that you may not normally be able to do (and letters of rec)

Potential downsides:

Delays grad school which probably delays graduation and getting a full-time position
If you have already been accepted to grad programs, they may not let you postpone them
Could potentially be a distraction from your long-term goals

Note, I did 5 internships during grad school so I obviously value internships. I do suggest to be strategical about internships to see if they are taking you closer to your goals. If so, go for it!

+1 and I'll add that if the internship deals with research, you'll probably strengthen your CV and graduate application. If it doesn't deal with research, then there's a good chance you'll change your mind about research as a career.


text:
manuscript, excluding author names and affiliations
I have a paper submitted to a journal of Springer.
In the submission process, there is a note that "attach your manuscript excluding author names and affiliations but I did not do it.
What will happen in this case.
Thank you very much for your responses.

@Alice Thank you very much for your nice and prompt response. I believe that you are right.

@Alice, I'd suggest you make that an actual answer (and that the OP accept it). It will give finality to the question that comments will not. Comments are often removed. And Welcome to Academia.

As Alice mentioned in the comments, the editor requests you to send an anonymized manuscript for the review process. The review is most probably double-blind, i.e. you do not get to know the reviewers' identity and neither do they know yours.
Be careful to adjust any language in your manuscript accordingly (e.g. "... as we showed in our earlier research [1]" -> "as has been shown in earlier research [1]").
For answers on why double-blind peer review is beneficial, see here.
TL;DR This is normal, do as the editor says.

Any friction you cause in the revision process will in the end hurt you.
"They can't even follow simple instructions" isn't exactly a way of showing interest and careful work.
Having to ask again for a version without authors/affiliation introduces delay.


text:
Blinded manuscripts and arXiv
Very recently, I have submmited my paper to a journal published by Springer.
As required by the  policy of the journal, the manuscript must not contain the author's name and the corresponding contact information. However, I published the paper to arXiv as a preprint.
My question is What will happen next? My manuscript can be sent to reviewers?
Thank you for your supports.

The journal should have a policy for precisely this question.

See also https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=arxiv+double-blind ; this has come up quite a few times. My suggestion is "don't worry; if you're thinking about the issue, you're probably already paying more attention than most of the submitters".

Thomas is correct--any journal put out by Springer as well as by university presses will have a specific policy about preprints. Look for the policy on the journal home page or the press's "authors' rights" web page, which often has information for prospective authors (i.e., authors who have submitted a paper for consideration but haven't received a decision). For example, the "Guidelines for Authors' Rights" for the University of Chicago Press's journals division  (https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/cont/jrnl_rights#faq6) states:
"To avoid citation confusion and compromising of peer review, we discourage online posting of pre-prints and working papers. If you choose to submit a pre-publication version of your paper to a non-commercial, discipline-specific pre-print or working paper archive, however, we require that appropriate credit be given to the journal as described above and ask you to remove the working paper from the archive after your article is published or replace it with the published version. Any version of your paper submitted to a pre-print or working paper archive can be made available only under a license that forbids commercial reuse, or you will be required to remit the appropriate fee to make your article available in the journal under a comparable license. If you deposit the published version of your article, it may be made publicly available only after the appropriate embargo period* has been observed. You are responsible for informing the manager of the archive of the embargo period that must be observed.
Please also note the comments elsewhere in these Guidelines regarding prior publication and anonymous peer review and the use of copyrighted material in your article.
*The embargo period is twelve (12) months unless otherwise required by mandate."
So I would advise checking out the specific journal's policy as well as Springer's "authors' rights" pages. Depending on what you find, you may be better off removing your essay from the preprint archive, if that is possible, at least while the essay is under consideration for publication. Good luck!

"To avoid citation confusion and compromising of peer review, we discourage online posting of pre-prints and working papers." Yeah, sure, that's the reason. To avoid confusion.

FYI, in the case of arXiv, it is not possible to remove submissions.  There is a "withdraw" option, but this simply marks the paper as "withdrawn"; the public can still download it.


text:
Awaiting Referee Selection in 11 weeks
Recently, I have submitted a mathematical paper to a journal published by Taylor & Francis. After some days, the status of the paper was changed from Submitted to Journal to AWAITING REFEREE SELECTION. Up to now,  11 weeks passed but the status is still AWAITING REFEREE SELECTION. I have contacted to Editorial Office several but the result is not changed. How should we respond to them in this case?

Is this the same paper submitted over 2 years ago or another slow one?  I would think to yank the paper.  Figure out which journals have faster processing.

You contacted them several times in 11 weeks?  In mathematics, my rule was do not contact the journal until at least 6 months.

@GEdgar I don't think so. If the time from submission to the first decision is 6 months (25 weeks) then that is too good. But 11 weeks for choosing a reviewer is not normal.

There is little you can do, actually, and eleven weeks doesn't sound excessive. That is especially true if the number of potential reviewers is small, as for an esoteric paper. But kicking them more isn't going to get them to move any faster, and might make them move slower if they get upset. Adding to their workload by needing to respond to you doesn't speed them up, of course.
Some academics have a different schedule at the end of a year and the first of the new year, so that might account for the delay.
But they really have no incentive to slow it down and every incentive to make it work. If you have no trust in them, withdraw the paper and submit it elsewhere, knowing that the clock restarts if you you do that.
There is also, possibly, some time delay in changing the status even after reviewers have been found.

The OP didn't give a field, but in those that I'm familiar with, 11 weeks to not even invite reviewers is excessive. Also, with modern editorial management systems, there should be no time delay in changing the status once reviewers have been invited; it's instant.

@Allure, there is know information here about "invitations". They may have been made, several times, in fact.


text:
Adding an affiliation to an accepted paper
I am the corresponding and the first author of a paper which has been accepted for publication in a journal published by Springer.
I have an important question that is I would like to know whether I can add another university as my second affiliation (before, I only use one affiliation for me) and what should I do to make this addition.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

Yes, you can make this change. The easiest way to do it is to wait for the journal office to send you the proofs. If you're worried this might be too late, you can also contact the journal office directly.
Don't email the editorial board because their role is over (they handle peer review, and this is not a peer review issue).

Thank you very much for your answer. I have sent an email to the publishing editor of the journal.

can [I] add another university as my second affiliation...what should I do to make this addition

Assuming your manuscript has been accepted for publication, but you haven't yet submitted a camera-ready manuscript, then just add a second affiliation. If you're concerned that this might not be permitted, then read the journal's rules.

Email the editor using the journal submission site (there should be some method to send adhoc questions) and ask, explaining your issue. If you have changed jobs, for example, it is usual to use the current affiliation on the publication with some sort of note that the work was completed while working at the other institution.
Do not contact the editor through other channels - this is a publishing issue and should be dealt with through the publisher's tools.

I would like to thank you for your comment. I have sent an email to the publishing editor.


text:
What kind of citation is needed for a whole paragraph?
I'm writing a paper on The Beatles and in this paragraph I'm talking about the formation of the group. I got the info from their biographical book. So it's just a summarized version of a chapter. I have no idea how to state that this info is from a book?

Summarizing a chapter in a paragraph and citing it at the end, I think, is not a good idea.
It is better to write

Simpson mentions the formation of the group in Chapter 5 of History
  of The Beatles [12].

And then write your paragraph in italic.
Actually, if you can, put citations at the end of each 2-3 sentences.
The following example is more proper when writing an academic manuscript.

The Famous English Rock Band Beatles was formed in 1957 [34]. First,
  John Lennon, the founder of the band, named the band as The Blackjacks. Then, with Paul McCartney joining the band, the name was changed
  to The Quarrymen [21].

You are paraphrasing the material, not quoting it.  (You summarized it.)  Put the citation at the end of the paragraph and add the source to your bibliography.


text:
PhD from university where I did my bachelor's degree or master's degree?
I currently live in New Zealand an I'm studying animal science. I got my bachelor of science in New Zealand (from Massey) and my masters from Melbourne University.
Do you think it is strange if I go back to New Zealand to the same University to do my PhD? I've heard that it is good to go to different Universities for all your degrees to show that you are "open-minded", but if I have already gone to two different universities for my bachelors and masters, am I already showing that I am "open-minded"?
Thanks,
Chris

Well if the topic or material is “local” to that university then it seems logical.
If you are going to study, for example, the effects of tourism on the breeding habits of koala bears then enrolling in the University of Wisconsin or Oxford or Cambridge may not be too helpful.
You should enrol at a Uni that has the course that you want, with the facilities you need and the environment you like - both for work and relaxation. It does not help, if you are happy in the stcks to be in a high-rise neither does moving to the sticks suit a city-dweller...
I am in an establishment where 1 metre of snow is common in winter and some new colleagues find winter just too much and leave...

I think that the main reason for going to a different university is that you may have already learned just about everything that the current/past one has to teach you. By moving you will see new perspectives. It isn't that you have an open mind, it is that you may (hopefully will) be introduced to new ideas.
That may not be the case in especially large universities with large faculties. And it may be less important also, if the place you already are has the experts (and research) that you need to work with. But finding ways to stretch your mind and experiences is normally good.
New Zealand is itself a rather small place. Australia is a bit bigger, of course. I don't know how much "academic inbreeding" there is between the two. Europe or the US have a lot of diversity. But if the work you want to do is well done in a small place it should be fine.

When I did my PhD I did not have too many choices, being picky is a luxury, do you have it? I did it abroad from my home country, and it's tough, adding to the implicit toughness of a PhD.
But I'd say, yes it looks strange, specially because NZ is quite small already. But the most important is that is comfortable and fast for you, open minding you can always go abroad for cooperation, presentations.


text:
Studying PhD in the UK as an EU student?
I have been very concerned about a friend who is considering studying PhD here in the UK. He wants to study music composition in RCM / Trinity Laban / guildhall music school.
I have been thinking about the financial issues he will be facing as an EU student (coming from EU).
I know that the government is offering up to £25000 doctoral loan, but that is definitely not enough to cover the living costs + fee, and also if he is applying for doctoral loan, he won't be able to apply for any scholarships / other funding.
I am desperate to look for an answer for him, I would love to know what are the options. And what type of funding is available? Any stipend or teaching/working for the university during his PhD?
(I honestly don't know much about PhD but I want to help him, and I have been digging through the web for every piece of info I could find.)

There is no question that Brexit will be disruptive to such people.

Firstly,
The government loan is a great tool, but you can still apply for school funding, you're right, this will mean he will not be able to get funding from a UK research council, but they still have other options.
Also to mention, the idea of school funding is that you can afford to live of it, most PhD's take-home £1200, which is more difficult in London.
The loan could be useful if he goes on to get a fees only scholarship or something, but yes, by itself its pretty useless.
If you try and get school funding, this usually means you agree to around 100 hours of unpaid teaching per year.
If they just get the loan, or Research Council funding, or any other funding not from the school, expect to earn around £15-£20 per hour for teaching. A bad thing about this is that you do not get paid any prep time, which is generally needed as an early stage PhD still coming to grips with the subject.
The website I found my funding from was jobs.ac.uk it gives lots of options and representative examples.
As a last resort, there is also bank style loans for PhD students.
Addition:
You will not be able to get a Postgraduate Doctoral Loan if:

you’ve received or will receive Research Council funding (for example, studentships, stipends, scholarships and tuition fee support)
you’re receiving a social work bursary
you’re eligible to apply for an NHS bursary (even if you’re not receiving it)
you’re already getting payments from student finance for another course that you’re studying
you’ve received a Postgraduate Doctoral Loan before - unless you left your course due to illness, bereavement or another serious personal reason
you already have a doctoral degree, or a qualification that’s equivalent or higher
you’re receiving a doctorate by publication
you’re behind in repayments for any previous loans from the Student Loans Company
Your course

So from what I read here, he will only not be allowed the loan if he gets research council funding, so he still could get school funding!

But I thought if he applies for Doctoral loan he won't be able to get scholarship or anything else?
I am just getting very overwhelmed by what options are available.

Do you need a better answer? :)

@user94929 Doctoral loans are a new extension of a system which already exists for short postgraduate degrees (and are thus poorly understood by everyone in the system), but my understanding is that they are intended as "last resort" funding, for students who haven't received other funding from more traditional  government funding sources, but are still intent on studying for a PhD. Note that there aren't very many of those for study in arts & the humanities, compared with science and technology.


text:
How do I approach a professor from another university?
I am doing my undergrad in engineering at a small liberal arts school. Due to lack of research opportunities at my current school, I am looking at getting a research position at a state university nearby. My question is, how typical is it for professors to let students from other universities join their labs? I want to send an email to a professor that I am interested to do research with, but I am not sure how to approach him in my email.

I'm a little surprised that there isn't some arrangement already between the two schools - have you asked your advisor / department chair?

Agree with Jon. In any case, you will want these individuals to vouch for you.

While most of the engineering professors completed their Ph.D at this state school, the engineering departments fairly new and so it does not have a formal arrangement of any kind, as far as I know. I could definitely ask the department head to put me in touch and vouch for me, but I am not sure what would would be the right thing to do first, contact the professor at this state school, or talk to the engineering department head and let him make this initial connection for me.
Thank you.

A lot of state universities have REU programs and tend to favor students at schools with a lack of research opportunities. Might be worth looking into

Very slowly, and not from behind, or else you might startle them.

I'm playing professor psychology here; may serve as another approach for you to think about.
If it's an experienced professor and the school is large, your cold calling e-mail may not stand out (unless you have some stellar skill sets or experiences.) If it's a relatively new professor, hiring someone outside his/her school may be a deterrence.
My suggestion is this: talk to your school to set up a cross-registration arrangement and take a course at the state university. Preferably, take a course that is taught by the professor with whom you would like to work.
This gives you a few edges: you'd get to see if commuting to two campuses work for you, you'd get to check out all the resources and feel the campus culture there, and you will get to know the professor better, and be able to make a personal contact with him/her. Get a good grade, and use the semester to build a relationship with the faculty there.
Once the professor got to know you and understand your aspiration and capability, it'd be a lot easier for the professor to engage and make a decision.

If the professor you propose to contact has relatively large labs with a number of researchers, your chances may be good. Less so if the students typically work as individuals.
In the former case a letter (maybe an email, but something more formal is better) to the professor is entirely appropriate. Detail your interest, your background and your skills.
However, before you send the letter get buy in from either your department head or other faculty on your idea. Then in your letter you can tell the prof to expect a supporting letter from Professor Xyzzy.
If the professor is interested, expect to be invited for a look around the lab, meeting other students and perhaps an interview. Be prepared for that. If your current faculty studied with this person, or otherwise knows him/her they can, perhaps prepare you for what to expect.
I doubt that, as an undergraduate, you would be asked to speak at a colloquium or other meeting, but it is (barely) possible.
Direct approach is good. Backup is also good.
Perhaps your contact might lead to a more formal arrangement that would benefit others. Your department head might be interested in that idea.

You should feel absolutely comfortable approaching professors you find interesting. Writing something as simple as:

I am looking for research opportunity and always was fascinated by [your field of work]. Can we discuss possibility of me working in your lab?

At the same time, talk to your academic advisor at your school. They will definitely have an idea how to connect you with the state school. On the same note, contact state school's department administration (academic advisor or something) in order to get details on paperwork and process.
Best case scenario is that you'll be able to get paid to work in the lab. Worst case scenario you'll do it for free.
Chances are that the professor will miss your email. That is why it's a two-step process: direct contact and via administration. Both are important

Getting paid (to learn) truly is "best case". But I wouldn't count on it here. We can dream. But you want to be more than a "lab rat", I think. An unpaid "intern" is the more likely scenario. But if you can really participate and not just wash glassware, it is worth it if you can afford it.

@Buffy our uni (Univ of Southern Cali) has summer paid program for local (USC and non-USC) undergrads https://dornsife.usc.edu/bridge-institute/bugs/ That is not unique


text:
How to cite an updated report?
Research reports published on the webpage of the home institution are sometimes updated during the revision process. Suppose a first version was published in 2013, and the update came in 2014, and suppose the first version is not available anymore. The web page may say something like "XYZ, 2013. Revised 2014". Which date to use for citation?
Argument for
"2013":
This may please the sensitive among the authors.
"2014":
This is factually correct as I'm citing the content of this version which is also currently online. But what if they update again?
"2013. Revised 2014":
This has its obvious benefits, but is probably too cumbersome to be consistently implemented.

This is a frequent case when dealing with "live" documents such as standards, software packages, and technical manuals.  There are two basic approaches to handling it, and which is better to use depends on whether the document bears a clear version marking.

If there is a clear version and date stamp, then you treat each version as a different document, which happen to share similar names, e.g.:

Arbuckle, J. Feline Packet Exchange Protocol, version 3.2, June 2011.

If either version or date stamp are not clear from the document, then the date is the date that that you retrieved it, e.g.:

Arbuckle, J. Feline Packet Router, retrieved from http://garfield.com/networkingprotocols/ June 14th, 2011.

Exact formatting depends on the style you are using.

I think the main problem here is the use of the term "published" just because it is posted on the web page. If a report is under revision, it is strictly speaking not published. Once published it should be fixed in terms of its content or it should carry some form of revision marking such as "Second Edition" or "version 2" in which case the different editions or versions must be continually available.
If you find some information in the 2013 draft which is later dropped, it means the authors no longer support that point for one or another reason. Hence it would be potentially bad to attribute such a point the authors.
So from this perspective I do not support any of your forms for referencing. It appears you should view the work as unpublished and only rely on the latest version as a source for information.

The word "published" has assumed an odd non-literal sense currently: a not-peer-reviewed thing is not "published", but it's not exactly "unpublished", either, if it's publicly available... that is, literally published. So, to say "unpublished" is too strong, even with the charged sense that "published" supposedly must mean not merely published but also "peer-reviewed"...


text:
When a STEM research topic can be studied experimentally, computationally, and theoretically, do PhD programs typically focus on only one approach?
In American universities, when a STEM research topic can be studied experimentally, computationally, and theoretically, do PhD programs in this research topic only focus on one of the three approaches or a combination of the three approaches?
For instance, consider physics.  If I find a PhD program called "Experimental Physics PhD" at University X, and if I get accepted and go there for my PhD, will I miss out on computational physics and theoretical physics training...and be trained only as an experimentalist?

I do not know about physics, but from my experience in engineering, studying a problem from all aspects can take a lot of time! Also, you will need to find a student who is equally strong in all approaches. As you know, students have different backgrounds and they tend to solve problems using their strengths!

In my experience: Individual students and faculty, maybe.  PhD programs, no.

From my experience, such focuses are often called something like "Concentrations" or "Tracks". The intent of these programs is to allow the student with a very specific interest to tailor the program to their own interests. Again from my experience, these tracks mostly affect the courseload that a student will have.
Students are always encouraged to network within the department, talk to other people, and if interested take seminars or possibly even full courses (if their advisor is the type to allow that sort of thing) outside of their interest, simply to learn more about their field.
Your training will consist mostly of two parts, your research and your coursework. If you choose experimental physics, your courses will be mostly related to that, and (I assume) your research will be in that field as well. The extent to which you move laterally within your field is really up to you. I think you'll find that your main enemy here is simply time; there's too much to learn and not enough time to learn it. Best of luck with that battle! :)


text:
I feel I may have misspoken about Donald Trump in our Dept. Should I risk drawing attention to the issue by apologizing for it?
Some administrators and professors and I were talking about all the recent events going on, and I feel I may have participated a bit much in the dialogue and now feel I may have gotten on some people's bad side.  If I email one or more of these profs. / admins, I risk drawing attention to a non-issue - there's no proof that any of them were even bothered by the dialogue, yet I feel uneasy about the current events being discussed so openly inside of a school building.
What do you recommend that I do?  Be proactive and send an email and apologize in the event that I may have misspoken about something -- or keep my mouth shut and don't draw any more attention to that conversation?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because I don't think there's anything specific to academia about it.  If you've said something truly offensive or outrageous, then apologizing would be worthwhile.  If you've simply expressed common opinions a little too vigorously, you can probably forget about it and move on without further comment.  Either way, I don't think there's anything unique about an academic environment that requires special handling.

@anonymousmathematician I think there is something interesting about this question. I have seen my colleagues revise their opinions on people rather quickly based on their political views. A heartfelt apology might go a long way, although I agree that the original post by OP is too vague to judge anything at all.

Do you work at Trump University?

"Group think" mentality in academia is common -presenting ideas that oppose the norm in academe are not held in high regard, or even within the framework of a friendly acknowledgement.  If folks in academe believe you are part of Trump support, you could be marginalized.  Folks in academe, in my experience, are more petty than those in the private sector.  Because of tenure, academicians are more likely to take action against people they feel represent inferior viewpoints.  That said, write an "apology" of sorts.

Impossible to say anything useful without knowing how far you went, and your observations of just how uncomfortable some people looked. // You might try Workplace SE -- but with more info supplied in the question.

They say three topics are banned from polite after-dinner conversation: religion, politics and sport. There are good reasons for that.
It can be said that the same holds for workplace. Academia is, in this sense, a slightly different animal in that at times it is a place where people vigorously express their opinion, and proudly so. This does not prevent occasional ganging-ups of opinion groups against people which are not seen to conform to the currently prevalent sentiment or simple are considered an out group.
Unless you must fear that the latter is the case (and with highly professional people, such as senior academic staff, I would start from the assumption that the threshold is relatively high for that), consider what's done is done. Let it go.
Remember Churchill's dictum: a fanatic is someone who won't change his opinion and can't change the topic.

Afaik, it''s sex, not sport ;-) I've always disagreed with that saying, though.

I should say it is subsumed under sport :-) As for disagreeing with the saying, different cultures are likely to have different taboo topics (I definitely know some countries in Europe which will have a different set thereof). Avoiding the Apocalyptic Three however are a good rule of thumb for the Anglo-Saxon culture.


text:
Do professors from different fields use the same data set in different ways?
I have no experience with data analysis but a data analysis project was offered to me in the past by one of my math professors.  It would have been a PCA project, where PCA means "Principle Component Analysis" -- equivalent to the "singular value decomposition" in linear algebra.
It was a biology data set.
My question is:  would a biologist professor use this data set in some different way?  If yes, then in what ways other than something linear algebraic?
What would / could a statistics professor do with this biology data set that would be different from what a mathematician and biologist does with it?
Thanks,

I really don't understand the question. Presumably all different kinds of people could do different things with the dataset, depending on what methods they know and what methods seem useful. It doesn't depend on what department their business card says they belong to.

@ff524, yea, I dunno.  my math prof who gave me this data set also briefly gave some history about the PCA / SVD, telling me how it was developed (invented?) by 6 or 7 different people, at different times, from different fields, showing just how important and prevalent the application is.  So, I wonder if most, if not all, researchers are using the same tools to, say, find compelling structure in the data set.  Or, are researchers from different departments differentiating themselves from mathematicians by doing something different with the data set.

so, for example, are biologists also doing an SVD on this data set, with the goal of finding structure in the data? @ff524, is what I'm thinking about...

Biologists might to PCA and/or something else. Mathematicians also might do PCA and/or something else. You're basically asking, "What are all the ways in which a dataset might be analyzed?"

I just have a raw idea that might be nonsense or unrelated but I will share it "just in case". Maybe a biologist will see the data from his point of view (application related to his field), while a mathematician see only numbers? In this case, both will approach the analysis of the data differently. I'm not familiar with this field, but I will assume that the mathematician will have more "out of the box" ideas on how to interpret the data (since he is not concerned with the application but rather trends or relationships between the numbers).

Yea, I guess so, @ff524.  And that I am not seeing the value that non-mathematicians are adding to the field of data analysis.  If a mathematician can tell you from his work on the data set that "it appears that the activation of certain genes leads to the subsequent inactivation of other genes, here are the dominant eigenvalues", then what else could a biologist do to differentiate himself / herself and bring something different to the table?  if they can't, and they use the same methods as the mathematicians, then it seems ...redundant.  But I've only just started to think about data...

@TheFireGuy, yep...that would be my guess, too

The biologist might contribute "Duh, we've known that for decades" or "That relationship is obviously due to a confounding variable X that isn't measured", for example.  Also see the anecdote in this video - watch through 8:33. (But presumably the mathematician in this example didn't invent PCA, and the biologist also knows how to do PCA, so it is equally valid to ask: what did the mathematician bring to the table?)

I think you should rephrase this question (toward the "what value does a non-mathematical or computer science based analyst add to the overall analysis of data") which is basically answered by @ff524's comment and video. As an analyst, I can tell you that I have personally had to go to the field expert and see what is known, what was likely biased or an error, and ask about a bunch of other issues after my initial analysis.

Yes.  The number of ways to analyze data is very large.  If the data is complex, it would be unlikely any two people would pick the same approach.  Keep in mind that analysis methods are selected from the knowledge of the user to suit the goals of the user.  Analysis methods are only partially selected based on the actual content of the data set.


text:
Do researchers at schools that publish good journals get priority in publishing in those journals?
Take mathematics, for an example.
Do Princeton math professors get any sort of priority / preferential treatment in publishing in the Annals?
Do Duke math professors get any priority in publishing in the Duke Mathematics Journal?
What about more applied places - do NYU Courant professors get any priority in publishing in Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics?
My question is generally about priority / preferential treatment, not about specific schools or journals.

Good journals: no.  Iffy journals, yes.  In fact, some journals publish only the papers of the editor and his friends.

The current chief editor of the Duke Mathematics Journal is a professor at UNC, of all places, so if anything you might expect Duke faculty to have a harder time publishing there.

CPAM is a special case -- from what I recall, any paper has to be communicated by a NYU Courant faculty.

@WolfgangBangerth, that's interesting :)

@DanRomik, would you like to convert your comment into an answer so I can accept it?  Thanks,

It might seem that these journals publish more papers from 'top' people/schools.  This simply reflects the quality of their work/environment; Indeed, their personal brand name says 'quality'.  Otherwise, they would never be in places like Princeton in the first place.

The answer is certainly not - not officially anyhow - except insofar as being a well known mathematician (which someone who is at a place like Princeton typically is) makes it easier to get one's paper accepted to a fancy journal. That effect is likely real (though of a magnitude that would be difficult or impossible to measure, and hopefully not too large), but it typically applies on a more global level rather than a journal-locale-based level.


text:
Does a research professor burn his bridges (intentionally or unintentionally) when he leaves for another university?
Say there is an influential and popular research professor who is moving up fast in his research areas - and that he heads a big research group at his school.  Then he gets an offer that he can't refuse - from a big time university.  He leaves six months or so later, bringing some of his doctoral students with him, too.  In general, has this professor burned his bridges with his former university?  I imagine he is bringing a lot of talented grad students and grant money in to the new school - and a lot of grant money is leaving the old school.

No. "The university" is not a divorced spouse. A prof does not take other peoples grant money with him. Half of the students who planned to join his group don't want to move. Usually a successor wil be appointed, who get's additional money to get started, and often uses that to buy equipment that others can profit from, too. The position will be vacant for half a year or more, meaning the university saves mony on salaries. Etc.

Sarcastic answer: hell hath no fury as a university scorned. Actual answer: no.

Can you be more specific about what you mean by "burned his bridges"?  Different aspects of the relationship will be affected in different ways.  For instance, it's probably not too likely that the former university X would offer him another job in the future, since he's now indicated that he doesn't think X is the best fit for his career.  But there's no reason it should affect his collaborations with faculty at X, other than perhaps making them slightly less convenient.

Usually a grant is a contract between a funding agency and a university.  It is not obvious that this popular research professor will get to move the grant.  I know b/c I was peripherally involved when a popular research professor unexpectedly died.  Even though he was young and healthy, the grant contracts foresaw this possibility and his research was transitioned to another professor seamlessly.  The exact same thing would have happened had he quit.

@emory Not true. Small scale grants that only include one prof/PI can usually go with him, at least inside a country (for a grant by a national institution). They are bound to the prof, not the university. Makes no sense to hand over a grant to a new guy who does not have the special expertise for which it was originally granted.

@Karl actually to be precise, most grants are bound to both the professor and university, and changing either requires getting approval from the funding agency. But the approval for changing institutions is usually granted without much difficulty (if the move is in the same country as you said), so you are essentially correct.

In general, no, it is not a problem to leave to a new position after some month. The colleagues know how the game goes and could be in the same situation.
However, in practice it depends very much on the special situation. Some examples where leaving after a short period of time are:

Being hired on the promise to build a workgroup in a new field that is not present at the department.
Being hired to teach a special much needed class.
You promised to submit a large grant proposal that would boost the universities standing if successful (e. g.  NSF centers, DFG Sonderforschungsbereich or such).
You got a large startup funding, spend a lot of money on specific equipment, that is of no use to anybody else.
You started to supervise many students and other colleagues have to step in to help out.

Probably there are more things, but the bottom line is "Don't be a jerk and you'll be fine".


text:
Tips for supervising interns
My advisor will be taking on a number of summer interns, some of whom have been assigned to my projects. The interns are a mix of sophomore and junior undergrads with varied levels of research experience. They will be present for 8 weeks (2 months).
What are some general tips for supervising interns ?

My biggest piece of advice is set expectations from day one and then work with them very very closely until you feel like they have "taken off" and are also on the same page.  It is such a short amount of time that you may have to have them do some shadowing to get them on board as soon as possible.
The worst thing you can do is tell them to do things, not get what you expect, then in week three you have gone no where, you are frustrated, they are frustrated, and then they are gone before you know it.

A few general tips, from somebody who has been on both sides of this. Paragraphs are not especially related to one another!

Make sure they understand the big picture - not only what they are doing, but why they are doing it. What's the overall ambition of which they are a part?
Make sure they understand the middle picture - what are you hoping that they will achieve during the internship, and how does that fit into the big picture?
Make sure they understand what they are doing from day to day. This is more about them feeling comfortable in coming to you with questions, and having sufficiently regular meetings that you understand what is going on and can keep an eye.

All of the above can help to maintain motivation.
Remember, perhaps above all else, why the intern is there: Partly to help with your project, but mostly to gain experience of a real research environment. Invite them to meetings where appropriate (or encourage your supervisor to do so), even if it's only relevant in a background sense; discuss things with them rather than just giving instructions; try, so far as possible, to expose them to more than routine "grunt" work.
Until you start to work with an intern, especially at undergrad level, you will have probably little clarity on their skills. For example, if somebody has put on their CV "Can use MATLAB", that can mean anything from "can follow worked examples" to "can be left alone to build complex systems". You will need to discuss things with them, and probably work quite closely with them at the start, to gauge their skills, and set expectations accordingly - bearing in mind that the internship may be a good opportunity for them to learn any skills that they need and do not possess. This should be encouraged.
On a related note, if an intern does not fully understand what they are doing, and especially if there is time pressure, there can be a tendency for them to get into a mindset of just following instructions by rote. This should be discouraged, for (a) it is tremendously demotivating; (b) somebody who is doing things without understanding them may do things wrong without understanding them; (c) if the purpose of an internship is to gain experience of research work, this is not going to help.