text:
Should I tell on them?
Student here. I've worked as a tutor for a while now at a tutoring center. There's one student that I started private tutoring. During the course of their classes they discovered they had a learning disability. I'm infinitely patient so I didn't really notice. Also i'm unfamiliar with this sort of thing so I wanted to break it off just in case there was something I didn't know how to handle. But apparently the student wanted to have a tutor present at all times, and the other tutors were charging up to a hundred dollars an hour to work with this poor soul. I was charging way less than that so I felt some responsibility to be the one to not screw this student over with high prices because everything was going okay and they were learning (or so it seemed). I probably should have just gotten out of there at that point. Time goes on and near the end of the semester they tell me they paid some PhD to take their exam for them. That's a shocker. They also started paying someone to do their homework. They said it was because they would not have an income from a certain organization if they dropped out of school. So basically they would go jobless in a pandemic unless they passed the class. My stupid self still wanted to help them the way I had been doing, explaining things step by step and having them do the problems- and encourage them to stop paying people to do stuff for them. It was awkward to try to tell them that they shouldn't be paying people to do their homework, since they are at least a decade older than myself.
It kept getting worse instead of better. I stuck to my guns and made them work, never answering for them (to their extreme frustration) but now I realize it may have been better to do exactly what I was so committed to not doing: leave them be so they could learn their lesson. I don't tutor them anymore but I still don't know what to do. I didn't want to give up on this student. But I think I was wrong to even take on this work. Should I tell about their cheating? I stopped tutoring them when the end of the semester came, that was a no-brainer. But I don't want them to keep working with whoever it is that's completely taking advantage of the situation, and I also worry that their professors will think it's me who helped them on their exam. I know, I must be a clueless idiot, but that's why i'm asking for help.
And feel free to give me a talking to if that's what I need. I just don't trust my judgement anymore. I'm quitting private tutoring.

Not reporting them does no one any good in a case like this. If they have a learning disability then they need to deal with that, and cheating isn't the proper way. If they don't really know the material then an employer will eventually catch on and they will be unemployed anyway. The PhD student has an ethical violation as do the people paid to do the homework.
If I were to beat up on you it would only be to suggest that they should have been referred to a professional when the learning issue became known.
But letting it go isn't a solution here.

Thank you for your comment. I did ask them and they said they would try a learning therapist long before it got bad, but both of us never followed up. I followed your advice and talked to them today about their progress for a couple hours, as a friend. Seems like it might have helped. They said they would take a different class and continue the subject they had difficulty in later on, after the learning therapist. Fingers crossed.


text:
Graduate School Admissions (Fall 2021): What are the prospects of an international applicant?
These days I have been seeing a lot of chatter on Gradcafe (forum for grad school applicants to discuss results and admission process) about decline in the percentage of admits being offered to international applicants for fall 2021 (Universities in USA).
I am also an international applicant (engineering) and this was my 3rd time applying for grad school.

First: Applied in 2017 (PhD), got into Tier 1 university (Ivy League) in USA with presidential scholarship for PhD. Due to personal issues, I was unable to attend grad school that year.

Applied in 2019 (PhD): Got interview invite from a Tier 1 university (X university) in the US. But in between Covid happened and the university did not take further interviews. Did not get an admit.

After this, I did a 6 month RA at university X in 2020 and completed my project successfully.

Applied for fall 2021 (PhD). I thought that my chances will be bright in University X this year due to added advantage of RA at the university. But I haven't heard anything from Univ X till now. I believe, it will be a reject 95% at this point.

What do you think, do the chances of getting an admit for international students in the US decreased?

This wouldn't be accepted as an answer, but the question is irrelevant for you. As a research question it might be interesting, but for you, the situation is what it is. The only sure statement is that if you don't apply then you won't be accepted. But make sure you have everything in place so that you can accept an offer if given, unlike a couple of years ago. And don't lose contact with the people who write you letters, which are relatively important in the US.

@Buffy I had medical issues, it was a bad time in 2017.I am totally prepared this time.  Nonetheless, I still hope at least one school admit may come through, but it is highly unlikely at this time.
The worst part is, my recommendations are exhausted. One time I could not attend grad school, other 2 times (including fall 2021 possibly) I did not get an admit. I still want to do a PhD, but I am not sure if I can ask my supervisors for recommendations again.
Note: I did not aim for Tier 1 schools this time, I thought I was playing it safe.

Probably a mistake to not ask your previous writers. If the supported you then, they will have little trouble now. Good luck.

Also it was probably a mistake to limit yourself to Tier 2. An effective strategy is to cover the ground, rather than limit your options. Who can say. A wide range of schools is always useful as long as the cost of coverage is reasonable.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to reply a faculty to ask him to recommend you to another faculty who might be recruiting this year?
I am a graduate school applicant for PhD in XXX engineering, fall 2021. I contacted a POI for the same and got the following reply:

Hi hashbrown,
sorry at the moment, the only graduate student position I have available is for YYYY research.
Thanks

Can I ask them to recommend my name to another faculty in the same field?

what's POI? Also, please consider taking the tour of the site.

I edited your post - presumably the research they had available was not the same as what you're studying so i changed it to "YYY." Not sure if "XXXX" is a person?

XXXX and YYY were research topics, sorry for the confusion.

No - this professor doesn't know who you are or if you're any good. They saw your research interests, and they didn't align to what they're looking for right now. Somewhat doubtful they even read your CV.
If they didn't say "I recommend you contact Dr. Y," then there is nothing material you can get from them.

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


text:
Does it get easier?
So I'm a current PhD student in applied math. My interests have somewhat gravitated over time so I feel like I'm constantly in new territory and constantly struggling to understand the papers I read. I'm always questioning the ideas I have for research, since in my experience my ideas have often been 1) done by someone else or 2) misguided/wrong.
I know I still have a lot to learn, especially about the "big picture" of my relevant field(s) and basic principles of research, and will probably find more specific problems that I understand. But at this point in my career, I should already be there, right? (Almost finished with my second year of PhD and still haven't published, though I have some projects that can hopefully become papers.)
It's difficult to imagine a state of research where I have my own niche and can churn out publications like I've seen some people do. I don't even like the idea of settling into a niche too snugly, as I like to move around and learn new things.
From more mature researchers, does this feeling of confusion and struggle ever diminish, or is it just an inevitable part of the work?

What you are experiencing is normal.   The worst thing you could do is to give up.  It is ok to take a break, and then come back to the 'battle'.  You'll find that it will get easier as you start to see familiar concepts and your way around the literature.  Also, there will be less info overload as you pick up more knowledge and skills.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11765/how-to-effectively-deal-with-imposter-syndrome-ive-somehow-convinced-everyone

https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/2219/948

Thanks, i's good to know I'm not alone. However, my question is a bit different: I'm asking whether this feeling goes away as one matures in a field, or whether even mature researchers are still surrounded by things they don't understand (obviously depends on the research style, whether they prefer to evolve their interests or stick to a niche but I'm assuming most people evolve somewhat)

An inquisitive, wandering mind is a curse and a blessing. You’ll want to recognize it and balance it with the focus you’ll need to launch your career successfully.

You haven't written anything about your supervision. A good supervisor should be there to discuss some concerns and give at least a bit of guidance in the beginning. Have you discussed this with your supervisor? What does your supervisor think about your research ideas?

Pretty much any activity gets easier with practice.  Research is no different.
I suggest that as research gets easier for you, you should get more ambitious.


text:
Should I feel obligated to include my advisor as coauthor?
I've been working on a project with a faculty member (let's call him S) that is not my advisor (let's call him A).
They are in different departments, and have little overlap. I am working on something with S (actually I am doing it mostly by myself, with a bit of advice from S) and am planning on publishing the results. I have shared the project with A, but since it's not his field, I know he has at best a vague understanding of the contents of the paper. However he did give the idea for the methodology, which I used.
S has continued giving me advice about this paper, mostly relating to expanding on the theory of the methodology he suggested. I don't think it's very useful (he doesn't understand the context) and would prefer to just go in the direction set with S.
However, when it comes to authorship, should I include A? It feels wrong to not include him when he has been giving well-intentioned advice (and supplied a crucial suggestion for the methodology). However, it also doesn't feel right to include him, since he isn't familiar with the rest of the contents of the paper beyond the methodology section.

I won't comment on this specific case, but I don't agree with your general premise that all the authors should be familiar with the whole work. Sometimes I help people in their research and they help me, and often it concerns rather isolated parts of the whole task. I don't see anything wrong in such collaboration.

@rg_software that makes sense! I'm still early in my PhD so I'm not familiar with the usual protocol for authorship

Ideally, he (either S or A or both) should be included if and only if their intellectual contributions appear in the paper. If they have contributed that, then they should be an author, just as is true for any other person.
Unfortunately, the world isn't ideal and in some fields it is just "pretty standard" to include an advisor even if they have contributed only indirectly (such as funding a lab). Many see this as an aberration. But I'll write further here about the world as it should be, not as it is.
A contributor (of intellectual content, not just time and effort) of even a part of a paper is still an author. "Advice" probably isn't, in itself, enough of a contribution to rise to the level of author.
If you have a good enough relationship with the advisor, I'd suggest that you just ask him for his advice and reasoning. Don't argue over it, but consider whatever he says. I was never co-author with any of my students and would have declined in any case. I also advised a few other students for whom I was not the official advisor. After they completed their dissertation and were working on other papers, then I'd have considered it on any joint project, of course.
But the question you want to ask yourself, to help resolve this, is whether it feels like plagiarism to write the things you do, attributing the ideas of S to yourself. If it does, then they are almost certainly worthy of authorship.
It isn't the same thing, however, if what you got from them is an idea for a question to explore. Thank them for contributing, but if the answers are yours then authorship is yours. Ideally, at least.
In a less ideal world, you might have to do what you have to do.


text:
Including a famous person as coauthor?
Let's say a famous researcher contributed only a bit to a research project by a student, and the student could reasonably choose either to include or not include them as a coauthor.
Is it beneficial to the student to include them? It seems that having a big name would increase viewership and perceived legitimacy of the paper, while having more coauthors also seems to diffuse the ownership of the work.

Probably area dependent.  As as a reviewer, I do not take care the about authors or affiliation.  However, there are reviewers who get star struck.  Having said that,  famous authors usually provide some value in terms of research taste; this could be selecting a good problem, and/or ensuring a paper is up to standard; i.e., he/she is a quality checker.  Also, I believe it makes a difference if your paper is borderline; 1 accept and 1 reject.  The editor may then recommend a major revision instead of a reject; this is especially true if the editor knows the famous author.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/158208/problems-with-gift-authorships-on-papers-and-how-to-solve-it

A friend of mine did this in a journal that lists the authors by alphabetical order. They became  "et. al." despite being the first author in terms of contribution. It's a funny story with a lesson behind.

@AnonymousPhysicist I was wondering more about the benefits to the student (whether they should choose to include a big name author) -- although it seems like that's not up to the student. Thank you for sharing though, that's very interesting

Let's say a famous researcher contributed only a bit to a research project by a student, and the student could reasonably choose either to include or not include them as a coauthor.

The student doesn't get to choose, the student gets to invite: It's the famous researcher's decision as to whether they want to be a co-author, since they contributed a bit to [the] research project.

It seems that having a big name would increase viewership and perceived legitimacy of the paper, while having more coauthors also seems to diffuse the ownership of the work.

The benefits are significant, whilst the drawback of more authors is minimal (albeit, fields vary).

"The student doesn't get to choose, the student gets to invite" Indeed. I lost the only chance in my short academic career of improving my Erdős number to 2 when a famous researcher declined! Afterwards I have jokingly wondered if mentioning that would have changed his mind...

The question more than suggests that while this answer in principle should be the correct one, it is not in the current situation. I imagine that the student has asked the famous person if they want to be a co-author, and the famous person has told the student that they can choose. Not unreasonable.

@nabla I don't believe the question in any way suggests the OP has asked the famous person and they've declined, actually, I think the question suggests the OP would rather not ask the famous person.

The drawback is that people can, and will, assume that the famous researcher did most of the work. I have seen that happen in my field, where people automatically assume that the famous coauthor did "the heavy lifting". This can be, to some extent, detrimental to the success of a young researcher.

@Inkblot Few students write papers that famous people would claim as theirs.

@Inkblot it depends. I personally think that the less famous of all did the job, others wrote it, and the big name secured the money as well provided, hopefully, a nice environment.

This assumes the paper is accepted and published. In proceedings with double-blind reviewing, adding a famous collaborator doesn't affect anything.

@AlexReinking Double blind review is very rare. Mostly only in CS conferences and few other places. I have seen the names of the authors of all papers I reviewed.

@user2768: Nobody said that the famous person will claim the paper. But the working assumption is always that the difficult parts, the ideas, the innovation, would be attributed to the experienced researcher, and the junior researcher did "grunt work" of verifying and elaborating on those. This isn't always the case, that's true, but I did see it happen, more than once. And incorrectly in some cases, much to the dismay of the junior researcher.

@Inkblot Let me rephrase: I don't think the people that [assume] the famous researcher did most of the work matter that much.

Yes, it is beneficial.
See the paper "Early coauthorship with top scientists predicts success in academic careers" in Nature Communications from Nov. 2019 (or the short news version at Nature Index).
In an analysis covering more than 22.000 scientists, it finds that collaborating with a top scientist early in one's career leads to an almost doubled increase in the probability of becoming a top scientist oneself.

But what is the cause and what the effect? I doubt that  the simple fact of the name on the paper is what matters.

But does it only "predict" or does it cause? I could imagine factors that a partly implied by co-authorship that are more likely to be causal, such as access to important networks (of potential co-authors), having a big shot supervisor (as co-author), graduating from a top school etc.

I'd imagine the causation goes both ways -- very interesting, thanks for sharing!

Just to make sure this answer does not get misinterpreted: it is beneficial to have a famous author in one's paper, but it is not beneficial to just add their name without asking first. Doing that constitutes a serious academic misconduct.

My experience with this, as a former grad student is as follows:
[student author][supervising professor][famous author  whom professor knows][various techs who processed the data]
They're likely credited in dozens of papers, but if its direct, co-author w/o primary positioning.

The order you mention is very area-dependent. For example, in mathematics and theoretical computer science, all authors are listed alphabetically.

I agree with Carl-Frederik, in my field(s) the supervising prof goes last

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
Master in Europe vs Master in US for PhD admittance
I am currently an European undergraduate Senior waiting on results for various Master's applications.
I have applied to programs in both the US and Europe, my goal following my Master is to pursue a PhD in the US in said field hopefully in a top school (MIT,Stanford,Caltech,...). For such purpose do you believe I would be favoured by getting my Master in the US, at Georgia Tech, or by getting it at a top European school, such as ETH Zurich or EPFL ? Or do you believe it would not make much of a difference ?
I really like programs at all these three schools, thus one of the main factors guiding my decision would be how much getting my Master's there would increase my chance of being admitted for a PhD in a top school in the US.

It is unlikely to make a difference at that level (GT vs ETHZ).
But note that a MS isn't required for entrance into a doctoral program in the US. I'd guess that if you can get into a masters at Georgia Tech you could probably also enter their doctoral program directly. There is lots of competition, though and most of it is from highly recommended and well educated people.
Because of that competition, your probability of getting accepted into one of those three schools is very low even with a good masters, unless something really stands out.
I won't discourage you from applying to such places, but you should broaden your search to assure success. Your career will depend more on what you do than on the name of the school you attend.
In fact, you should probably be looking at doctoral admissions rather than masters if that is really your goal.
Most good doctoral programs in US will grant you a masters along the way. Some of them, just for asking. Others require a thesis of sorts, less than a doctoral thesis.
And note that the US undergraduate program is typically not very specialized. Approximately half of the required courses are not in the major field of study. This is, then, what a US student enters doctoral studies with - even at very good schools.

Thanks for your answer, I have decided to go for a Master's before applying to Doctoral programs to strengthen my profile. I am getting my Bachelor's degree in a country where undergraduate studies are just three years long, thus I will be graduating very young, at just 21 years old, and I thought that having two extra years to get research experience could really help me. Especially because given my short undergraduate degree I did not have many opportunities to research out of my Bachelor thesis.

I will of course broaden the group of universities to which I will apply for Doctoral studies, the ones I cited are just my dream schools, I know they are very long shots with very fierce competition to get into.

You have some misunderstandings. In the US, undergrad is 4 years but it has lots (and lots) of courses outside the specialty. A 3 year European (for example) bachelors probably has at least as much in the major field as a 4 year US degree. 21 is the typical age for US students to start doctoral studies. Most US students have little real research experience. The systems are very different. Don't make assumptions that cost you time.

Thanks for your clarifications, I may have underestimated my profile, I thought that having little to no research experience would be a big point against me in Doctoral applications, and would outweigh my good grades and test scores, especially for schools as good as those. Anyway I believe surely a Master will help me get a better understanding of what I want to specialise in and enjoy most about my field of study. Another perk of getting a Master is having the opportunity to apply to both European and American PhD programs later, at least there are some positives.

For the reason you mention in your comments to Buffy's answer, I suggest European masters. Some additional points.

US masters are rarely funded and are very expensive, EU citizens are privy to very low masters tuition in Europe. Consider applying to the Fulbright if you're dead-set on US programs to help finance you.
Masters in Europe usually require a masters thesis. Which is a huge plus for your application to a PhD. This thesis also gives you a great opportunity to decide if research is right for you.


text:
Will I be competitive for college teaching jobs if I quit ABD?
I'm looking at quitting my PhD (4.5 years in) in engineering in the U.S at an R1. My advisor and I tried a new tack after I broached quitting this Spring, but I'm concerned that things aren't improving, and I would like to make sure I know my options if I make the decision to leave.
For background, I'm ABD (all but dissertation), love teaching, hate research. I have taught a few courses and have an internship under my belt. I particularly love teaching at the college level because I can experiment with different assessments and teaching styles and don't have to teach to standardized testing. I also enjoy teaching in my specific discipline. Looking for insight:

How feasible is it to get hired for a lecturer/instructional professor position with only a master's? My department won't do it. They literally fired the only person who knew anything about one topic because he didn't have a PhD. Is this common?

How feasible is it to get hired teaching math at a community college? My discipline does not exist at the community college level, but it's kind of math-heavy, so I was thinking about math departments. Do I stand a chance without an engineering PhD, much less a math PhD?

I appreciate any advice or suggestions!

The potential loss of opportunities is so high for the cost ... why can't you finish?

Thanks for your comment @AzorAhai-him-. I hate research. At the end of the day, finishing (...and starting) my dissertation would be at least one more year of misery when all I really want to do is teach.

Please ask one question per post.  The third question is off topic.

@4AndAHalfYearsLater Oh, you're 4.5 years in without having started a dissertation?

Owing to falling birth rates, teaching jobs are tough to find the US.  None of your personal circumstances will change that fact.

Have you considered a PhD thesis on didactics in your field?

Every community college (CC) I've known about from applying or from my acquaintances or from places I've lived (combined includes over 100), the absolute minimum requirement is a Masters degree (specialization doesn't matter) and 18 (semester) graduate credit hours in mathematics, although a few are more stringent than this. But the primary issue is not your graduate schoolwork background (although statistics helps more than, say, general topology) but demonstrable teaching background and excellence. For high schools, see my answer here.

@DaveLRenfro thank you for your response! If I may ask a follow-up: do they typically want those mathematics courses from a mathematics department? I have some statistics credits, but the majority of my coursework is in operations research and data science, which are taught in our industrial engineering department. Thank you for linking your high school answer.

@lighthousekeeper - thank you for the suggestion. My advisor is not willing to support that approach, and unfortunately unless I went to a generic engineering education department, I don't think I'll have the opportunity. I wish, though.

@4AndAHalfYearsLater Sorry to hear that. I think that many fields (including mine) have dedicated didactics researchers, but I can imagine it will be practically difficult to arrange a PhD project with one at this point.

I think classes in an industrial engineering department will probably not count, but maybe worth asking if you have any specific CC's in mind. In my earlier comment I was going to say that I wasn't sure if courses in Statistics or Operations Research or some such would count if the university's structure was that these were separate departments and separate from just plain "mathematics" (some universities have several such departments under a "mathematical sciences" umbrella), but I ran up against a character limit. But my guess is that industrial engineering is probably too distant to count.

Daniel R. Collins, a frequent contributor to Academia Stack Exchange, works at a CC, and at some point he's likely to step in and provide more authoritative advice. Whether this happens or not, I encourage you to look over his current 164 many answers here, as many of these will give you a bit of insight about teaching at a CC. BTW, you might have better luck teaching industrial engineering stuff (CC, or a specialized HS), since my experience has been they have difficulty in finding qualified teachers, more so than for math.

A year of (first-world) suffering will be worth it to you in the long run, in terms of credentialing and status. Just do it.

There are some opportunities, but less than if you finish. Lots of community college teachers have a masters only. Some to secondary schools are a lot like colleges but without the research. In both of these, you probably have enough math and maybe some other things that give you the background, since both teach only lower level courses.
Some four year teaching colleges in the US will also hire people without a doctorate, but the more prestigious, the less likely, I'd suspect.
In addition, there are a few top research schools (Duke, Stanford, CMU, ...) in which a person with a Masters can serve as a "Professor of the Practice" which is a long term untenured position. Such people are responsible for quite a lot of the undergraduate teaching, especially at lower levels. A friend of mine is an ABD at Duke, for example, with title Lecturer IIRC.  but it is a long term position.
In all of these, even top secondary schools, there will be some competition with people holding doctorates but preferring to teach rather than do (serious) research. But many of them also do some research, perhaps in the pedagogy of their field or in less technical aspects.


text:
Supervisor cancels PhD students' salary when he feels productivity is low; what to do?
My friend's PhD supervisor (CS in EU) is severe to the point of cancelling a month of salary when he feels productivity rates are not met by his students. Given that the students are just starting (4 months now), how should they deal with this situation? Should they complain about salary, and if yes, to whom?

At my university (somewhere in Australia), the funding of students is detached from their supervisor for this reason.  A supervisor should never ever hold such power or leverage over his/her students.  This may be different in other countries.

From what little I know of the EU, it is hard to imagine this could occur? Clearly head to the appropriate office...

Why would any student stay with this professor? Find the door. Run in that direction. Fast.

he actually crossed a red line doing that.

To get an accurate answer you should probably specify the country, and the nature of the PhD student's employment contracts or funding agreements.

Not paying people for work done is certainly illegal - possibly to the point of going to jail - in every developed country.  Moreover, higher-ups at the university could be liable - possibly to the point of going to jail.  The head of the department and the human resources office at the university will certainly want to know about this.  If they don't listen, the government department in charge of enforcing labor laws will want to know.

I think it is really necessary to specify at least the country in order to get specific advice. Laws and regulations vary widely within the European Union.

There's basically nothing they can do unless they plan on switching advisors, if they are your funding source they can just decide to stop paying you. You can always leave or go to another advisor but there's really no consequence for bad behavior on their part. There's too much exploitable labor in academia, mostly revolving around people from poor countries.

@Roland: That was my first thought, too; but I it seems to be difficult to find concrete information. One important point is that many EU legal acts are directives, which have to be implemented in national law by each member country on its own. Thus, the details of the legislation might vary considerably by country. (But admittedly, I'm not sure to which extent this applies to the OP's situation.)

The country would be very interesting. For the EU countries I'm familiar with, I find this story hard to believe. The processes are normally set up in a way that a supervisor cannot do something like that.

believe it or not it's Norway

@Sam Has the supervisor actually cancelled salaries or threatened to do so? I think most of the surprise is coming from assuming your language to indicate that pay for some period worked was actually withdrawn/not paid, but it could be also read as a threat to not pay.

threatened to do

Yes, they should complain. To whom is difficult to answer without being closer to the situation; I would have some idea in my US organization but not about what the organization is like at your friend's university.
For me, step one would probably have been with the office folk in my grad program. They'd be acutely aware that this isn't normal and have helpful suggestions for where to escalate next.
Next up might be the chair of the graduate program, and then the chair of the department if this is a different person. After that would be human resources/payroll administrators; they're the ones that will eventually have to correct any wrongly withheld funds, but that shouldn't be the first point of contact.
An alternative track would be through an ombudsperson whose office is meant to mediate disputes between students and university employees. I think starting locally is better, though.
One could also consult a lawyer at some point to find out what their legal standing is, and it is very much your right to consult with a lawyer, though I'd caution that once lawyers are involved everyone at the university may quickly become less helpful. This is not necessarily because they want to be less helpful, but because of direction from their own higher ups and the university itself to clear everything through legal once lawyers start moving in. IMO this is painful and unfortunately not worth the value of a month of graduate school salary; others might feel the principle is worth it, but it's probably not a good career move even if the case would be totally justified.

This is a serious enough transgression that I think it's probably not a recoverable situation with the advisor. Maybe, in some unusual circumstance, it could be forgiven as a very misguided motivational strategy from someone new to how things work. I think that's almost certainly an overly charitable assessment.
I'd recommend moving to a new advisor as soon as possible, and leaving the university as soon as possible if contacting the people on some rough equivalent of my list is not fruitful. Denying salary for lack of productivity is never okay. If progress is truly not satisfactory, there will be better official channels with proper protections in place for review.
Your friend is just starting out. It will become harder and harder to move on in the future: the sunk costs will be higher and potential avenues for abuse less blatant. A lot of the assessment of a PhD student's progress is based on the expressed opinions of their advisor. Does your friend want someone who would threaten to withhold their paycheck to be the person helping them make decisions about authorship? Deciding when and whether they graduate? Recommending them for future academic positions/jobs? Giving them academic, career, and personal advice?

Would this mean the end of the PhD for them if the advisor comes to know about the complaint ?

@Sam Hopefully the student can move to another advisor in the program. I don't see how the advisor can not be made aware of the complaint: the complaint is that they've done something unethical and threatened or done something (I presume, not knowing the details or jurisdiction) illegal. If the student does not act now, I can't imagine things getting much better for them. If an advisor will do this, what else will they do?

@Sam - Are you asking if someone should accept enslavement (because that's what this amounts to) for a PhD that they might never get to finish?  As an aside, if immigration is involved, most countries have laws protecting the rights of victims to remain in the country when they expose wrongdoing.  They're usually meant for human trafficking cases, but...


text:
Consent issues when the only participants are the investigators themselves
I'm am on staff at a tertiary level college. My colleagues and I are developing a wearable, non-invasive monitor, not too dissimilar from a Fitbit. Naturally, we want to know whether the monitor works or not, but we also want to know (as we go through the development stages) whether it is comfortable to wear, whether it impedes normal activities, whether it's easy to put on and take off, and so forth.
During the initial phase of the project, only the "principal researchers" will be involved; no junior staff. Later, however, we will want to test our prototype with other volunteers. For that reason, someone suggested that even at this early, essentially engineering-oriented stage of the project, we submit an application to our institutional ethics review committee (IRB). That is what we did. The committee has now reported back and said that they want of my colleagues to sign a formal consent form showing "informed consent", and want to see a formal questionnaire that each participant will answer when they have worn the device.
I feel stymied by the fact that there is no "superior authority" whom any of my colleagues can ask about the device, its effects, the teams intentions, or anything else. Every member of the team is an active participant who knows as much as anyone else about it. There is no person to whom any other person's consent is being given. Moreover, every person who tries the device is likely to make their own spontaneous observations about absolutely anything to do with the monitor, whether or not it is about something that is of a priori interest to the team, and whether or not a question appears in a questionnaire. As a minor example, someone might say that the wrist band for the device made them itch, or that they didn't like the color, or that they thought it would fit them better if the holes in the band were made closer together, and so ad infinitum.
Does anyone else have experience of this kind of situation? If so, what was the nature of the consent form? Can you direct me to an example of a consent form used with one or more "self-experimenters"? ... and what solution would you offer for the questionnaire conundrum?
I should perhaps add that I have tried searching using terms like "experimenter participant", "participant observer", "consent self-experimentation" but have not succeeded in finding anything useful.

As a minor example, someone might say that the wrist band for the device made them itch I am quite sure that, you being based in the US, if the wrist instead of being itchy will trigger a serious allergic reaction, the team member will have a lot of pressure to sue "the team" to pay for the treatments, either directly or because the insurance will refuse to cover them. You will find out the hard way who is the principal in the team, even if you have a very flat hierarchy.

On the other hand, since it is clearly more than a hobby, you are working as a team but surely you already discussed how you will patent your instruments or how you will share the profit, don't you?

Thumbs up for worrying about ethics. Good form even if it is causing you some trouble.

I have not encounter this specific scenario, and I know this is a bit late, but I think the answer is straightforward - draw up your own consent form with the input of your IRB and possibly a lawyer.
Obviously there is a precedent for self experimentation Wikipedia even has a list dedicated to some of the more notable examples. I'm not sure that this should be used as a guide though and I doubt there was much thought given to proper paperwork in these cases.
I think it is worth mentioning that "informed consent" (at least in a medical sense) requires that a patient

be able to understand what they are consenting to
be told clearly what they are consenting to (with explanation as necessary)
document that they have consented AMA Code of Medical Ethics.

This exact definition varies depending on the source, the but core idea is the same even for research. I don't see any issue with consenting to a procedure or experiment that you and your colleagues understand. An expert in oncology can still consent to undergoing chemotherapy despite knowing as much as (maybe even more than) any other oncologist. You could certainly administer the form to one another or you could invite a neutral party with the requisite background to read up on your proposal and collect consent.


text:
Rejecting Postdoc Extension for Other Grant Management Opportunities
I helped my PhD supervisor to secure a funding for an 18-month project in 2019. My supervisor got the grant in April 2020 and she asked me to consider doing a postdoc under the project. I was not very keen to continue doing lab research activity, yet I still agreed to take up the postdoc because of the uncertain job market during the pandemic. Since then I started to work on the postdoc project planning and budgetary control while preparing for my viva.
I successfully submitted my final thesis in September 2020 and the postdoc contract officially started in November 2020. The offer letter stated the contract is valid for 6 months, renewable until the end of project. This condition is regulated by the university.
As my 6-month postdoc contract is nearing its end, my supervisor asked me to liaise with the HR on extension. I hesitated to extend my postdoc because I lost the interest in doing lab research any longer. I also stumbled on a few job openings for research grant management elsewhere, which I am interested in applying.
The foundations of most of my postdoc research activities has been laid out/completed by now because I started the project before I passed my viva, e.g. communications between the project stakeholders, organizing workshops, pilot reactor design & procurement. The tasks left are mainly the reactor operation and data collection.
Should I let my supervisor know that I would like to move on to a different career path, since the 6-month contract is nearing its expiry? Or am I obliged to extend the contract so that the project does not get stuck in the middle? I feel the guilt because I had the experience of having to take over other postgraduate student's work because they left.
I would appreciate advise from postdoc/project PI who experienced similar issue. Thank you in advance!

Research admin with 11 years experience here -- have you researched the field of research administration?  Do you have a plan to get into the position?  Most people get exposure slowly over many years and don't just jump into grants management.  Even people with background from the central office of sponsored programs have a hard time learning how to manage a portfolio.  The work is very specific and requires a long time to get up and running.  Just curious about this exit strategy, because it sounds a bit risky to me, or at least, maybe not as glorious as you may expect.

@yourfriendlyresearchadmin Thank you for your comments. I have joined a workshop during my PhD on grant management by my institution, mainly to expose the researchers to the entire grant cycle from grant calls, to application/pitching, budgetary control, progress report prep and project closure. My PI also asked me to liaise with the research management center (RMC) regularly to manage finance issues or virement, and of course to draft mid-term/final reports to funders. I am thinking to join RMC to facilitate grant portfolio management. Appreciate your views/experience on my transition.

If you can work out shadowing someone for a bit I think it would be well worth it.  The job is very stressful.  I mean don't get me wrong, I haven't left the profession, but there is research specifically on stress for the field.  You can read the work of Jennifer Shambrook. One of the biggest issues is that most people have to self-train while on deadline.  While resourceful people can do it most of the time, it's really a draining process.  If you get in over your head out of the gate, it can be way too much and the risk for the PI/institution is on your shoulders costing folks a lot of $$$.

Or am I obliged to extend the contract so that the project does not get stuck in the middle?

Let's start with the easy question -- you are not obliged to extend the contract. A post-doc is inherently a time-limited position; both your funding agency and your university are (or should be) well aware that you could leave at any time. Your case is even more clear cut, in that the university deliberately structured your contract in such a way that they could cut you loose at any time. This flexibility cuts both ways.

I feel the guilt because I had the experience of having to take over other postgraduate student's work because they left.

This shouldn't induce guilt; rather, you have created a new project that can be used to give a new opportunity to someone else. Sure, this might not happen and the work might be instead forced onto an already-overworked student, but that is not your concern.

Should I let my supervisor know that I would like to move on to a different career path

Well, there are competing norms here. One (mostly in business) is that you should never express any thoughts about leaving until you have accepted another job. Another (mostly in universities) is that you should give as much notice as possible so that your advisor can make plans. Which of these you opt for will depend on your supervisor's personality. You should also check your contract to see what the provisions for leaving are -- renewing your contract for six months might not mean that you have to stay for the full six months.

I also stumbled on a few job openings for research grant management elsewhere, which I am interested in applying.

The way you have written this makes it sound like you have only the vaguest idea about what this career path entails. If this is the case, I would caution you against becoming unemployed too soon; your job search may take some time. I'm not sure which position you are referring to, but "contract administrator" positions are usually bookkeeping positions that are not a natural fit for an academic, while "program manager" positions are generally rather competitive and might not be something you would be certain to easily get hired for directly after a post-doc.

This is spot on!

@cag51 Many thanks for the point-to-point response! Definitely helped to clear my doubts on how to approach this problem with my PI. Guess for now I should start "soft" by first discussing the project closure (research report preparation, publications etc.) as the grant will tentatively end soon (November 2021). Looking for jobs in parallel and let my PI know about my transition.

First, to be honest, I've never been in your precise situation. But I do have a 40 year career in academia behind me. I've been in good situations and bad situations. I stayed in a bad situation for too long once and it was a mistake. I had options that I didn't recognize at the time, to my dismay.
I you have options that seem better to you than what you have now, then take advantage of it. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200. Go directly to your best option.
There is little worse in your single life than wasting it doing something you'd rather not be doing unless there are no other options.
You are at a natural point to change your direction. Just tell your PI that you now need to move on. If they can't understand the value of it then it is their problem.
You only have one life to live. Live it fully. Live it happily.


text:
What is a good academic word for "verifiable by scientific data or experiments"? Is "empirical" a suitable word for that?
What is a good academic word for verifiable by scientific data or experiments?
Is empirical data a suitable word for that?
P.S EDIT: my question is what is A single word for "derived through experimental data" (opposite to derived through observation)
I mean that word should explain that it can be precisely reproduced by others as well because it's experimental data.

FYI empirical is a very general term. It just means verifiable through observation. Has no experimental connotation. So if you interviewed people about their experiences, that is still empirical data.

With a slight detour into philosophy, not everyone agrees that "verifiable" is a good criterion. Do other description of what you want to do to your mind?

Perhaps you could include an example sentence?

The three examples you give are not of the same concept. You are asking three different questions.

Data are "derived" from observations. Alternatively said, observations become data when we record them. Otherwise, they remain as observations. By example, the only reason we know what Galileo observed during his observations of the moon is because he recorded his observations in pictures, making them data.
The next step in the chain is to "derive" a result. This involves analysis or interpretation.
In summary, the chain is

observation - (to written record) -> data

data - (through analysis or interpretation) -> result

The one word you seek is result.
When you want to further qualify the level of effort taken in making observations, you can use words such as focused, directed, or even scientific as opposed to random or undirected. The phrase "unscientific observations" is not necessarily a "good" way to express the opposite of scientific. So, data obtained from directed observations have perhaps a higher standard than data obtained from random observations.
Suppose instead that you need a qualifying metric that defines the trust that you have in a result that is obtained by the analysis of data from (scientific) experiments or observations. Consider these criteria:

verifiable - able to be found by others
certifiable - attestable
precise - reproducible
accurate - indistinguishable from truth
measurable - subject to quantification through observation
robust - impervious to unpredictable outcomes
empirical - derived through observation
first-principled - derived through reasoning

You may make variations. For example, a verifiable and robust result is one that others can readily find and that has no ambiguities. A robustly verifiable result is one where the method that one uses to find the result has no ambiguities.
A result obtained from experimental observations is essentially empirical by nature. First principled reasoning may be used to define the accuracy of the result. Replicate, certifiable experiments are needed to establish the degree of precision on the result.

my question is what is the word for "derived through experimental data" (opposite to derived through observation)

Just "experimental". There isn't a separate word for it.

@Pretty_Girl "Verifiable" through experiments is not the same as "derived" through experiments. Experiments involve observation.

A hypothesis "testable by scientific experiments" would be a "scientific hypothesis."

Technically. trying to verify an hypothesis through experiments is the opposite of the scientific method; you're supposed to construct experiments to disprove your hypothesis.

@nick012000 Well spotted.  I'd call that a typo.


text:
Copyrights of recorded lectures?
Most universities around the world are now requesting their lecturers to record lectures and post them on a repository. In my university, we use Moodle to store and share video recordings.
My question is: what are the copyirights of my uploaded videos (say in UK and/or USA)? Do I have any rights once I upload my videos to the system?
My question is motivated by a big discussion we are currently having in our Faculty (where Faculty means a group of Science Departments) on whether the University has total rights on our uploaded videos. If so, they want to recycle lectures even after lecturers leave (say, for another university) or die.
I understand this can be seen as one of those questions whose answer is: check your contract, ask your manager, read the entire Constitution, ... My question relates to a general understanding of copyrights of video lectures. Thanks.

Copyright law varies. It is unlikely to be the same in all details between US and UK.

To those voting to close: I hope not every question that might have different answers in different countries is banned as "depends on individual factors".

I don't think this is the right place to ask. This is: https://law.stackexchange.com/

This is an interesting question, but probably the correct answer would be rather complex. In the EU, I would assume that also the General Data Protection Regulation has some relevance when it comes to using video or voice recordings. Although neither valid for the US or the UK, something similar might exist? At my university in the EU, I upload my recordings without being aware of having signed away any rights in this direction.

If you, the faculty, want to retain any rights, I suggest that you (as a collective group negotiating with the administration) write them into a contract. You might be able to come to a royalty agreement, but I doubt much beyond that.
If faculty are employees of the university then most of the IP created can be claimed by the employer, just as if you were employed by IBM in a research capacity.
I don't think that universities (none in my experience) get in the way of a faculty member publishing books (or software, ...), but those are normally written at the full initiative of the author(s) rather than at the direction of the university. And since there are other alternatives for teaching a course than writing your own book, it is normally an independent activity. Lectures, however, like other explicit course materials, seem to be in a different category.
The course materials were created by yourself, but at the direction of the employer. The university provides the infrastructure and the audience.
IANAL, but guess that the above is a pretty general interpretation. Copyright law, however, is variable around the world and to some extent, so is the relationship between the faculty and the university. So, "your mileage may vary."
Absent a formal agreement, the university will probably claim to own all rights including the rights to reuse such things in the future whether the faculty member is employed there or not and without additional compensation. It would be difficult, at best, to contest this view, I think.
I would prefer a different interpretation, of course, in which the law would recognize that the faculty is the university and derives all function and authority from the consent and participation of the faculty. However, that is a late medieval view. Yes, I'm that old.
If a university wants to maintain a high quality faculty and keep them happy and productive, I think they would be willing to negotiate some sharing arrangement. It would need to be formalized. An argument for such an agreement would, I think, be an improvement in the general quality of such things.

Very interesting points.  I have clarified the meaning of 'Faculty" in my question, as in this case it means a group of Science Departments (e.g. Faculty of Sciences). I think in the USA, faculty means staff members in charge of teaching and research.

We use the same terminology here, actually.  I use it in both senses.

But the negotiation and agreement I suggest here needs to be collective (Faculty vs faculty), not individually worked out. That would be logistically impossible, I think.

In the United States, and possibly in all Berne Convention nations, copyright exists in a creative work as soon as it is "fixed in a tangible medium."  Sound and video recordings qualify as fixed in a tangible medium.
In general, copyright belongs to the person who created the work.  The exception is a "work made for hire," which belongs to the person or organization doing the hiring.  In the United States, for something to be a work made for hire requires an agreement beforehand.  In the absence of such an agreement, the work belongs to the person who created it.
So, in the absence of a "work made for hire" clause in your contract, you own the copyright to your recorded lectures. Well, that was wrong.  In the U.S., an employment relationship seems to classify work done in the course of employment as "work made for hire."  Sorry.
Enforcing such a copyright may be a different matter entirely.

Have you assumed that the individual has "made" the work? That is to say, recored it and fixed it... Or is that something that was done by the university. And, does being "required" to record it and the individual complying imply an "agreement" even if assumed rather than written?

@Buffy  I've assumed the individual faculty member "made" the work, in the same sense that Taylor Swift "makes" her recordings and not the rented recording studio.  The original question says "requested" rather than "required."  In the United States and in the midst of a pandemic, a university could probably get away with "required."  In more normal times, I doubt it unless part of a contract.  It's a legal, not academic, question, but I'd argue that the copyright still belongs to the faculty member.  I might even put a copyright notice on my recordings and See What Happens.™

Tough guy. While I agree that is how it should be, the professor doesn't "rent the studio". That studio doesn't employ Ms. Swift, quite the other way round. But, I await the outcome of your copyright suit. I hope you prevail.

The work for hire exception is also country-dependent. E.g. in Germany, the employee will always keep the full copyright and there is no legal way to give it away. There will however likely be a clause in the work contract granting (possibly exclusive) usage rights to the employer.

The positive here is that it defines when copyright comes to existence.


text:
Does admission care about internships?
I have found on Reddit and other forums discussing factors that effect one's admission and it is often stated that research along with letters of recommendation from supervisors can play a huge role; what would be the weight of internships held at top Tech and Finance companies with letters of recommendations from managers?
I am specifically asking about grad school (masters) admissions in North America in the field of Quantum Computing/Quantum System Engineering.

When I evaluate admission applications, an internship, by itself, has a small positive value. But a manager's letter could be much more valuable, if it convinces me that you have the intelligence, knowledge, work ethic, etc. to succeed in the program you're applying to.

You can do research during internships.

Admissions to grad school, or something else? What part of the world?

@cag51 Yes grad school, in North America, I have added that to the question

Admissions cares about making a positive prediction of your success and whether you will make proper use of resources, along with contributing in the future. No one thing lets people make that prediction, so many, many things are taken in to consideration.
Positive indicators, including successful internships or research, help you. Negative things, such as poor grades, hurt. Letters of recommendation can be very important.
Other helpful things: Indications of hard work. Indications of working well with others and contributing. Wide interests. Flexibility. But no one thing is absolutely determinative. And individual evaluators will all have their own ideas about the "most important" thing.
So, you want your graduate school application to be filled with positive indicators so that people don't need to make decisions "at the margin" in your case.
But an internship or research experience, alone, won't assure your admission, not will its lack, assure rejection. It is one factor among many.


text:
Fellow student doesn't share progress in joint paper for coursework - how should I react?
I'm currently enrolled in a course (Masters-level) where we are supposed to write a paper together with another fellow student. The paper will not be published publicly.
It has been difficult since the start to communicate with my partner. He often won't answer mails for over a week and then ignoring my suggestions and questions while forcing his own ideas on me without consulting with me. The course also requires mutual peer-review of our work, which I have done, but I received nothing from him.
He didn't acknowledge any of my comments in the document except spelling errors and didn't share his progress before turning in the paper for the first milestone. It turns out that there are still multiple formatting and style issues that I informed him about, and he broke some of my cross references. This is absolutely below my standards for submissions and I'm afraid it will reflect negatively on me.
How should I react to this? Should I involve the professor? I already made it clear to him that I prefer a more cooperative working style instead of waiting for his drops of content. The only thing I care about this point is a good grade and a good standing with the professor, since I consider my thesis in his department.

The first thing I would do is to try contacting your partner again. You've said you already told him that you prefer a more cooperative style, but perhaps you should can be clearer about this. For example, if you say "I think you aren't communicating well, I need you to cooperate more", this is ambiguous and could possibly be interpreted as an attack on his working style. Instead, you can try to give more concrete suggestions. For example, setting up weekly meeting times for both of you to sit down together and talk about the paper and what you need to do next. You could also suggest setting up a google docs or dropbox etc. where both of you have access, so that you can both edit the document and see the changes the other has made.
If this still doesn't work, I would consider the cost/benefit of the next steps. You can escalate by going to the professor, but this isn't necessarily in your best interest, even if you don't like working with your partner. You say that there are formatting/style issues, and broken references, but to me these sound like minor issues that can be fixed pretty easily. It also sounds like your partner is doing a lot of work on the paper, which is good because sometimes you might get a partner who does nothing or does everything at the very last minute.
If you do decide to go to professor, you should understand that if you can't fix the group, the professor isn't going to be able to either. Maybe if your partner is ghosting you the professor can force the two of you to sit in the same room together, but beyond that they can't do a whole lot. Your professor is also not going to grade you easier because you complain about the group to them. Really the only thing the professor can do is possibly give you the option of working by yourself for the rest of the project (but they won't necessarily allow this). But of course, then you'll be out of a partner altogether.

Good suggestions overall, but I would nix the idea of using DropBox. DropBox is not great for showing, merging, or tracking versions of files. It's better they use Google Docs (which does track editorial changes) or some kind of version control system. It's not that I have anything against using DropBox, DropBox is awesome in many ways, but if you do not trust your working partner, DropBox is just not well-suited for that task.

We already use Dropbox, and a Word document. However he enabled password-protected tracking (without telling me) on the document and never accepted my changes until the very last day, so I never could properly format and layout my part. He is doing work on the paper, but never consults with me and essentially forces his workflow and ideas on me while ignoring suggestions from me completely. I think I go with your suggestion and clearly telling him my issues with this, but I assume he'll just ignore me.


text:
Changing fields from Mathematics to Biology/Chemistry
I’m currently in my penultimate year of an undergraduate degree in mathematics. I’ve been thinking about changing fields completely. I love maths, so I intend to graduate with this degree and I’m certainly not considering switching subjects. However, I’ve always been drawn to biology and chemistry.
Note: I am currently studying in the UK. (I would be prepared to study in another country, e.g. in the US or somewhere in Europe)
I have two questions:

How do I figure out whether this is really worth it and whether I’d be happy studying biology and related subjects?

I’ve read some biology undergraduate texts (and enjoyed every second), but is this enough? And chemistry was my favourite subject at A level (equivalent to the AP or SAT in the US I think).

Now suppose I had decided to change careers. Suppose I wanted to become a biochemist and do research in say genetical engineering (pardon my lack of knowledge in this area if ‘a biochemist doing genetical engineering’ sounds like gibberish; I hope the overall meaning is clear). What steps would I have to take after I get my maths degree to achieve this goal?

I have thought about

Taking a gap year to learn the undergraduate biology/chemistry needed for a masters in these subjects
Explaining my situation to the university that I would want to attend (to study biology/chemistry) - perhaps they would let me attend some lecture courses.

I could try but I’d rather not attend biology & related lectures in my final year at uni (as the workload will already be huge).
What would you do?

I think you're in the UK, but could you explicitly put this in your question?  Answers do depend on country.

@AlexanderWoo thanks, just edited:^)

Have you thought about mathematical biology (or something similar)? You'd get to use maths (which you mentioned you enjoy) to understand biological systems (which you're also interested in). Also, do you have reasons to believe that you'd enjoy more being a researcher in say, biochemistry, than in maths?

@mmm Yes, I have thought about mathematical biology and bioinformatics. I’ll have to explore these areas in more depth to see if I enjoy them – e.g. over the summer.
Experimental work has always seemed appealing though. Also, wouldn’t my mathematical skills also be useful in a more hands on practical area? Do you think it’d be possible to combine experimental work with theoretical work and modelling?
I’m more interested in what I would hypothetically have to go through to make this career switch (Question #2)

I think that asking right this to someone at your institution would be a good move.

There are several interdisciplinary programs in chemistry, materials science which are focusing on theoretical and data-driven approaches (and little or no benchwork). Many of these are happy with students from math and IT, too, and due to the nature of interdisciplinary programs, they have some experience in filling you up with the bare minimum knowledge of the other fields you haven't studied.

You don't mention what you see your destination being, academia or otherwise.

@Greg very interesting, I will look into those.

@Aruralreader for now I see myself in academia.


text:
How can I choose between two PhD offers when I'm feeling "biased"?
I have been offered two PhD positions (!) and I'm having trouble deciding between the two.
I think they are fairly close in terms of the quality of the program itself (including advisor, department, cohort, etc...). However, in one of the positions, I'd be close to family, which I think makes me unfairly think of this position with respect to the other, thus "biased".
Any advice on how could I be more unbiased towards the decision? What do you think could help me change my mind?

Your post is far too long and too specific to you. Try to shorten to a paragraph or two

Did that. I guess I was going against the guidelines because I just wanted a discussion around this issue and a general advice, rather than a single unequivocal answer. Hope to gather some useful advice even with this more generic post.

Great job improving the post, this is much better. We'll see if the community votes to reopen. In the mean time: are you sure you want to be "unbiased?" Lots of grad students get into depressed, lonely spirals of unproductivity (or at least so the questions here seem to indicate); if being near your family helps to avoid this, then maybe you shouldn't trade away that advantage.

I think I have an implicit hope that I would be fine even far from family, although I would certainly have less support. So with this assumption, I would prefer to be "unbiased". Of course, if we abandon this assumption, there would be a clearer advantage, as you said.

Being close to family was a strong factor (the strongest really) in deciding which schools to apply to. My family is an emotional support system. Doing a PhD is hard, it's always nice to take a break and visit home. I don't understand what you mean by "fairly" deciding who to be with because you are the one doing the PhD, so you should choose the program that has the most benefits for you. Those benefits might include proximity to your family.

Congratulations on your offers!
Since you would have accepted either in isolation, there really is no "wrong" choice here. Remember, this will be years of your actual real life so choosing based on closeness to friends and family is not a mistake.
Try not to get paralyzed with the thought that you have to make the perfect choice (either here or elsewhere). Since both offers seem good, you shouldn't be too preoccupied with fears of making a mistake.
Some biased advice: choose the one that you know most about and where the future trajectory seems clearest. Pick the one where you are most likely to feel comfortable and happy. And as you inevitably come to difficult parts in your PhD journey (as everyone does) don't mourn not having taken the other path.


text:
Will publishing all my papers in a single journal endanger my career?
I am a PhD student with only two papers published in peer-reviewed journals all within the same journal.
One of them was published due to a deal between a conference I was in and the publisher. The other one is a critique of a paper that was published there, hence it makes sense to be on the same journal.
I have two other papers under review in journals. I am waiting for a first review on them for a much longer than average time. In one of them my PhD advisor is also an author. Even though it wasn't peer-reviewed yet, we are already preparing (and submitting to conferences) works derived from it. After waiting a long time for a review I mailed the editors of the journal and they say they didn't find reviewers yet.
Here is my dilemma: my advisor is pushing that I withdraw the article from the current journal and submit to the same journal I have my other papers in, but I am scared this will damage my career prospects.
If one reads my CV, in a job application for example, and realize all of my papers are in the same journal they might just stop considering me. This might damage even more since: (i) the chief editor of the journal works in our dpt (and was my professor in grad school) and (ii) even though this specific journal has good metrics (Q2 in general and Q1 in the paper's topic and higher impact factor than the journal which didn't find reviewers for my paper) I know many academics dislike the publisher, some with good reason.
Will this damage my career? Is it worse to publish again in the same journal than not publish at all? If so, how should I explain this concern to my advisor?

You say you waited a long time... Can you quantify that? A few weeks? Months? Years?

the one in question waited 200 days and no reviewers assigned.
The journal's website says 90 days in avg to final decision

Why don't you publish your third paper in the same journal, then all your other papers in other journals?

Related: Is it good to have all the PhD publications in one journal, and Is there a reason to spread your research into  multiple journals instead of just one?

@JoelReyesNoche
Considering how absurdly long these reviews are taking, I don't know if I can afford waiting for the next papers to be published before applying for jobs

@Libor
No it isn't, but what matters is not what it actually is nor what I think it is. What matters is what however may (or may not) hire me in the future thinks. This is a good journal in a publisher that is known for having several low-quality journals and this can make or break my ability to get hired.

@Libor thanks, but that supposes I will be called to an interview.

I wouldn't mind if all my journals are in Nature.

Will publishing all my papers in a single journal endanger my career?

If it is not one of the very top journals in the field
If you have more than ten publications
And all the publications are in the same journal

Then yes, it will endanger your research career.  Your research career is based on your reputation as a researcher.  If you only publish in one journal, then your reputation will not spread to as many editors and peer reviewers.
If you only have two to four papers, then where they are published tells us very little about where your career is headed.  It's just not a useful sample size.
This assumes you work in physical sciences fields that I am familiar with.  In these fields people getting permanent positions have over twenty publications, so there is a decent sample size.

Is it worse to publish again in the same journal than not publish at all?

No.

Your first few papers don't determine your career. The answer to the title question is, of course, "it depends". If your research focus is narrow, especially narrow, then there are fewer journals that are appropriate venues and the others won't have appropriate reviewers in their "stable". But continuing to publish in a very low impact journal would have negative consequences, that aren't the case here.
I'll guess that "a paper in the same journal" is a better outcome than "no paper" at this particular point in your journey, so your advisor is likely giving good advice. I doubt that an editor, even one who knows you will bias decisions in your favor if they want to keep up the reputation of the journal.
But, the indicators seem to be positive, not negative; getting published in a good journal.
You can also ask the editor of the journal you submitted to about the likelihood of a decision in a reasonable time frame, saying that if that isn't possible you will "be forced by circumstances" to withdraw the paper.
I'll also note that, assuming everything you say is accurate, that people believe in you and your work. That support alone should lessen your fears about getting a good position in the future.

Thanks for your input, @Buffy
Although I know the journal is valid and that the editor won't bias me, I don't know if that matters. What matters is what whoever may (or may not) hire me in the future thinks, and that is scary :/ .

"If your research focus is narrow, especially narrow," then your research career has bigger problems than where you publish.

Most people would base their decision on:

The relative rating or impact factor of the journal compared with others relevant to the same field; and
The relevance of your material to what the journal typically publishes and their audience.

The citations you are likely to get will be influenced by both the profile of the journal and the relevance of the material to its readership.
Its therefore perfectly feasible (and sensible) to publish material in a 'lower ranked' journal if the research you are looking to publish has greater relevance for that audience.
BUT - if the research in question is genuinely only a 1-shot-at-goal only situation when it comes to publication - then you would usually be inclined to go for the highest rated journal that you can as these outlets can be very selective.
Be aware however that, for better or worse, most academics will now 'salami slice' the output from their research, or different aspects of it, for different outlets. This is not always a bad thing (and may not actually constitute 'salami slicing'). For example, a paper emphasising theoretical or methodological aspects to the research may go to a different outlet to one that is more applied or gives greater emphasis to context, findings or implications in practice.
This final point does however flag that if you are only ever publishing in one journal it does convey a relatively narrow focus in terms of how you convey the relevance of your research and your willingness to engage a broader audience.


text:
My paper is in R&R but I have concerns about the data quality. What should I do?
I am co-authoring a paper and I am the 2nd author on this paper. We submitted the paper and it got generally positive reviews. The reviewer comments were not difficult to address. I have put a lot of time into this paper, and I am in an early and important stage in my career, so publishing is important to me.
The issue is that I don't believe the results of our study. My coauthor has sent me the data to address some of revisions, and some of the effect sizes are uncomfortably large. I worry that there has been a severe methodological issue that is now impossible to diagnose. I have spent a long time trying to figure out what could be wrong, with no success. My concerns are limited to one study only; the other studies replicate this effect but do not have impossible large effect sizes. I have asked my colleague about this and am awaiting a reply. Revisions are due in a few days.
Presuming they want to proceed with the submission, my options (as I see them) are to:

Do nothing. The paper will likely get published and I can ignore it. The paper is in my field, but I don't plan to follow up on this particular effect.

Retract my authorship and let my coauthor go it alone. Have nothing to show for my effort. Risk making a rash decision based on something potentially minor-- but without discovering any new information, I may never know.

What should I do?

Not an answer to your main question, but on the subject of revisions being due in a few days: you can almost certainly obtain an extension by emailing the journal and saying you need more time to finalise your corrections. I suggest this should be the first action; then you and your coauthor can take a bit of time to investigate/discuss/consider the situation.

Talk to your co-author(s) openly about your concerns and ask for clarifications.
If such a direct confrontation seems uncomfortable to you, ask them to make the data openly available for anyone to replicate, e.g. at Zenodo, by referring to your university's internal regulations (I am sure there are guidelines about research transparency at your university). This should pressure them to ensure that the data are sound.
In addition, insist on making each co-author's contribution transparent in the form of CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy). With this taxonomy, it will be public that you were not the one who handled the dataset, in case doubts should arise.


text:
Does poor grammar on a shared message board for school annoy teachers?
From the experience of a student, these are the types of people I notice on class messaging boards:
Person 1. Writes almost six-seven paragraphs for a single question that could be asked in two sentences. All sentences are grammatically correct and punctuated. Always includes greeting and salutation.
Person 2. Writes about three paragraphs. Most sentences have proper grammar. Either salutation or greeting.
Person 3. Writes one or two sentences. Most I's are not capitalized and poor grammar.
Person 4. Random letters mixed in, most sentences are gibberish.
Does this annoy teachers? Especially from junior high through high school where this is common.
Most teachers reply even to the most nonsensical messages, which is nice of them, but it is annoying to me (as a student) when someone doesn't take the time and effort to add a period at the end of their sentence.
So, from the perspective of a teacher or professor, are People 3 and 4's (as shown above) behavior on a shared message board obnoxious?

It isn't an answer to the question, other than that 3 and 4 annoy a lot of people. Extreme abbreviations, as people often use with their close friends while chatting should be reserved for that.

Question (wordiness) doesn't match the title (grammar) - that might annoy some teachers.

@MisterMak I'm sorry - that was a typo, I meant to say people 3 and 4 rather than 1 and 2. Fixed now.

Teachers could very well be annoyed by 3 and 4, but would probably answer nonetheless.  They might also reach out to the poor writers and offer tips.  Posting writing rules for the messaging board in advance might help also.


text:
Are public universities in the UK required to follow the UK NARIC guidelines in assessing the qualifications of foreign PhD applicants?
I recently learned about the National Recognition Information Centre for the United Kingdom (UK NARIC). It's a UK agency that assesses international academic qualifications.
According to UK NARIC, a Master's degree from my country is at best equivalent to a British Bachelor's Degree with Honours. Thus, it seems that before I can apply to a PhD program in the UK, I will have to complete another Master's degree in the said country.
My question is, are all public universities in the UK required to follow the UK NARIC guidelines in evaluating the academic credentials of prospective PhD applicants? Or, can these universities still opt to assess PhD applications on a case-by-case basis?
Thanks in advance for your answers!

I would email the department/university you are interested in applying to directly, and ask if your qualification is sufficient.

No. Universities (almost all UK universities are public) in the UK are not bound to follow any standard or rules when evaluating prospective PhD applicants. Even the requirement for a Master's degree at all is at the discretion of the admissions panel (in fact at least half of the students have supervised had only Bachelor's degrees).

My understanding is that it comes down to funding. Public universities get funding from the government (including any remaining teaching block grant, qualiyy related research funding (what used to be called "the HEFCE money" or "QR money") and C-stream research top-up. Public universities are subject to government restrictions on the students they can take and the amount they can charge them. Private unis take no money from the government, and are therefore not subject to the same restrictions (although a certain subset of students might qualify for government loans).

I think there are 7 institutions that people commonly mean when they say "private universities": Regent’s University London, The University of Buckingham, The University of Law, BPP University College, The London Institute of Banking & Finance, The American University, Richmond (awarding Open University degrees) and New College for the Humanities (awarding University of London degrees).

UK universities do assess PhD applicants on a case-by-case basis
Actually, UK universities do assess PhD applicants on a case-by-case basis. Broadly speaking, the criteria for admission are:

is the applicant's research proposal coherent and will it advance scholarship?
does the applicant possess the necessary skill, motivation, and credentials to conduct the research proposed?
does the university have a member of academic staff who is capable of supervising the applicant's research and who is available and willing to do so?

(NB: getting admitted to a PhD programme in the UK is relatively straightforward, but getting a funded PhD place is significantly harder)
In general, the minimum "credentials" expected of an applicant by a UK university would be:

an upper-second-class or first-class undergraduate (Bachelor's) degree in a relevant (but not necessarily the same) discipline; and
(where the applicant's previous university studies were not in English) evidence that the applicant is highly proficient in the use and comprehension of English.

Expectations regarding a Master's degree
Nowadays, a relevant Master's degree would also be expected (but probably not essential), since it is regarded as good preparation for undertaking original research. For that purpose, NARIC equivalence is not very important here -- a UK university is more interested in the details of what you did in that Master's degree. Ideally, you will have written an original dissertation or project involving serious original research in a relevant discipline (the dissertation need not be particularly long -- the quality and potential are what count, and a potential supervisor may well ask to see only extracts from it), demonstrated specialist knowledge relevant to your PhD research proposal, and manifested some appreciation of some of the research methodologies you propose to deploy in your PhD.
So, if you feel that your existing Master's degree can demonstrate research preparedness and a suitable specialist knowledge for your research proposal, it may well be sufficient. You should be prepared to discuss what you learned and discovered from that Master's degree in detail, and show extracts from the work you produced in fulfilment of the requirements for that degree (such as a dissertation).

This is a generally sound discussion, but note that some things here are discipline specific. For example, in experimental sciences, we almost never ask for a research proposal. Students will apply for an prespecified project, or devise a project in collaboration with the supervisor. This is because the research will require research funding (tens of thousands of pounds in my field).


text:
Cite appendix from guest author (APA)
I need to cite the appendix of a book that I already cited somewhere else in my paper, but the appendix was written by a guest author whose name is not among the author names of the book. Does this mean I should have two entries in my bibliography, one for the entire book and one just for the appendix? Or should I just ignore the fact that the appendix was written by someone else? I'm supposed to use APA style.


text:
Applying to a job after just accepting an offer
I just accepted an offer after the usual cycle of tenure-track applications starting in December. However, there's another job posting I'm very interested in that was just posted now for some reason(*). Is it possible for me to apply anyway? On one hand I'm just curious to see if I might get interviewed at least, on the other hand I'm pretty happy with the job I accepted, but this second one is closer to home, so I might want to try to negotiate a double position or something (spending half the year at either university). Field is math btw, both are TT positions.
Assuming it is not unreasonable to apply (don't want to get on people's bad side), I assume I should explain the situation in the cover letter. So I guess part of the problem is coming up with a "valid" motivation for applying. If I tell them straight up I only want a double position, they might not consider my application at all(?).
(*) I don't understand why it's posted so late. It also says review will begin immediately - maybe they already have someone in mind?

@MorgenRodgers Not common, but I know of some professors with this arrangement (in North America and Europe, often with an Asian institute).

This is an excellent way to burn bridges at two institutions, do not do it.  The interview process for a TT position is long and daunting for everyone involved.  It is also expensive - even if this was a purely virtual interview cycle.  The sheer number of hours that the hiring committee put in to your application and interview when they could have been doing something else in their busy schedule means that they have a good reason to expect that someone who has accepted the job offer they gave will actually do that job.
If you were offered but did not accept, or were still in the interview round, this would be a very different question.  But since you have accepted the job offer then reneging on what you agreed to will look pretty bad on you.
I can see this going poorly for you in several ways:

You apply to the second position, get it, and then try to negotiate a double-job.  Both institutions would reasonably be confused and upset here, with the second job offer probably being pulled and the first institution probably eying you with suspicion.

You tell the first place what you're doing, and apply anyway.  I expect they will be quite concerned that your intention is to jump ship whenever a slightly more interesting position becomes available.

You tell both places what you're doing right from the outset.  The second institution is unlikely to consider you unless you are amazing at what you do - they want a tenured prof eventually, that's a lifetime committment - and still the first place eyes you suspiciously.

The only way I see this working, and it is not ideal, is for you to apply to the second position, get it, and then leave the first to work at the second.  But, you've just gotten a TT position that you seem to be interested in...why would you do that?


text:
Second PhD scholarship while studying a PhD already
I would appreciate it if someone could help me.
I have a question. Is it illegal if an international student, who is currently studying a PhD with a scholarship in the UK, accept another PhD scholarship from another country simultaneously?
Consider that he is going to continue his PhD in the UK until his visa is granted from the second country, and then he will withdraw from the UK university's scholarship. I do not know if this is illegal or will violate any specific law or regulations. In the scholarship contract is mentioned that student can withdraw any time but should repay a portion of the fee and scholarship.
Will either of these two university know I am doing this? none of them asked me, so I preferred not to say until someone asks me
I really need to know this and would be grateful if someone could give me a right an accurate answer.
Thank you

One legal question might involve fraud, but probably not otherwise. But there might be reasons beyond strict legality for not doing this without giving notice to everyone.


text:
How normal is it to get email replies in ungrammatical English by a high indexed journal (in the context of lack of communication)?
I submitted a brief report (2,000 words) to a high-indexed journal and after some five days sent an email stating that a preprint for the manuscript had been uploaded. A journal assistant replied he was to get back to me on the preprint as soon as they heard from the assigned editor (I thought: Whatever, it’s just a preprint notification.) However, after 20 days, there was no reply, and after a month, the manuscript was still at the With Editor stage.
I sent a short email to check whether an editor had been assigned and received the following reply: “Dear XY, Th editor has mailed to patience that he is working on the same. Best, XY” After the email, the status of the manuscript changed to "In Review". How would you interpret this?

Either carelessness or a non-native English speaker as an editorial assistant. Nothing more. Perhaps they meant to say "recommend patience" and were interrupted. Don't overthink it or read too much into it. If you stick around here for long (recommended) you will get several "poor English" replies. Some from me, most likely.

Thank you for your answer. I should then leave it be. The paper should be published within the next five months, which is why I was trying to detect potential issues at the start.
P.S. I know see how bad the term "bad English" is I used in the original title (which I have now changed). I did not want to associate the assistant's foreign language competence with any bad connotations. It was just to emphasize that I did not expect this from the journal I submitted the manuscript to.

"I know see how bad the term" - either an intentional or informative mistake in there :)

Yep, @BryanKrause, we all do it. Even you, I bet.

Or someone answered from their phone

Bryan Krause: I don't know what the mistake is, so it was probably not intentional. Anyway, I really would not want my question to induce a discussion on "mistakes" in one's language use or if they are a sign or not of someone's greater or lower value. I am a linguist; "mistakes" in language use or "bad language use" don't conceptually exist in linguistics, and this is one of the reasons I changed the "bad English" in the title. I hope we leave it at that
Cheers

@Buffy Definitely I do, and unassisted by technology it would be much worse! And just this week even I had my phone autocorrect my misspelling of "anually" not to "annually" but something else, so even technology as a crutch is not always the best.

@John5543 You wrote the word "know" when you meant "now". I think we're all in agreement that it's not a big deal and nothing to judge by, I just found it entertainingly ironic given the subject of the question.

@BryanKrause Oh, right. The brain missed it somehow. Thank you for pointing that out

There are a number of explanations, but the most likely two are carelessness or a non-native English speaker who is assistant to the editor. In a lot of places like, for example, NYC the workforce is composed of people from many lands. And some high end journals may have a widely distributed (world wide) staff. So, some awkwardness with the language can be expected, and I hope excused.
The other, carelessness, is that people sometimes get interrupted during their work and leave out a word. I know that here, since I'm old and may my typing is sometimes awkward, the spell corrector will substitute a word and I don't notice it.
And, of course a single word inserted, "recommend patience" rather than "patience", would make it just about right.
Don't overthink it.
Also, a month with no change in status means little, though it is worth pinging the editor as you did. Journal time, like academic time, can run very slowly, slowly, slowly. Some folks wait six months or more for a change. Mystifying, but there it is. And if you got back a quick reply to your query, you are luckier than some.


text:
Should I ask professor for recommendation letter for graduate school if a month earlier he declined to give me recommendation for some internship?
One year earlier I did a project under a Professor, I asked him for a recommendation letter for an internship program, but I couldn't get selected. Then this year I asked him for an internship program but he politely rejected me saying that it would affect if he give a lower rank to a student like me(He give rank to students and then send recommendations).
Now since I am going to apply for graduate school programs that also seem to ask for referees, should I ask the same professor for the recommendation?
He knows me well from classroom as well as project work.

I don't understand your comment about the rank. He ranks all the students in your class, and then provides this rank in his letter? And he declined because he thought your rank was too low for the letter to help your application?

@cag51   Out of all the say three students who ask him for the recommendation, he ranks them based on their achievements. For internships, he only writes for two or three students. And he declined because he had better candidates than me.

@cag51: I've had professors who did the same thing.  I've even had professors who noted on the syllabus: "If you get a grade of at least X, I'll give you a recommendation." Typically, this only happened in very large class sizes graded on a curve, making it roughly equivalent to the approach taken by OP's professor, albeit starting from a pool of all students rather than only students asking for a recommendation.

Of course you can ask him to write a recommendation letter, but it probably would be best to ask if he'd write a favorable letter.

@Brian Yeah, I guess one should just ask another professor in minecase. @A rural reader Thank you for your advice.

Ask someone else
It sounds like the professor has already told you no.

That is the thing, he declined the internship program which is like a month, but I now want to ask for graduate school. I understand that recommendations for internships and admission in graduate schools can be two different things(The second one being most important). That is why I was confused.

@Mirae - sounds like he doesn't want to help you.  Stop going back for more punishment.

There is nothing like punishment, sounds like you are joking or something.

@Mirae: He told you no and he told you why.  None of the reasons he gave you are amenable to being argued.  Don't try to convince him to change his mind: A good recommendation needs to be enthusiastic.

@Mirae "going back for punishment" means that the prof tells you he doesn't want to support you and you go back to pick up that same negative message again and again. It's a way of speaking.

@Captain Emacs  Yeah I understand.