text:
Why wouldn't a professor allow a student to record audio of his lecture?
I am a master’s student in a public university in the state of New York. I do not consider myself to be disabled in any form but I do find it difficult to concentrate in class. I lose focus too often and have difficulty recalling concepts taught during class. So I find resources such as recorded lectures to be very quite beneficial as whenever I lose focus while watching them, I can simply rewind back.
I am currently enrolled in a course where lectures are not recorded. I like this subject and I want to do well. So I want to ask the Professor permission to audio-record his lecture (by just keeping my phone on my desk and not using any distracting piece of equipment). I don't know the professor well but he definitely isn't one of those overtly friendly ones who (you'd think) will surely give you permission.
What I want to know is if he were to deny me, what could be his reasons?
I think I have just one shot at this. So I want to go there prepared.
A vaguely similar (but not the same) question has been asked before.

Update: I asked the Professor if I could record and he simply smiled and said yes.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

This is a subjective question, but common reasons I have heard (and reasons I would have) include:

Fear of students editing records to manipulate what you said
Fear of having a mistake you made taken out of context and spread widely
Concern that it encourages students to not pay as close of attention
Concern that students will not feel they need to attend class if they have acceess to the lecture outside of class.
Concern that students in the class will not feel as comfortable asking questions or contributing to discussion, since they are also being recorded
Institutional concern about a course's lectures being widely distributed online, when in fact these lectures are for (paying) enrolled students--a type of "intellectual property" concern

Edit: Also, you might want to be aware when bringing up problems getting easily distracted in the class, a professor could take that somewhat personally. Many committed teachers go out of their way to try to make their class as interesting and engaging as possible. If a student asked to record lectures because they are getting distracted or zoning out during class, one may not hear: "I am trying to do this to improve my learning;" but rather: "I am trying to compensate for your short-comings as a teacher". Not all instructors will feel this way, but that's just something to keep in mind as you broach that conversation.
Edit2: There's a lot of discussion in comments that my last comment about socially navigating the question: it is very true that many teachers may not care. However, trying to frame the request more explicitly as "this is a thing I am doing to improve my learning" could be beneficial in making your instructor agree.

Nice listing; and good points. But also, the video, with answering questions may show the prof not in the best light if it takes some time to clarify what the question is or what the answer should be (as opposed to, say, a pre-prepared lecture script).

And one can use copyright material in lecture slides. But if they get recorded and distributed, then this is not allowed and you might get fined (Happened twice at our university last year).

This is a nice and comprehensive answer to the question. Still, even though there are many reasons lecturers might object to being recorded, I have seen many lecturers being fine with being recorded. In my classes (some years ago) the resulting files weren't distributed among the students. If you want to record someone, it's good to keep in mind that they are doing you a favour. You should be trustworthy and honour their "terms & conditions" (like "please don't post online without consent", etc.).

I don't think the last portion should be a major concern. Not that some teachers (including, possibly, you) might take it personally, I don't doubt that, but I think it's the exception rather than the rule. In my experience, most teachers will acknowledge when students have difficulty staying focused and paying attention due to personal reasons (an ADHD diagnostics or use of certain medications are some examples), and will do their best to accommodate for that. It helps when the student sticks to a policy of only using the recorded content for his personal aid, and not sharing it in any way.

I recently discussed the threat of atomic attack by the Soviet Union in the 1950s and early 1960s and described the "duck and cover" drill that elementary school kids learned.  Mindful of the microphone clipped to my necktie, I did not describe the third step, after 1. You bend over, and, 2. You put your head between your knees, but I might have. Imagine Yours Truly on YouTube, wholly out of context, telling a class of students, "kiss your [posterior] good-bye!" Holy smoke! http://ksuweb.kennesaw.edu/faculty/rbrow211/papers/podcasting/podcasting_protects_ip.html

I would also add that there are a few lecturers who might talk about things they're comfortable sharing with a small class but would be worried about getting onto the internet. I had a lecturer who would give anecdotes about his times in various industries, some of them portraying others in not all too flattering ways ;)

Great starting list, but it's also worth noting that in many states (I don't know if New York is included) you need all parties' consent before recording audio or video. That means that you or your professor would need written consent from every one of your classmates. That's a lot of extra paperwork no one wants.

If you agreed to never distribute your recordings (even to other students), several of those objections would evaporate.

There is also the potential issue that the administration may decide that video+audio recordings of faculty are just as good as faculty, and don't need to be paid any more.

One more to NMJD's list: privacy of other students.  Enrollment and participation in a class is FERPA-protected in the United States.
Students may share comments or information that they do not want shared outside the classroom.
For example, a religious student may share doubts about their faith or LGBT status.  A student may not want others to know that they are taking a class but their voices or faces may appear on the tape or video. An engineering student may ask a really stupid question or give a totally wrong response that they do not wish transmitted to the outside world and future employers.  etc. etc.

Two perfectly good legal reasons. Y's right to do X stops when doing X can get Z into a lawsuit. "Or worse, expelled." needless to say, +1'd

A fair concern, but isn't that only relevant when the OP tries to make the recording public, rather than only to use it for her/his own memory and lessons?

The concern is that once a recording is made, it's impossible to know what will happen with it - especially if the student is doing it against or without the professor's permission.

FERPA intended to apply to faculty/staff sharing student's education records maintained by the school. Does not apply here for several reasons: i) as @Hennes points out, this is about creating and privately using the record, not sharing it ii) Student created the record, not faculty/staff - certainly not 'maintained by the school' iii) The recording is of the instructors lecture, not of student questions/comments - it is not a 'student education record'. Any inadvertently recorded student participation could be anonymized and then shared (if that were the intention)

Participation in a course is FERPA protected. If a parent calls and asks about a their child, I cannot tell them if that student is in any particular class. Ergo, I cannot share a class list with student names without violating FERPA -- as well as anything that indicates participation. Furthermore, I cannot permit or authorize a student to do this without violating FERPA because I cannot control what happens with the data.

@RoboKaren I think you are getting at the same point I was trying to make in my answer. By asking the professor, you are putting them in a position where something that the student elects to do, and has every right to do, instead becomes something the professor may feel liable for, simply because they were asked for permission. The student has every right to record the words of their professor as a study aid. FERPA does not specifically prohibit that.

Ah, but the student doesn't have the right to record the words of their professor without their permission, because of copyright. Doing it without permission may lead to a campus code violation if caught and the professor is angry enough to bring charges.

Definitely agree on possible university policy violation! However, copyright does not apply to the lecture itself - the form must be fixed. e.g. the professor has power point slides - or the professor themselves recorded their lecture beforehand.The extemporaneous lecture itself is not capable of copyright. However, even if the professor had a previous recording of the exact words of the lecture, and then tried to argue the lecture was a 'performance' of that copyrighted work, even then academic fair use would cover the case of the student recording it for their own personal study.

I disagree. The lecture itself can and is a creative work and is automatically copyright under the Bern convention - just as any spoken language performance is. And the student can raise fair use as a defense, but it is not automatic -- there is no fair use exemption, only a defense.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

@RoboKaren Recording of a lecture by one of its intended recipients to use for study is almost undoubtedly covered by fair use and not a copyright violation.

I understand that you want us to play devil's advocate to help you think ahead and prepare for the conversation.  Good thinking -- it's good to do your research ahead of time.
I would like to play devil's advocate at a more fundamental level, though.

I do not consider myself to be disabled in any form but I do find it difficult to concentrate in class. I lose focus too often and have difficulty recalling concepts taught during class.

Perhaps you have already had a good evaluation to find out why you lose focus often and have difficulty recalling concepts taught in class.  But if you haven't yet, then I would encourage you to do so.  Your question did raise a red flag for me, and made me wonder what might be behind your difficulties with focus.
If the evaluation were to find some clear reason, that could be documented to the satisfaction of your university's office for students with disabilities, you wouldn't have to struggle all on your own to get accommodations you need.
And now back to your immediate concern.  I would guess that common underlying reasons for refusing would be self-consciousness and fear of the unknown, if the instructor had never had the experience of being taped while teaching.
If this is the case, it might be helpful to try it out in office hours, with permission.  Another benefit of visiting office hours would be that the instructor would get to know you better, would see that you're working hard and doing your part, and would find you more trustworthy.

About a year and a half ago, I was in a class where the professor is generally amenable to recording, but during which he asked us to not record a specific class.  The reason behind this was that this specific session was an open discussion of a controversial topic (currently a "hot-button" topic in American politics).  His reasons were two-fold:

For his professional reputation; he wouldn't have time to fully research any questions and vet the answers through his normal evaluation process.  As a result, he couldn't be certain that any answers he might give to esoteric questions would be fully accurate.
To allow his students to freely speak their minds without fear of public embarrassment and repercussions.

Other answers bring up various practical concerns that may lead a professor to refuse to allow their lectures to be recorded, but one purely psychological reason why they might refuse is that they may simply be a shy or reserved person. Standing in front of a large audience and speaking, which is an unavoidable part of the job, is already intimidating to some professors (even very good and successful ones who end up doing an excellent job with their teaching). I can totally imagine shyness or introverted tendencies playing a role in making a professor not want to have audio recordings of their lectures taken, independently of any practical concerns about the recording being made public and so on, and therefore refusing to allow it unless coerced due to university policy related to, for example, accommodation of students with disabilities.
I should add that while such behavior on the part of a professor might be perceived as annoying or inconsiderate by students such as OP, there is an argument to be made (and I'm not taking a side one way or the other, simply presenting this as what I think is a valid argument) that professors also have a right to some ordinary human frailties and weaknesses and to be allowed to do their jobs under conditions they view as acceptable given those frailties and weaknesses. We are not all superheroes, and it is not self-evident to me that in a clash between the interests of a student who finds it difficult to concentrate in class and those of a professor who finds it difficult to lecture when they know they are being recorded, the interests of the student should morally trump those of the professor.

All of the reasons given above for a professor refusing to allow his lectures to be recorded are real and valid. Concern with them being shared in inappropriate ways is the biggest issue. A recording will miss aspects of body language and other things that can cause problems. And it's not a question of trust: there are cases of student's using a recording of an instructor's class against him out of context to create a disciplinary action. (Sometimes there are classes with a number of students who want to fight instructors, rather than learn from them.)
That said, professors recognize that a student who wants to learn is someone to be encouraged. A LiveScribe pen can help you connect written notes to specific parts of the lecture, and allow you to playback a day's classes. But keep the emphasis on 'for my personal use.' In the same way that you shouldn't bundle all your class notes together and distribute them (they are either the professor's or the college's intellectual property), you shouldn't pass around your recordings of the class. It's your personal copy, for your personal use only. If you emphasize that, that it is for your enhanced learning, few professors would disagree.

Not in any way involved in education, just stumbled on this thread and read out of curiosity.
All of the reasons suggested seem perfectly valid and well put but I'm surprised that no-one has gone back step and said that whatever his reasons, completely valid or totally absurd, or even if he doesn't actually have a reason, isn't it irrelevant? If he states that he doesn't want to be recorded, surely that is his choice and requires no further explanation if he declines to give it. Does not the much vaunted 'Freedom of Speech' in the US extend also to a freedom NOT to speak? Or in this case, a freedom not to have his speaking recorded?

No, it doesn't grant that freedom, and in fact it would be firmly against some of the underlying principles of free speech for others to be barred totally from recording it. This is not the case in all areas but the reasoning is faulty all the same.

TL;DR: Use books to learn.
Is that a course about some obscure topic? Is a book (or books) available with information about that course?
If a written material (book or lecture notes) for learning is not available
Ask your professor how could you study the subject on your own if you don't understand dully some of the topics. Tell that you have troubles taking notes of everything and that you are afraid of missing something or making mistakes in notes while you misendurstand the topic.
If the professor tells you that the are no valid books on this subject and the lectures is the only source, ask if you may record the lectures on your phone. Explain that you would use it only for your own learning and audio recordings of lectures help you in other courses because you can pause, rewind and go in your own tempo. It would be quite strange if this gets denied.
If there is a book or other written materials available
Don't record the lectures.
I am teaching myself. If a student would come up to me and ask to record the lectures, I would allow it but I would think to myself that the student is an idiot. To put a more objective term that I could use with students and colleagues, I would say that the student does not know how to learn.
I would allow it because I think your approach to learning is your own business, but I can judge you on that and I think that the approach is wrong.
If you learn on your own, you should always use a book. It's up to your tempo. You can rewind it or skip over whenever you want. It is more thorough, it includes illustrations and formulas from the blackboard and a lot more information than what was told in lecture (but you can choose if you take it all or maybe even less than in the lecture).
A book is usually read more times by more people than a lecture is listened to and thus it is better checked for errors. Professors can and will make mistakes in lectures. And it will be your fault and problem if you misunderstand something because the professor mistakenly mixed up a couple of words and didn't notice it.
I wouldn't care if you recorded my mistake and showed it to someone - mistakes can happen to anyone. But if you genuinly misunderstand a crucial topic and try to put the blame on my mistakes, I will still grade you according to your knowledge and not forgive you because you recorded a mistake. A professor is there to guide you through course, the learning is up to you yourself.
The lectures is an introduction to the topic and gives you the overall picture. It is completely natural if you get distracted or miss something in lectures. No one can remain totally attentive for 45 or 90 minutes. I've missed something in every lecture I've attended yet I've never had problems to actually learn the topics by myself using resources.

-1. Your attitude towards non-reader-based learning is appalling and, more importantly on SE, does nothing to help people in the situation faced by the original asker. Thinking your student to be an idiot because they learn vest through non-reader-visual, or verbal-aural, or kinaesthetic methods? Congratulations, you've disregarded the majority of your classes' abilities to learn because it's different from your own personal preference.

@Nij I am not talking about learning styles. I am talking about the content - no lecturer will guarantee the content of information and accuracy comparable to a well-accepted standard book in the field. Even if it is true that you learn better by listening (afaik there is no real evidence for that learning-style efficency stuff, only subjective preferences), the information in a good text-book is incomparably better and more thorough to what could be told in lecture. And can you really say that a guy who loses focus all the time when listening the lecture, could actually be aural learner?

Answering this in a slightly different way: I'd like to point out, that because you are in the state of New York (where wire-tapping requires only 1-party consent), and you are a participant in the lecture, you have no reason to ask the professor for permission to 'wiretap' the lecture.
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/new-york-recording-law
http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2015/09/is-it-legal-to-record-your-teachers-or-professors.html
I doubt there is any specific rule (for SUNY schools) forbidding you from recording the lecture you are attending.
As long as you are just using the recording for your own purposes, I would advise against asking for permission for something you already have the right to do.
As the idiom goes, better to beg forgiveness, than ask permission. Let's put it this way: you are ENCOURAGED to take notes in a lecture. A recording is simply automated and efficient note taking.
Edit:
FERPA exists to protect students from the school or university, not the other way around. For example, it doesn't cover recordings of the professor lecturing, only questions asked by your fellow students.
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs97/web/97859.asp
Edit:
I see you commented earlier that you feel compelled to get permission. I would suggest that it would be better to talk this through with your academic adviser, than the professor. They should be able to talk through any specific university policy on it.

You wrote, "[FERPA] doesn't cover recordings of the professor lecturing, only questions asked by your fellow students." And, how is the OP going to guarantee to the fellow students that any questions and comments they may pose during the lecture won't get recorded too?

@Mico There is no guarantee that student questions will not be recorded (by the university/professor) simply that the students will be asked for consent before such a recording would be played back to other groups of students. If the professor wanted to play back that recording for a different class, he would either need to a) get permission of the original group of students b) edit out the questions. I did not mean to imply that FERPA would prevent a student from recording other students questions and using them for their own purposes.

I don't understand the point you are making. According to the OP, it's the OP who's doing the recording; the OP has stated clearly that the course is not being recorded by the university/professor. Students who participate in the course may well object to another student making recordings, especially as they have no control over the use and potential further (re)distribution of the recordings.

In New York, you should have no expectation that something you are saying to a group of people will not be recorded by one of the people to whom you are speaking. It does not matter if the other students object or not - simply making the recordings and using it for study purposes does not violate anyone's rights or reasonable expectations of privacy.

" you have no reason to ask the professor for permission to 'wiretap' the lecture. " having a legal right to do something doesn't mean there is no reason to ask permission.  The golden rule still applies, there is no legal requirement to be polite and considerate, but there are good reasons for doing so anyway.  "As the idiom goes, better to beg forgiveness, than ask permission." is not as good a guide as the Golden rule IMHO.

The golden rule applies, absolutely. If I were a professor, I would want students to use every morally sound, fully legal means, at their disposal to increase their chances of comprehending my lectures and maximizing their chance of success in my class. I would not want my student feel it necessary to ask me for permission to do any number of things that do not negatively impact anyone else in any way. The golden rule is not at odds with the idiom, in my opinion. Our difference of opinion, I believe, is if recording a conversation/lecture is considered normal/morally sound.

@JamilRKhan so far the prof has done nothing whatsoever to prevent anyone from recording the lecture AFAICS.  The golden rule should be applied by both parties, but you have argued that there is no need for the student to bother.  It has not even been ascertained whether the prof requires permission.  You are wrong if you thing the difference is to do with whether recording a conversation is normal (it isn't but that isn't the point) or moral (it probably is bit that isn't the point).  The point of disagreement is whether you should be polite/considerate about it.  I think that you should.

At my university they are recorded, automatically and all students are given access, thus students aren't allowed to record anything.
This being said staff can opt out of recordings. I'd be clear with them the purpose of the recording and how it's to be used. If they feel happy then I'm sure they'll consent.

How is it "thus", or a given, that students aren't allowed to record anything just because lectures are recorded (ass+u+me(dly) by the school itself)?   Is there a written policy stating that students are not to record in class lectures/discussions?  I really do not understand having these no recording rules in this day and age.  It is almost impossible to bar student recordings, as phones/laptops/digital recorders are ubiquitous items now.  How does one enforce these rules?

Further, if you record anything then they lose control. They don't know what will happen with any recording. You'd have to assure them of its usage.

There are campus rules regarding recording and seen as there are high quality recordings, with video in some cases already provided it's not needed, for students to record themselves. There is still need for privacy of other students and not all will agree to being recorded, therefore uncontrolled recordings are not always best.

I find the material in your answer interesting, but I think it would work better as a comment.  (I was not the downvoter.)

Not I either lol, It also depends where you live if all in the classroom needs to give permission to record......Thankfully Texas(where I am) is not one of those places

Yes, I agree it's not the strongest answer. I even upvoted the main really decent answer. My main aim was to express the need to explain how the recordings are to be used. They will lose control of the recording, so it's best they know how it's to be used. It might change the dynamic of the lecture if they are aware they are been recorded, but even with a red recording light I forget about it quickly.

I'm really surprised that nobody has mentioned accessibility yet.
During my time at university, I struggled heavily with 'dyslexia', most notably the inability to write and listen at the same time due to the level of concentration I needed to write coherently.
I was given a voice recorder, and access to software so that I could record lectures, and simply make notes on the timings or certain explanations/sub-categories.
There's also the point to consider that you have paid (in my mind) probably an extortionate amount of money for these lectures.
TL;DR - you should always be allowed to record a lecture for your own personal use, as otherwise would discriminate against those with learning difficulties. However you have no right to upload it to anywhere or share it with anyone else.
EDIT: I realise this doesn't answer the question at all, but rather I answer a different unasked question. Oops, this is my first posting sorry!

Those with learning difficulties should be issued special learning aids, as it seems to have happened to you. But you paid for the privilege of watching the lectures, not recording it. By your reasoning, one could record a theatrical movie anytime. You see, I really get distracted by my girlfriend sitting at my side in a dark room, I need to record the movie so I can watch it later.

@Mindwin
I find that metaphor quite dismissive of the issues a lot of people face, and quite a poor representation of the point I made. I would advise you to attempt to wholly understand the issues you're discussing before making flippant comparisons to events that are intended to sound ridiculous.
You are entitled to lecture notes, am I correct? You're also entitled to the presentation slides too. How much of an extension is a recording of the lecture?
Also, you don't pay to watch a lecture, you pay to be taught information/skills. This is a quite a salient distinction to make.

You are allowed to do what the contract between you and the teaching institution allows, given the local law. I cannot record the movie because the contract between me and the theater (that I entered when I bought the ticket) and the local law specifically disallow said behaviour. You cannot pass GO and collect $200 in a RISK game.

I realise this doesn't answer the question at all – Then do not post an Answer. Either make a Comment or say nothing here. Stack Exchange works by having laser-focused Questions and Answers, without tangents and rambling discussion.


text:
Should I correct a course assignment that I already presented? I'm not sure whether the professor will notice the error
In a subject of my master we did a team work (analyse a piece of data). All the teams deliver the slides for the presentation the same day even if we presented it in different days. This work is 40% of the subject's grade.
Two hours before our presentation, we found a big mistake in our analysis. Some plots showed incorrect axes if we did filter data correctly, either data wasn't correct or the plot. The data should be above 1 and in the graph the log in base 10 was below 0. We couldn't modify the presentation, so we presented as we intended before finding the error. Nobody (noticed) asked about the mistake. The professor did take notes about the presentation conclusions but were about ones (presumably) not affected by the error.
We couldn't find in two hours the source of the error although my guess is that is in one of the very first steps of filtering data or in the plotting process, and we were more nervous concerned about the presentation itself.
I am unsure how to proceed:

Should I correct the work?
It was my mistake I was the one creating the script to analyse the data and I am interested/curious in the correct results. First finding the error, then correcting and creating the slides/plots corrected could take 2 weeks.
Should I contact the professor after correcting the error?
From my point of view we have already presented it and we will receive our grade, from the presentation we did. I would be surprised if we had an appointment to present the corrected version. The next expected contact with this professor is on the final exam (60% of the grade).
How can these affect our/my grade?
I am afraid the professor finds out the mistake and we find out later that we have a low mark or if we send a corrected version our grade will also suffer from it.

I am aware of these other question but my work is not published, nor it will.

I don't get this: "so we presented as we intended before finding the error." Why couldn't you explain that the slides were wrong? It shows mastery of the subject if you can do this. As a teacher, I would never punish someone for correcting themselves and saying "Just this morning, it occured to us that our calculation was wrong. I'll tell you what we have done anyway, and [some type of justification]" I would, however, be extremely annoyed if students present sth they know to be wrong, as it shows disrespect for the audience and is simply dishonest.

When we send our slides we thought that our methods were correct, and that the conclusions were also correct. So we present as if all the presentation was correct, if anyone would have asked we would admit that the data and the plot weren't coherent, but as we couldn't find the source of the error we stand with the previous conclusions. We didn't admit it although I was in favor of doing so, because other members thought it would be worst.

How can these affect our/my grade?

If you do not present the error, it can only be negligible or negative.  I do not see a positive outcome without additional influence.

Should I contact the professor after correcting the error?

You state that the next line of communication will be at the Final?  The Final would be too late.  If you're going to do it, then time should be of the essence.

Should I correct the work?

That wholly depends on what the professor would want.  Write a brand-new report?  No.  Show that you understand what the issue was, how it happened, and what a 'fix' would entail?  To the best of your ability, absolutely.  You're presenting a problem, and giving a solution -- not presenting a problem, and expecting a solution on a silver platter.
Regardless of if the professor noticed the error, it would be unwise to punch enough holes in your presentation to render it invalid while you're giving it.
I've messed-up on some trivial components before.  Communication works wonders.  If you're unhappy with the turn out after working-it-out; then take it to someone else.
Good luck.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it legally allowed to pursue an MBA while pursuing a PhD in Sweden?
The title says it all. To elaborate, In Sweden Ph.D. is being considered a formal job and students receive a monthly salary and pay taxes. Therefore, the question is specifically about whether applying and pursuing an MBA in parallel with pursuing Ph.D. is legally feasible or a special type of permission is required from the university?
Update 1: I'm aware that it's not recommended to pursue these two demanding degrees together. The question is whether in Sweden it's technically possible or not.
Update 2: It's a question related to Sweden, only!

One or the other is pretty intense, done right. How much do you like to sleep?

Sure, working on writing your thesis is a walk in the park, doesn't take much time at all... Well, aside from being the most stressful time in a PhD for many people.

The last 1.5 years is not nearly done, that's when it becomes the most stressful, as @JonCuster mentions.

O no! Why is this a duplicate when the other question is German only??

@user111388 Is there any difference?

@user2768: Potentially, yes. Both questions relate to a single country and it is not at all clear from the questions that the answers are the same.

@user111388 Potentially, yes, but, do you have any basis to reopen the question?

Neither myself nor @JonCuster are arguing, we're merely speaking from experience. Perhaps you have an explanation, but 1.5 years is about forty percent of the time allowed for a PhD in Sweden. Realistically, it's far higher in terms of workload, since earlier years aren't as efficient.

@user2768: Of course not, I am not a user with much reputation here and as such, I don't have much voice. I am just saying that to me the questions seem to be really unrelated and there is no indication in the questions that they have the same answer.

@user111388 I only asked to see if the question needed reopening. Since you have no basis, I won't nominate for reopening.

@user2768: I know the way the site works, this question will not be reopened. My opinion is that closing two questions of different countries as a duplicate is the same of closing any two unrelated questions (where I would also have no basis to reopen other that they are unrelated). I think my problem is that there is no basis to close in the first place.

@user111388 We have different opinions on how this site works. Questions that get incorrectly closed get reopened, I've argued in favor of many reopenings, but I can't do so without a basis.

@linker All responses are based on interpretations of the information you've provided. You can edit your question to correct misinterpretations. Regarding differences between contract duration and study periods, I think that's typically across Europe. In countries with shorter contracts, students overrun, whereas students with longer contracts underrun.

@user2768 I guess the question is crystal clear. Especially with the last 2 updates. I also asked for answers specifically for Sweden! Regarding contracts, In Sweden, one can overrun almost indefinitely, without getting a salary from the university. It's possible to underrun as well (like myself), but almost nobody does that, simply because we're getting salaries and our visas/citizenships are based on that (unless we get a better position elsewhere and/or don't care about visa/citizenship).

Looking over this, I'm a bit confused as to why location constraints would change anything. I would suggest that the burden would be on you, as the OP, to identify why such a constraint should require a different answer. This would be no different than someone else asking the same question "...for women" or "...for Russian speakers", show us why it matters and we can help address the new facts.

@eykanal Since the question is asking about the legal aspects of pursuing a second degree, the reason that the answer to this question depends on the country is that different countries may have different rules when it comes to pursuing a second degree. E.g., in China, it might be up to the supervisor to let a PhD student pursue a second degree whereas in the U.S it might be a different case. It may also affect the salary or visa/citizenship situation. I believe it's completely based on the country and associated rules and regulations. Hope this answers your question :-)

Apart from the probable foolhardiness of attempting this, there is a genuine question of legality, which surely varies from region to region. I am resisting the obvious rant about not doing it even if it's legal. :)

@paulgarrett You are correct that it is not recommended in general, and I already mentioned it in the question.

@MichelGokanKhan, yes, I did notice that mention, and I was trying to focus other peoples' attention on the (possibly serious) issue of legality, rather than the wisdom of it. :) (Still resisting advice on that! :)

Does Sweden usually use the typical European-style "get a Masters then do a 3-year PhD" PhDs or the American-style "start a PhD after you finish a Bachelors, with the first two years being equivalent to a Masters"? In the former case, why would you want to waste your time getting a second Masters? In the latter, wouldn't an MBA be a part of the PhD?

@nick012000 It’s the European style you mentioned. Again, it is not recommended in general. However, there are cases where someone wants to learn about business administration in the final year of PhD with specific goals (e.g., planning for starting up a business after finishing PhD or learn how to invest). Of course you are right that for someone who is about to get a PhD degree, having a second master degree is not the most important part of this scenario

It's surely unlikely that an institute will forbid the simultaneous pursuit of two degrees. However, an MBA and a PhD are both demanding. Pursuing them simultaneously is seemingly a route to failure, unless they are each tackled on a part-time basis.

@linker Maybe edit your question to clarify your situation. My answer is country-independent: There's surely no reason for any university to forbid the pursuit of two degrees. Regardless, surely no country does universally, so it only makes sense to consider a single institute, making such a question off topic. Since you have a "no sideline" clause in the contract with your university, you cannot be employed elsewhere. That doesn't mean you can't study an MBA elsewhere (since that's not employment, at least, I know of no business school that'll pay you to study).

It's still not clear to me (seeing such rules from across the Atlantic) where a "full-time employment" (for a PhD) also precludes "a full-time degree program". So far as I can tell, the literal legality of this is not clear. (Apart from the issue of the wisdom of it...)

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


text:
Is it possible to follow notations/terminologies from a previously published article in a new paper without re-explaining them (in Computer Science)?
As I understood correctly, in the field of computer science, there is no "standard notation" in scientific publications for explaining various aspects of a computer system. Even though in each discipline there exist some conventions for denoting various elements in the system (e.g., in networking and communication, usually N refers to a node and T is time, etc.), for them to be used in a scientific paper, usually one needs to define them in the paper anyways.
My question here is that, how can I properly continue using an already available and well-defined set of notations, terminologies, and the system model from an already published article in my new paper such that I don't require to re-define or explain them?
To provide a specific example, in this paper I defined a set of notations as well s a system model. If I want to continue using the same notations and system model in my new paper, how can I properly cite it in my current paper and skip re-explaining them without making potential confusion for reviewers?
A real example (with links) would be much appreciated so that I can discuss them with my co-authors.

Update 1: As stated by @DaveLRenfro and @Anyon in the comments, it looks like a common practice in the field of mathematics and physics to refer to a previously published paper for terminologies and notations. This question, though, is concerning more on a similar practice in the field of computer science.
Update 2: Providing evidence regarding reusing terminology, notation, and system models in any academic paper in the field of computer science would be highly appreciated.
Update 3: There are mixed opinions about re-using terminologies from another paper, but in this case, I believe it's preferable to do so as it's in line with the paper that I want to borrow terminologies and more importantly notations from.
Update 4: As discussed in the comments (now moved in the chat), there are over 3 dozens hits in Google scholar for the phrase "for terms not defined in this paper" but almost all of them are either related to the field of mathematics or physics.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment. We can only move comments to chat once.

I'm not sure why you think that for things that require precise definitions that the standard practice should be any different in mathematics and CS (I've studied, published, and taught both).
It may not do your readers a great service, but it is enough to say that your notations, definitions of terms, etc. are taken from a specific cited source. This saves you from any charge of either plagiarism or copyright infringement.
It is a disservice to your readers only if it isn't likely that they have already seen the earlier paper and need to read it before they can begin yours. It is also, in that case, a disservice to yourself as some won't bother.
However, many people will be able to discern much of what you write from the context provided that it is well written.
But, if you cite the original source of your notations, then a brief paraphrase of the meaning of a term at first use would be both acceptable and helpful.
If you want/need to repeat full definitions from the earlier paper then citing, again, solves the plagiarism issue, but you need to consider copyright. Some things can't be copyrighted at all if an idea can be expressed in essentially only one way. The derivative in math is like that. The idea is too bound with the expression to allow copyright of the expression. (Ideas can't be copyrighted - only expression). But in other cases you might need to both cite and paraphrase if too much of the earlier expression needs to be copied otherwise.
And, when you do copy, make sure that you clearly denote what is copied with such things as quotes or indentation.
But, again, the practice of mathematicians and computer scientists isn't really different for such things.

Thanks for your great answer. I do agree with all the points you mentioned. However, as discussed in the comments section with others, it looks like there is a subtle difference between CS and math when it comes to re-using notations (at least in some specific disciplines of CS). But regardless, do you know any specific example (in any disciplines of computer science) where a paper referred to another one for terminologies and notations?

Not specifically at the moment, but an author might well do so in a follow up paper on one they wrote earlier. Within a small specialty field, the notations are likely to become common knowledge pretty fast since people will read one another's work.

It is definitely a lot more common in CS papers to (perhaps needlessly) restate even standard definitions.

@Maeher Sure, you are right about definitions. Things like a "computer network" or "RAM", "CPU", "scheduling", "time complexity", etc. are quite common in CS papers. What about mathematical notations? I haven't seen any paper in CS (mostly in computer networking) that refers to another paper for mathematical notations.

@MichelGokanKhan: Would you share examples of terminologies and notations you have in mind?

@Aruralreader Sure. For example, notations used and presented in my previous paper where I explained an approach for simulating a specific type of cloud systems. Now in my new paper, I'm looking for ways to extend the previous model/notations so that I can use them to explain my proposed method for optimizing a cloud-native system. I prefer not to explain everything from scratch and like to re-use the previous set of notations, if possible. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.08983.pdf

@Buffy I've done a thorough search in the literature, and didn't find a single paper in computer science that followed another paper's set of notations. I still think your answer is a great one, but I don't think referring to another paper for notations is a common practice in CS. I might be wrong though...

In principle, there is no reason that definitions/notations cannot be cited, just like substantive arguments or observations or other parts of a paper.  However, it raises the practical problem that the reader has to have recourse to another paper in order to understand the notation and meaning of terms in your present paper.  Irrespective of the particular field, the Golden Rule in all such cases is to be clear and make things easy for your reader, so that should be your guiding principle in this decision.
The dilemma you are experiencing only comes about when the definitions/notation are sufficiently volumous that you want to avoid a long repitition of them.  So, first have a think about whether there is a way to present the required definitions/notation in a more parsimonious form.  Ask yourself: have I reduced this to its simplest form?  In the event that you can significantly reduce this material, you might find that it is not onerous to put it directly in the new paper.
If you decide to rely on definitions in a previous cited paper, I strongly recommend that you at least give some paraphrased heuristic summary of what the definitions mean.  This is something that is useful to "jog the memory" of a reader who has read your other paper, and if your heuristic explanation is good enough, it might even serve as an adequate substitute for the formal definitions in some cases (allowing a reader to roughly understand your paper even without going back to the previous one).
There is no silver bullet here, so ultimately you will have to decide on the appropriate trade off between parsimony in the present paper, and reader convenience in having a set of notations/definitions in one place.  Good luck.

Thanks, Ben. If I understood correctly, your answer implies that I still have to "re-explain" the notations, terminologies, and the model in the new paper, at least in a minimalistic form. Do you think I should move the explanation, notation table and system model in the appendix or keep it in the main part?

BTW, this is the paper that I want to follow notations from: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.08983.pdf

You also mentioned: "there is no reason that definitions/notations cannot be cited, just like substantive arguments or observations or other parts of a paper" --> Do you have any example in the file of computer science that a paper cited another paper's notations? As mentioned in Update 4, it's common in physics or math but I couldn't find any example in CS yet...

I don't have any strong views on particulars; just follow the Golden Rule and you'll be fine.  Sorry, I don't have any examples of this.

I awarded the bounty to your answer merely because I disagree with @Buffy on "the practice of mathematicians and computer scientists aren't really different for such things."  I think, unlike in math, in CS, it's extremely unusual to refer to another paper for notations, therefore better not to do it...I might be wrong, though, but I couldn't find a single piece of evidence.

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


text:
Providing a recommendation letter directly to the student
I'm going to apply for a Ph.D. position in a nordic country, and as you know, I need my current supervisor recommendation letter.
I asked my supervisor to provide me with a recommendation letter regarding all the researches I have done in his lab. He responds that even though he is more than happy to provide one, but he never provides any recommendation letter directly to a student. Instead, he will only send such a letter to any professor/university who formally asks about one.
The whole process looks problematic to me for many reasons:

I can't ask my new supervisor to ask my old supervisor to ask for a recommendation for me. No supervisor would do such a thing because there is really tough competition between candidates. Most of them already have strong recommendation letters. The only scenario I can think of is when the university itself sends such an email, where there is no such procedure in the case of at least Sweden.

I have to apply via a web form inside the university's website where the application form asks for at least 2 recommendation letters (in PDF format). There is no place in that form for me to add my professor's email.

I didn't see such a process anywhere in at least nordic countries. Almost all my friends received their recommendation letters from their previous professors.

What's the best approach in such a situation?
Edit
I'm going to apply for a position in Sweden.

Are you applying in the same country? Which country are you and where are you applying? Practices about recommendation letters vary a lot around the world, and not all professors are aware of the differences or accept them. See, for instance, this question: http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/71429/20058

Are you sure you are required to collect the letter yourself and then send it on to the university where you are applying? If that's the standard procedure there, can't you just tell your supervisor that this is how they want it?

@Lewian Exactly! Just for the sake of the record: What I finally did was that I contacted my supervisor and explained Sweden's Ph.D. application procedure to him in clear words. He then understood and kindly provided me with a PDF format of the recommendation letter. All it required was merely more clarity and better communication :-)

Having the letter of recommendation (LoR) writer send the LoR directly to the institution to which you are applying is indeed the standard procedure in the English-speaking world and increasingly beyond. In this procedure, the LoR is confidential; only the issuer and the recipient(s) should normally see it.
The process works as follows:

Online forms usually have two "sides". The first side is for you, the
applicant. You enter the name and email address of your LoR writer,
after you have obtained their approval. An email will be sent to the
LoR writer with a link to "their" side of the website, to which they
can then upload the letter and perhaps additional information.
For the offline process, you write your application, and the LoR writer sends in their LoR independently from you before the deadline.

However, in some countries (until recently e.g. in Germany and Austria) a different procedure is used, in which the LoR is handed to the applicant who then submits it together with their application (via website or offline).
I would contact the HR or admissions (whichever is applicable) department at the institution where you are applying and ask for clarification, then talk to your LoR writer again. If the institution explicitly requests that you hand in the letter, you can just relay this information to your supervisor. You may also want to make your supervisor aware of different traditions of LoR writing in different countries. Alternatively, ask the HR/admissions department whether they can accept a LoR directly from your supervisor.

Then why the application form asks for at least 2 recommendation letter?

@MichelGokan I'm not sure I understand your comment. If online, it will be possible to submit multiple email addresses. If offline, you just repeat the process and mention in your application who will write the LoRs. But from your edits I see that the website asks you to directly upload the LoR. Your supervisor perhaps expects the "American/UK" process described above. To make sure that there is no misunderstanding, I would inquire at the institution where you are applying about the process and then explain to your LoR writer(s) that it's different from what they're used to.

Downvoter, please explain so this answer can actually be improved.

As a final question: my professor still think its ridiculus to provide any direct recom letter to me...and I really don't know how to convince him the process is different in Sweden. What do you advice me to do in this situation?

@MichelGokan I would make sure that he is willing to write you a strong letter of recommendation and is really only hung up on the procedure. Then forward him the information that you got from the institution.

@henning The question says that the letters should  be uploaded as pdfs on the application web-site. Yet your answer does not address this issue (you say some e-mail will be sent to the profs, yet no such option is given). From my experience, it _may_be possible the professors themselves to upload the pdf (but I do not think this is the case here). Indeed this is a strange tradition to me (as you also hint on the beginning of your answer)

@PsySp Thanks. I tried to expand on how to deal with the different traditions.

One minor remark: It might be either the "HR department" or the "Studiensekretariat" or something like that who is responsible. In general, the HR department would deal with employment issues, while the "Studiensekretariat" or similar would deal with issues related to studying/studentship. For a PhD candidate in Germany, both entities might be involved, though "recommendation letters" seem to be distinctly on the side of studying/research (i.e. more related to the "Studiensekretariat") than belonging to the legal/administrative aspects handled by HR.

Just for the sake of the record: What I finally did was that I contacted my supervisor and explained Sweden's Ph.D. application procedure to him in clear words. He then understood and kindly provided me with a PDF format of the recommendation letter. All it required was merely more clarity and better communication :-)

While uncommon, some applications do ask the applicant to submit the letter directly - as a PDF. This is very rare, and I have had many faculty simply refuse to submit the letter that way. I have also received notably redacted letters this way. Neither is good for the applicant. What I tend to do is upload a PDF with the writer's contact information and a note that the letter will be sent directly to the institution (usually the dept. secretary, the dept. chair, or the advisor). I would then follow up within a day or so after the writer confirms that the letter was sent to make sure the letter got where it needed to be

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


text:
Is it a bad idea not to use slides in my Ph.D. oral defense?
I am preparing for my Ph.D. oral defense in mathematics and am reading tips from various resources. It seems that the usage of slides is usually assumed, though it is generally not required. For me, I am more used to the more traditional way; that is, using whiteboard and markers. I have almost never used slides in my past part-time teachings.
My questions:

Is it a bad idea to use whiteboard and markers instead of slides in my Ph.D. oral defense?
If I use whiteboard, what if the committee have questions about the contents that I have already erased in my presentation?

What does your supervisor think?

In addition to my answer below, I want to mention another important aspect: having prepared presentation slides, in my opinion, improves the quality of a presentation (and, especially, somewhat more stressful defense one) due to better management of the presentation's flow.

I'm not sure what country you are studying in and that could make a big difference. I did my PhD (in Electronics) in the UK and there was no expectation to use slides / visual aids of any sort for the viva, and I don't recall any of my colleagues saying they used them either.

You need to say where in the world you are, since customs vary dramatically. As @Eborbob says, in the UK, essentially nobody uses visual aids because the defence is an oral examination given by two people, not a presentation made to a committee.

never change a running system. especially at the last moment.

+1 to henning's point, and, to add: if you use presentation software, be fully prepared to go forward without it if something breaks.  Which it often will (that actually happened at my defense---the projector in the room wasn't working).

You can give the talk using the blackboard, and still have some version prepared for later reference (handouts, slides, transparencies, ...).

Thank you everyone for your attentions. I don't think my supervisor would have any preference on my presentation though he usually uses slides. I am from a southeastern Asian university and I think that the system might be more similar to that of the United Kingdom (not sure if this information makes any difference).

I wouldn't say that slides are assumed (at least in math); I gave my defense just at a blackboard, and it would have been unusual in my department to do anything else. (Also, it's easier to find a blackboard in a math department than a whiteboard.)

Your defense is not just your presentation, it is also (and more importantly) the rounds of questions and answers.  I always tell my students to number their slides, because the examiners will want to ask about information on particular slides. Of course that information is also in your thesis, which the examiners will have read, but it's often easier to refer to information that was just presented.  If you do it all on the board, then --unless it all fits on the board with no erasing-- I'd suggest that you have everything you are going to write on the board also on handouts.

Whiteboard is not traditional, blackboard is :)

I have seen plenty of thesis defenses that use blackboards (the boards in our department are black- rather than white-, but I don't see that it makes a difference) and also plenty that have used slides.  You should ask around -- or remember from previous thesis defenses you have attended; these are almost always open to all interested parties -- to see whether there is any local preference between slides and writing on the board.  Ask your advisor too.
I suspect that you will find that it is up to you.  In that case: do what makes you feel comfortable.

Is it a bad idea to use whiteboard and markers instead of slides in my Ph.D. oral defense?

No, if you know it will make you more comfortable and more able to present well, it's a good idea.

If I use whiteboard, what if the committee have questions about the contents that I have already erased in my presentation?

I don't see any fundamental difference between a thesis defense and any other math presentation.  In general people can ask questions at any time; if the speaker indicates that she would rather address them later, then they get addressed later, in which case it's up to both the speaker and the questioner to remember the question (e.g. someone could write it down).  A question which is specifically pertinent to something complicated you wrote on the board is probably better addressed then rather than later.  If you get a later question about something that's not on the board anymore, your options are to answer the question verbally, to rewrite something on the board, or to pass out some other written materials which address it.
I will mention in passing that mathematical culture seems to prefer "chalk talks" more than general academic culture at this point.  I have absolutely never used slides / powerpoint / whatever in any class I've taught.  I do it only at large conferences where I can't be confident in advance that the board will be available and easily visible to all and/or that I've been given such a short amount of time that I feel that I have to whip through slides at top speed in order to "cover" what I want to.  Writing mathematics on the board takes time.  But so does understanding mathematics, and it feels a bit dishonest to need to present material faster than you can write it on the board.  Moreover, if you're writing then you can adapt your presentation to the audience on the fly (which for a thesis can be important, so that e.g. having a thesis defense in a room with nothing to write on at all would seem weird to me).
Good luck.
Further Thoughts: Many thesis defenses have two very distinct parts, and the first part really is a lot like a conference talk in that you have a set amount of material to "cover" and the general expectation that you will get through that "coverage" with little distraction.  So doing slides for that part of the defense makes perfectly good sense to me: a thesis defense is not a lecture, and the goal of that part of the defense is not to impart the maximal possible understanding to everyone in the room.  You want to get through that first part with little fuss, and you don't want it to drag out.  So for instance if you are the type of person that prepares much more to write on the board than turns out to be realistic (as I often am), then preparing slides could be a good strategy to stay on track.  Still, if you want to write on the board during this part of the defense: go for it.

A point that could modify the situation a little is whether there is a time limit. In my university, the presentation part of a Ph.D. defense is expected to last 30 minutes or less, which could hamper a good blackboard presentation.

There is another option, that gives the best of both worlds: use transparencies on an overhead projector! Your department will probably have one buried in the dungeons somewhere.
Some projectors have a continuous roll of film that you scroll up and down over the surface you write on, with others you'll need to use individual A4 transparency sheets. If you use a clear numbering system, it's easy for the audience to ask you to go back to a specific spot.
You can even draw complicated diagrams by hand in advance, or print some sections onto transparency paper. But you still have that possibility to write directly onto what you're projecting that you can only do with a computer presentation if you have a "smart" whiteboard or a digitizer tablet.

I am not sure whether this post was made in jest.

@OswaldVeblen I'm honestly surprised you think that! OHPs and document cameras were both used very widely at my undergraduate university. I'd much rather use one of those and my normal handwriting than have to write in the awkwardly large handwriting necessary when using a blackboard or whiteboard.

I definitely love this approach! Will see if the department supports it.

+1 for overhead projector. Two of my three chemistry profs and one math TA did this and it was great, because it makes for a nice pace, makes it possible to adapt to questions from the audience and (less relevant for a defense, but very much for a lecture) you can scan them later on and mail them around as reference material for the students.

@OswaldVeblen: when I first started going to conferences, about 7 or 8 years ago now, OHPs and transparencies were still very common, and I found them rather good — preparing slides on a computer, I get bogged down in perfectionism much more than on paper/transparencies.  But they do seem to have mostly vanished over the last few years.

If the OP has not had the experience of using transparencies, there are a few pitfalls. (1) One still has to be careful about font size. (2) Finding a good pen to write on transparencies is hard, even more so when you want to use colors. (I had the unfortunate experience once of using an orange marker that produced beautiful transparencies when you placed it over a piece of paper, but was entirely illegible on an OHP.) (3) Writing "cleanly" on a transparency requires some practice. (4) It takes some practice to not get into a frenzy when it comes time to do the take-off-the-old-slide-put-on-

-the-new dance. (For example, to make your transparencies easily findable, you want to store them separated by sheets of paper, otherwise the page numbers are really hard to see. This adds some extra work when taking off the old slide and putting on the new one.) // If my choice is between OHP and document camera (where I can just write on paper), I would definitely go with the latter.

@WillieWong I guess you're right that a document camera is better. Another advantage is when in a large room where the OHP may not be big or bright enough. I forgot about them when writing my answer... perhaps not all universities will have one, though

Let me answer question 2 first, since it is easier.

You can highly encourage your examiners/audience members to interrupt you at anytime with questions. (This prevents the problem from happening.)
Additionally prepare some written notes and when giving your presentation use clear and consistent numberings/namings of equations and theorems. (This makes it easier for the audience to scribble down the context of their question, and for you to recall the statements later.)

Question 1 on the other hand depends on a lot of factors.

Is your oral defense "serious" or "pro forma"? In the first case it is often better to use whichever you are more comfortable with (but read on for the points below). In the second case you should just use slides (it saves every one some time and gets you out of the room to enjoy the champagne that much quicker). Since in the second case you don't really care about giving a good talk, we will assume you are in the first case for the following points.
Slides doesn't mean faster. While it is possible to abuse slides and give talks at a higher pace than you would otherwise (and hence should), it is considered bad practice by many to use slides for the sake of "covering material". Your job in giving an academic presentation is not to simply show off how much stuff you know, but to convey a sense of narrative to the project and to impress on the audience the actual knowledge you have discovered.

If you are covering the slide from top to bottom with words, you are doing it wrong.
If you have more slides than minutes for the presentation, you are probably doing it wrong.
If you presentation can be presented without you (namely that the audience can just read the slide from beginning to end without you being involved), you are doing it wrong.

The keyword in visual aid is "aid". Most people find it difficult to process two different streams of verbal information at the same time. If you use slides you should use keywords and phrases to anchor the attention of the audience, but not full sentences (which would be an invitation to stop listening to what you are saying).
Board doesn't mean slower. You don't have to write down every word that comes out of your mouth. Mathematics excels in having symbolic notation. And while it is good to state your theorems in a reasonably complete way, for technical hypotheses you don't necessarily have to write it down (unless that hypothesis is sort of the point of the presentation): you can simply give names to your hypotheses and express and explain each of them orally.
Is your penmanship good? This is obviously a concern for the decision between board versus slide. If your board writing is perfectly illegible, you really should use slides. Even if all your peers use the board.
Some further comparisons (in no particular order)

Slides force you to adopt a fixed linear narrative, and it is harder to jump out of it on the fly. Board allows you to be more free-form. On the flip side, if you are very nervous about your presentation, the regimental nature of slides may help you settle into a groove more easily.
Slides do allow you to race through material. If you are the type that when excited will start talking faster and faster, maybe the action of writing on the board can help prevent you from blitzing through your talk at an incomprehensible speed.
If your talk has a time-limit, one benefit from a board-talk is that you can adjust your presentation on the fly to accommodate the limit. It doesn't look good if you give a slide talk and either finish 10 minutes early or end up with 15 slides that you never got to. (You can do adjustments for slide talks too, but it is harder to hide it from the audience.)
If your talk uses a lot of pictures, I would recommend slides. Very few people are talented enough to draw great illustrations on the fly on the board. The same applies to any material that will take significantly longer to reproduce on the board than the time it will stay up on the board.
On the other hand, if your illustrations are "dynamic", it can sometimes be done better on the board. (Example: reproducing a straight-edge and compass construction, or illustrating Reidemeister moves in knot theory.)

In mathematics at least, both are common enough that you really shouldn't feel the need to conform to using one or the other. Ultimately your decision should be determined by "how can I give the best presentation?" while factoring various things like nerves (you will be nervous at your oral defense, regardless of how many talks you have given before; the same is true of your first tenure-track job talk, your first talk at a large conference, etc.) Of course you should spend time to prepare the content of your talk. But you should also spend time to discover the common pitfalls of public presentation (I listed some above, but the list is by no means complete) and make the effort to take preventative actions. One way to do the latter, as has been suggested elsewhere on this page, is to go to other students' presentations. Wisdom is in large part learning from other people's mistakes.

The answer to your first question is hidden in your second question. Usually the questions are asked after the presentation and hence you might be asked to go to previous slide when the opponent might have a question or doubt. Also if people will ask you questions in between the presentation which is considered as rude behaviour on their part, might destroy your concentration and flow during presentation.
Being a defence related to mathematics you might need a chalk and board anyhow as you can say everything on the ppt presentation, so you might need it to explain something not present in your slides.
Overall my recommendation is to use ppt slides for the main presentation and also keeping chalk and board handy for odd questions not covered in the slides.
Good luck with your defence!!!

Thanks! I am just wondering what if one chooses not to use slides and thus the committee could not ask questions conveniently. (Thus the student could avoid some difficult questions?) But the committee will not let the student fail because of the presentation method s/he chooses, right?

Well it might be that the committee would not fail you but still if they will have problems in asking question then it would be reflected in the grades that you get. Also that you don't have the ppt doesn't mean that you would avoid difficult questions because usually the members of the committee make a list of possible questions to ask to you before hand only based on the thesis that you submitted. Hence you will get the questions for sure the only thing would be that ppt will make it easier for both you and the committee to ask and answer as well as to refer to it quickly with wasting time.

@Zuriel: I gather that you are very nervous about your defense, and also maybe that you haven't seen many other defenses.  If you have time, I strongly recommend that you attend other people's defenses.  You'll see how things are done and -- perhaps most importantly -- that in most cases they are really not a high-stress event like an exam.  If you're worried that you might fail because of the choice of slides or not, I really think you should talk to your advisor and your committee members about that.  I would expect them to say, "Don't be silly, you have nothing to worry about."

"if people will ask you questions in between the presentation which is considered as rude behaviour on their part" – does this not depend entirely on where you're from? Here in the Netherlands there is no formal oral defence, but it is perfectly normal (even expected) that there will be questions during any public presentation.

In my experience (in the U.S., mostly) it is quite common for a thesis committee to ask questions during the defense, rather than waiting until the end.  Such interruptions are not considered rude at all.

I recommend the blackboard.  Shows your process of thought better.  Plus more old school.  Unless you have complex graphics, skip the slide show.

Nice answer - welcome on the Academia SE.

You should not compare presentations (at a defense, at a conference, etc) and teaching. A presentation does not necessarily explain the material, and its main purpose it to advertise your work in the presence of time constraints and stress. All blackboard presentations that I saw, put the presenters at a disadvantage. They would waste time copying from their notes to the board, fixing mistakes, then searching what's the next thing to copy. If you need to make a presentation, don't do it on blackboard.

Thanks for your answer! Though I have finished my defense, it is very helpful to future presentations.

@Zuriel Wow, did not notice how old the question is. It got bumped to the front page for some reason.

:-) I asked the questions a few years ago but the answers are still very encouraging and helpful to me and perhaps other readers.

Well to give a better understanding visualization is needed. During defense you main aim is to make people understand what you were doing and how good it is. If you feel you can make them understand without the slides go for it.

Can you please try to clean this up and explain yourself a bit better?  Right now it's very difficult for me to understand this post.


text:
Is feeling lonely and uncomfortable in my (foreign) country of study a valid reason to drop out of a PhD?
I've been studying for my PhD in Sweden (I moved from the UK in January 2014). It's been alright. I've had difficulties before, and I've thought of quitting it, but I pushed through. I don't speak the language, but I'm in an academic environment where everyone speaks English anyway. I've got on with people here, but being back with my parents for Christmas has made me realise just how much I miss things here.
I can't afford a city apartment abroad, so I live with a family as a lodger in the countryside. I can never quite relax there. It's an old house with thin walls and easily damaged doors, so I have to take care with everything. I have a small room and I don't quite feel comfortable expressing myself around somewhat-strangers. We get on, but I never feel comfortable speaking with them, and they don't really know me. I can't really move out either, since I would be moving on in six months as per the program, and would it really be worth it to find a new place for that amount of time?
Folks at work are nice, but I've never felt completely comfortable around them either. We just have different interests and are different ages. They're nice, but I've felt the urge to prove myself and do well and that's isolated me. There is a LOT of support available, but somehow I still find things difficult. Socialising outside of work is very hard due to the language barrier, the distance from the city (which makes weekends abysmally dull unless I want to spend all day on a trip to the shops) and the way things are organised there. It's not impossible, but it takes great effort.
It's not necessarily the work which is getting me down, but I've realised that I've gotten by this year by devoting myself to work. I've made many mistakes (not all of which can be cleared up), but my supervisor doesn't really mind and still thinks I've done well enough. He's probably right, but as I'm so focused on work I notice all the possible small mistakes, and when they could come back to bite me. And that sucks. I do dread going back to work, as I will have to finish this project somehow, and it won't be as good as I had hoped it would have been. But I will finish it.
Some of the later projects (in my department we work on several different but related papers for a PhD) so seem better, and I can usually get back into things, but I don't have a burning passion for the field. I took the PhD because I was struggling to find a job, and I was considering academia. The PhD was related to what I considered that I wanted to study in the future, and my old masters supervisor recommended it.
As I've said, this isn't the first time I've had doubts. Last year I had a very bad period when I wanted to quit too, but it passed when I felt like I was doing better. Every time I'm back in the UK for a few weeks or longer I feel even more rubbish going back, because things are so much easier here. I know my way around, I speak the language, I have friends I can easily relate to and family nearby that loves me... And it'll only get worse when I have to move to Australia in six months for the next part of my PhD, as the PhD is jointly hosted with another uni in Sydney.
I really feel like I want to come back to the UK. I'm not even sure a PhD is right for me; sometimes it feels okay, but it never quite feels wonderful. It feels more like a job than a life. I'm already on medication for depression/bipolar, and I'm autistic too, if that makes a difference. I get the feeling that I just want to be around folks who get me, which for me seems rare to find over there in an environment so devoted to work.
I feel so lonely right now. I have such an empty life, and it sucks so much. Even this kind of work feels kind of wrong for me too: I don't want to be stuck in an office doing facts and figures forever, especially not for four years. I always thought it was what I wanted, but now I feel like I'd much rather go out and help people somehow as my life's work, or find a boring-but-menial job and focus my life outside of that. Even without my work problems, I've felt like this for at least six months. My PhD seems like a temporary thing to me now, and after it I hope to do something else. But four years like this? I'm not sure if I could handle that.
My passion for my work has gone, I suppose.
There are other things to consider too: I'm transgender, and still struggling to get hormone replacement therapy. Sweden is supportive, but they're told me it'd take a year to begin due to the necessary psychological tests. Which I've already done in the UK. Every time I go somewhere else I have to start the whole thing again.
I am scared that I just feel this way because I'm afraid of how my project will turn out. I'm going to go back and get it done, and see how I feel then, but even then I think I'm afraid I'll just slip back into feeling generally miserable again.

Hi, and welcome to Academia.SE.  I think your question may already be addressed by How should I deal with discouragement as a graduate student? and some other similar questions on the site.  Although everybody's experience is unique, the kind of discouragement you are facing is very common, and you may  find useful advice in the questions that have already been asked.

I'm already on medication for depression/bipolar, and I'm autistic too, if that makes a difference. Based on what you've described, you should probably check up with your doctor to get evaluated. I know that incorrect dosing either way tends to turn people wonky from personal experience, and the amount of stressors you have in your life right now is higher than normal as well.

As with other comments and the answer, it sounds like the issues are not about the PhD itself, but about dislocation and other larger psychological issues.

just in case, they talk about "winter depression" in Scandinavia; in particular if  you are from the south of UK  you might feel the lack of light quite acutely now.

On the bright side, if/when you move to Australia, the language barrier will pretty much go away.  This may make it easier for you to feel connected there, although it may take time to develop those connections.

@jakebeal I don't think it's a duplicate - this question is more about the experience of being a student in a foreign country. The answers to the other question on discouragement about research don't fully apply. I think this is probably an issue faced by a lot of international students.

"Wherever you go, there you are."

The OP is transgender. There is a related question here the OP might be interested. Typical experiences of transgender people in academia?.

When I did my PhD studies in Germany, I was lonely and uncomfortable at first, to the point of depression. I tried to work as as hard as possible while trying to figure out got to improve my emotional state. Eventually I found some YouTube channels that were uplifting and also got a hobby. That worked well for me, and I completed my studies successfully.

The other answers are excellent, but let me add one thing:

I don't speak the language, but I'm in an academic environment where
  everyone speaks English anyway.

Believe me - this is a great misunderstanding (though it is a common one). I work at a University (and did my PhD there) in another country as well - but i do speak the language, just as many - but not all - of my international colleagues. Also in our department, most official stuff is done in English, and people are happy to speak English with new colleagues who don't speak the local language.
But this can actually be pretty dangerous as well: It creates the false impression that learning the local language is not neccessary. Technically speaking, it indeed isn't. But actually, it is. It is simply impossible to feel at home if you cannot do any normal stuff without everyone else having to make an effort they wouldn't make if you weren't there. Yes, people might be fluent in English. But that it something different than actually wanting to talk English (= your mother tongue, not theirs!) all the time. To be  honest, I think it is perfectly understandable if you go out for a beer after work and you know that inviting person X to join would result in having to speak another language the whole evening, that people don't invite X.
You are the only one who can decide whether to quit or not. But let me give you an advice: Learn the language. In fact, the very act of taking such a class gives you many new contacts as well, and you might find some friends there as well.
Good luck and all the best!

I really agree with this answer. I can't imagine how to become integrated without at least trying to learn the local language. Even without actually speaking the language, learning it is a huge advantage and provides motivation.

Extremely good point, which too few people are aware of. However, I gave another answer my upvote here, because if I were a betting person, I would not bet on this resolving this particular OP's situation. Reason being that--and I speak from experience--as a native English speaker living in a country where English is huge as a second language, especially among educated folk (which OP is), if you really want to learn the local language, you must be extremely self-motivated and relentlessly persistent, as you cannot rely on the situation to force you, or even necessarily on others'

help and encouragement. And unfortunately, someone who is depressed, homesick, autistic (issues with socializing makes this even harder) and already does not feel at home for other reasons, plus will be leaving in a matter of months, probably does not have it in them. But I could be wrong, of course.

Even before you mentioned it, reading your detailed description made me wonder if you might be dealing with depression.
A lot of what you feel is likely due to that. A depressed person is unlikely to feel passion (or what you think that might be) for anything. Feeling a burning void, a lack of purpose, are common, and would probably be with you whatever you target (I am depressed and empathize).
Yes, going home helps, as you say, as you have a support network there. Sweden must be among the better countries to actively support uncommon life circumstances - transgender, depressed, autistic; and you indicate that you feel tolerance (I don't know as much about Australia). Before you drop out, and fall into a possible alternate void in part because of how your mind is wired, I'd strongly consider finding an analyst in Sweden, and working on opening up and finding support in Sweden (transgender groups, other depressed people, people at your school, giving your guest family a shot, and talking to your adviser). I don't know how hard that is considering you say that you are autistic too, but it really is essential to not feel alone; and I see no way around trying.
I would make that my primary focus for the next 6 months, also considering that - for some - depression peaks in winter. If you still feel the same then, I would consider asking for a break of your PhD first before completely dropping out. If granted, try to work as an intern or such in one of the other fields you mention, and see how that feels. My guess though is that it wouldn't necessarily be all that different as long as your depression is strong, but you would have an actual point of comparison.

You are the one who gets to decide what constitutes a valid reason for dropping out of a PhD program.  Feeling lonely and uncomfortable is a valid reason for ceasing to do almost anything if the feelings are intense enough.
The situation of studying abroad in a foreign country where you don't speak the language and don't have an ideal living situation is well known to be difficult.  I was an American living in Montreal on a work permit for two and a half years (as a postdoc, not a student).  This is certainly the easy end of the spectrum -- how many people living abroad can take a bus to their hometown? -- but it was more difficult than I was expecting it to be.  That said, this is a relatively common difficult situation which many people do get through and even come to enjoy.
You also mentioned that you are bipolar, autistic and are transgendered.  Not only transgendered but in a transitional state which is being impeded by your living in a foreign country.  Wow, that's a lot of stuff to deal with at once.  Again, you are the one to decide whether it's too much stuff, but I have little doubt that it would be too much for me.  If it were me, I would only continue as a student if the PhD program were going amazingly, excitingly well, to the extent that I could clearly see the wonderful academic career that these personal hardships and sacrifices are setting up.  It doesn't sound like your program is going that well, and more importantly it sounds like the prospect of a future academic career is not a source of deep pleasure and satisfaction to you.
In summary, you sound like you are quite unhappy, and you are in a situation in which those feelings are more than justified.  What one life change, however large or small, would make you more happy and fulfilled?  That's a tough question and one worth really thinking over.  If the answer is "Dropping out of the PhD program and moving back to your home country": great, because you can absolutely do that.  If it's something else, try doing that first and see what happens.
Good luck.

Yes, coping with (if not "solving") one problem at a time is already toward the limit of human capacity, so to feel over-loaded, in the first place, is entirely reasonable already with just 1+ issues, not to mention 3-or-so. One should not be pointlessly lazy or self-indulgent, sure, but also not go to the opposite extreme of demanding trans-human strength, focus, etc. One cannot hold one's breath forever, for example. The living situation alone, offering no genuine respite from the alien-ness of the larger environment, would be hard for me to take...

Don't sweat it, what you feel is perfectly natural. I moved to the US when I was 19 and the first year did suck. It just takes a while to get used to the country, meet people you have things in common, get a car etc, etc.
You already spent a year, I think you'll soon find that the worst is over, just stick with it, get your PhD and with that in hand you can do pretty much whatever you want. You can go in academia, you move to the private sector or whatever.
If you are worried about your job, go talk to the manager. I'm sure you are doing just fine, everyone makes mistakes, even seasoned professionals who should know better, just be honest about it and fix it.
Try meeting other English speakers, I would imagine that Sweden has a sizable British, Americans etc community. Check with the local universities, embassies often have mixers where you can meet people.
I would seriously consider getting a car or moving somewhere closer to town. Get a roommate if you can, that way it's cheaper and you get someone to hang out with. Having a place to go home where you can feel comfortable is super important, it will make you feel much better.

It's normal to feel this way at the beginning, but once These Feelings persist for longer than a month or two, then they cease from simply being the normal 'moving to a new environment' jitters. I say, if it does not suit you, and the programs benefits are not worth it enough for you to stay (e.g. you may be more likely to get a secure Job, but it may be in Sweden, still away from Family  and/or you may not be happy with that Position, as is already what seems to be the case from reading your Story), then I do not see the harm in either taking abreak or stopping indefinitely. Sure, the work that you have already completed would have lost its value, but in the Long run, you will thank yourself tremendously for making a decision that would inform your happiness. Another alternative is to enjoy your own Company and seek out at least one like-minded individual by joining an Organisation or speaking to someone within your course of study about going out for Drinks, etc.
Never allow your emotions to control you, rather, you control your emotions by doing what is best for yourself in both the short and Long run. Hey, maybe sacrificing a bit of happiness now may yield your happiness for the rest of your life once the program is over and you are more financially stable. True, Money does not bring happiness, but lack thereof is just as burdensome.

Phds are seldom easy. It does get better afterwards (postdocs/professors have way more say in what/how they do stuff). Indeed, what I'm doing now has little relation to what I did during the phd...
All these doubts and insecurities are common. But I'll reinforce the advice: go for professional psychological support. I know from experience that helps, and you have a lot going on :) And, maybe, a hobby, something to take your head of stuff for a while... If you go to australia, try to get a more confortable place to live. For me at least, it really helped...
IMHO, the decision of continuing or not is almost irrelevant. You will do what you think its best and live with it, which is nothing new for you. I would only say that it wouldn't be very wise to decide stuff that is that important while feeling that bad. Clearheaded decisions are always best, but not always possible :)


text:
What makes a standout profile for applying to a top-ten ranked CS masters in the US?
I'm currently an undergrad student, will complete it next 3 months, I was thinking that, what makes an undergrad profile different and stand out of crowd?
To be more specific: what does it take for an applicant for a Masters in Computer Science, for top 10 ranked departments in the United States.
What is it that an undergrad must do which will elevate his/her profile. Is research or publications expected from undergrads?

What is it that an undergrad must do which will elevate his/her profile. — Ask this question at least two years before graduation.  It's too late to do much now.

@JeffE What can a second year BSc student do to improve his/her profile/CV?

@EnthusiasticStudent (1) Talk to professors (yes plural), in person, especially about research. (2) Do something that displays your intellectual creativity and maturity and that is not required by your classes.  Examples include graduate-level classes, independent study/research with faculty, industry internships, contributions to open-source projects, and posting on StackExchange sites.  (4) Don't screw up your classes.

@JeffE: Would that be okay if I ask you a personalized question?
I've led 2 Internships, 3 major projects, 3 mini-projects, 1 International publication (though I consider it as simply literature survey of that subject) and relatively less aggregate % (61%), would that be good enough for my profile?

That obviously depend on what you actually did in your internships, projects, and paper. The crucial point is the phrase displays your intellectual creativity and maturity. It's not a checklist.

That I utterly agree on this, but how can one show this to anyone without having a direct interaction with the admission committee?

You seem to have little time to do a huge number of things, but a few things you can do:

contribute to some open source projects there are many many and all need help of at level
show that you have played with some ideas on GitHub
show you can turn your hand to many languages again stick it up on GitHub
have a shot at project Euler, and stick it all up on Github
build an App or website that does something/anything

Publications for Undergrads are great, but not really expected.