text:
When professors search for PhD candidates in CS, how knowledgeable do they expect the applicant to be?
I was wondering that when there is a call for application for PhD candidates, how much of theory on a particular field does the professor usually expect the candidate to know?
I have seen situations discussed here itself, where the professors were interested in hiring applicants who already are well versed with the theory behind the project they are applying to. Is this universal? Or is that a particular case and there are others who allow the applicant to get used to the theory in the field in, say, 0.5-1 year or so.
Also, does it matter in terms of whether the candidate is a international applicant?
Edit: I narrowed the field I'm most interested in to be Computer Science. My target area for sending the applications is EU countries. With respect to the international applicant part, I am from India.

Seemingly some people like downvoting before a question has been answered without leaving reasons.

They are probably downvoting for the same reason I'm voting to close. The question is too broad as it stands. The answer depends on the subject area, the country, the funding source, and the particular professor. There is no one right answer.

I narrowed down the field and prospective country - although I thought a more general answer existed. If it still remains unanswerable then by all means suggest what I can add more to improve it - or go ahead and close it.

When you apply for a Ph.D position, you are in competition with other applicants. Obviously, if another applicant is already familiar with the topic, it is an advantage that he has over you. However, this should not be the only criteria for choosing who will fill the position. For example, if you have better publications than another applicant even if you are less familiar with the field, one may prefer you because you may have a higher potential for publications. To summarize, it is an advantage if you are familiar with the topic. However, whether it is a requirement depends on the professor. Personnally, as a CS professor, I would still be open to hire top students if they are not exactly working in my field.   And conversely, if a student has a weak profile but is related to my field, I would probably not hire him.


text:
Is it unethical to send unofficial feedback to authors of a paper which I declined to review due to conflict of interest?
I was asked to review a paper which was submitted to a conference. The author of the paper was one of my former professors* and of course I declined to review the submission due to conflict interest.
I was wondering however, would it be unethical to write an email to my professor give him a feedback on the paper and perhaps, provide him some kind of unofficial review?
Of course it would not change the fate of the paper but if the paper gets accepted, they can use my pseudo-review when doing their final editing. I was not sure if this is ethical and/or according to the etiquette of academia.
Edit: Perhaps I should clarify what do I mean by feedback. What I had in my mind wasn't a complete review but rather some suggestions. Something in the lines of:

Very interesting stuff bla bla... however, I think it would be better
  if you had written sec. IV in this fashion and you add data-field foo
  to figure bar.

*I have a good relationship with professor but we never had any projects or publications together.

Why is it conflict of interest ?

@seteropere, My huge respect and interest for this professor may blind me to see possible flaws in his paper. Is not categorize as COI?

@Pouya While I cannot speak from personal experience, I believe it is not entirely uncommon for people to be asked to referee papers by people they are closer to than you describe, for example their students, colleagues or collaborators.

@Pouya: Did you explicitly agree to confidentiality, or did the email that asked you to review explicitly say you should keep this confidential?

As user1258240 pointed out, if the paper is publicly available you can avoid the entire issue of how it came to your attention.  But if it isn't, then you shouldn't get in touch with the authors directly:

There's at least a mild ethical issue, namely why you read the paper at all, rather than discarding it once you recognized the conflict of interest.  You would have had a legitimate reason to read it as a reviewer, but now you've put yourself in the same potentially awkward position as a reviewer (where you have to be careful not to take advantage of having early access to the paper's contents) without the justification.  It may have been simple curiosity on your part, but it could also look a little suspicious, like you hope to derive some benefit from having read the paper.
Identifying yourself to the authors could make this impression worse.  The illegitimate benefit you're deriving could be getting to show off in front of the authors or establishing that they are in your debt.  (On the other hand, sending anonymous e-mail with unofficial feedback feels creepy to me.)
Even aside from whether it's actually unethical, you don't want to get a reputation as someone who pushes ethical boundaries.  That can leave people with an uncomfortable impression, like you're a loose cannon who might cause trouble even while you're trying to behave ethically.

Instead of contacting the authors yourself, you could write to the editor and ask whether you could supply unofficial feedback, which the editor wouldn't use for deciding whether to accept the paper (but would provide to the authors).  It can't hurt to ask, and the editor might agree.  However, I'd avoid saying that you've already read the paper, since I think there's a good chance the editor will say "No, if you have a conflict of interest you shouldn't even read the paper in the first place."

There might be an ethical problem with telling the professor that you were asked to review his paper, but I think it's a minor issue: the anonymity of the reviewers is mostly there to allow them to give their opinion freely. If you are eventually not reviewing the paper then I don't think you are required to preserve that anonymity (even if you do review the paper, it's not totally clear that you must stay quiet about it).
And if the paper is available online on some archive or on the authors' web pages, then it is definitely ok to give the authors your opinion based on the online version if there is a plausible way in which you could know about the paper had you not been asked about it.
I feel that you main concern is that the fact that the paper was sent to you in error would give the authors an unfair advantage by giving them the opportunity to hear your opinion about it. Well, it is unfair, as are many things in life, but not un-ethical. Ethics is there to keep science working well and making progress, and by letting the authors know your opinion you are doing exactly that. Fairness is only relevant when there is competition for competition's sake, and science should not be that.

"would give the authors an unfair advantage" - over whom? And do I also get an unfair advantage by showing my paper to friends first for feedback? Do I get an unfair advantage if I upload it at arXiv and get comments that way? Let's not overthink things :)

Yes @xLeitix, that's my point...

"And if the paper is available online on some archive or on the authors' web pages": this looks to me like the most important point. If you can find the preprint online, just say you are sending feedback because you had a look at the preprint online. If you cannot find the preprint but can find information about the existence of the paper online (e.g., its title), you could ask your former prof for a copy, and then send comments.

The question covers a wider issue than what you explicitly ask. To contact an author about a manuscript that you have not reviewed is not unethical as such but carries with it several other issues. You will essentially provide comments as any other colleague of the authors would except the comments would be unsolicited. If you contacted the authors as a reviewer outside of the review process the matter would be very different, of course.
First, there is the personal issue. How well do you know your former professor, do you think he/she will react positively to your comments "out of the blue"? I think it is worth thinking twice about providing comments on something the author would not expect you would necessarily see other than as a reviewer of course. If this happened to me and the colleague was a close friend with whom I feel comfortable discussing our respective science freely it would not be a problem. But, somewhere is a line where the comments would be come uncomfortable due to an uncertainty about the reaction.
Second, as an author, I would not expect the journal/conference to send out the entire article when asking for reviews. That behaviour is closer to unethical than what your question concerns. It is more appropriate to provide the title and abstract to the prospective reviewer so here I think the conference, in this case, should make their routines more strict. As you can see from this perspective, it is not your fault you have gained access to the entire manuscript so at least you are not, in my opinion, breaking any confidence, that has already been broken by "the conference".
So while I do not see any strictly ethical problems with providing comments, you should perhaps consider the action twice before continuing for the first reason above. I am sure there are differing opinion about this but the main problem here lies in the fact that you were given access to the entire manuscript even though you have not agreed to be a reviewer. In an open review system this would be perfectly fine but I would be quite irritated if I found my manuscript has been distributed to large numbers of prospective reviewers.

Second, as an author, I would not expect the journal/conference to send out the entire article when asking for reviews. — I would. Sending the full paper with a review request (or at least making it available to the prospective reviewer) is standard practice in some subfields of computer science, including my own.

That depends upon the guildelines of your review board.  Consult the person or group that organized the peer review, and ask them if it would be acceptable practice.  If you strongly wish to send this feedback, mention to the group that you will not mention the names of the other peer reviewers (if you know them) or any other facts about the review, and will only be addressing the content itself.
From there, it becomes an issue of whether or not the group will allow it, and act on the assumption that they will not until proven otherwise, to avoid being placed in a sticky spot.

You can also ask if the paper will be made public after the conference, and if so then you should be able to offer your critique afterwards without any ethical qualms, except to mention to the professor why you withheld the comments (to avoid compromising ethical guidelines).
I think you should be safe giving your professor this feedback as long as you don't breach the anonymity of the peer reviewers that are on his review board - but don't assume that is the case.

My gut instinct is to avoid doing this. Typically reviews are supposed to be anonymous and letting the professor know you've seen it breaks the anonymity of it all. You may be breaking the ethical guidelines of the conference.
Best case scenario: the professor appreciates your comments, and nothing else happens.
Worst case scenario: it becomes known what you did and people (editors, other researchers, etc.) stop trusting you.

Thank you for interesting answer. Do you think your answer is the same if you consider my edit of the original post?

I am trying to figure out what the breach of trust here actually is. If @Pouya emails the author, he has learned nothing more than that Pouya was originally planned to be a reviewer but declined. That does not sound like sensitive information to me - the potential reviewers are typically either well-known anyway (e.g., PC of a conference) or at least pretty obvious in case of most journals. Specifically, the author does not know more about who actually reviews his paper than before the mail.

@xLeitix, You have mentioned out very good points and some of my doubts in this comment and the comment you posted on the other answer. Would you kindly elaborate more by providing an answer?

@xLeitix: in information theory terms I'm sure it tells the author something, but very little. At least, that you're on that editor's list of possible reviewers in that field (telling any anecdote about reviewing a paper would do the same), and that the actual reviews came from others on the list (which the author knows being just as aware of the conflict of interest). If the anonymity were a top secret matter of critical importance then best practice might be to say nothing just in case multiple information leaks add up to a pattern someone can analyse, but this isn't the secret service ;-)

@Pouya Your edit doesn't make a difference on my answer. I see too many possible bad outcomes of reaching out to the author. I wouldn't do it or advice people I know to do it.

@xLeitix: For my field, I'd say the breach of trust was on the editor's side: At least I've always been asked to decide whether to accept or decline a review based on the abstract only.

@cbeleites Yes, this is also true for my field. Unfortunately, the abstract and invitation specifically does not contain the names of the authors, so I am also occasionally in the situation that I accept a review, find out that I have a conflict with one of the authors, and have to back out of the review again. It wouldn't call this a breach of trust of anyone, just an unfortunate practice that is not really one person's fault.

@SteveJessop: Many journals thank their reviewers by name (e.g. long  list at end of the year) - so being a reviewer there in itself if not treated as sensitive information.

@Leitix: we see the author list before accepting. Disclosing authors in the full manuscript but not before doesn't make particular sense to me. But in the situation you describe, you probably agreed not to discuss the paper with anyone when accepting to review.

Summary: I don't see any particular problem in discussing the paper with the authors. But I do have a problem with an editor sending out full manuscripts before confidentiality is agreed upon. As a reviewer and researcher, I want to be able to regain my full freedom of speaking to the authors by declining to review.
Here, a diplomatic approach may be

to let the authors know you were asked and have declined to review, and
ask them whether they would like to discuss the paper
suggest to the editor to switch to a process where reviewers accept or decline based on title, abstract (and author names if not double blinded) only and do not get the full manuscript until they accepted to review.

In my field, agreeing to treat the manuscript confidential happens when accepting to review.
I assume that there was no process where the OP signed up as reviewer and at that point agreed to confidentiality. (Otherwise I suppose this question wouldn't have been asked)
I also assume that this question wouldn't have been asked if the manuscript was attached to an email that clearly says "keep this confidential".
Although I object to this situation: I prefer to agree to confidentiality on a case by case basis rather than being bound to it by an email I cannot influence. The extreme case of what makes me uneasy here would the ridiculous situation that I'm bound to not talk to a close colleague because a 3rd party sent me some email.
Being "spoiled" by the practice in my field, I'd now answer the editor in question that I do not want to receive confidential information such as the full manuscript before having agreed to confidentiality and I'm not available as reviewer in a procedure where even declining to review binds me to not talk to the authors about the manuscript. I'd also point out that the decide-by-abstract procedure practically avoids the problem.  Yes, I do keep the abstract confidential but that is no practical limitation for my work as researcher: title and abstract typically do not contain information (in my field) that wasn't available already from conference proceedings/talks (I'm in a proceedings-are-unimportant field). There's typically nothing to talk about in the abstract, at least nothing that cannot wait until the paper is out officially.
Last but not least, IANAL, but from the editor's perspective I would not rely on a one-sided confidentiality "agreement" in unsolicited email (full manuscript attached to "do you accept for review?"-email as legally valid across all kinds of legislations. Explicit consent to confidentiality is IMHO legally much safer, ethically much better, and not so difficult to implement:
In my field, the decision to accept or decline to do a review is done based on title + abstract (+ author names).
That way, I don't get particularly sensitive/confidential information before having agreed to treat it as such and the problem is avoided.
Maybe you could suggest this to the editor.
Also from this point of view, it was the editor who violated the confidentiality. After all: there's no way to say how many other people got the manuscript without agreeing to confidentiality. Blaming the OP for discussing the paper with the author is killing the messenger of the bad news.
The major ethical problem on the OP's side was solved appropriately by declining to review a paper of a close colleague.
I then don't see any problem giving feedback to a close colleague. Discussing science and papers and manuscripts is what you do with close colleagues. Otherwise they aren't close collegues IMHO.
Just to be clear: I do make a rather large distinction between  confidentiality towards third parties and being restricted in talking to the authors.
If I need to decline the review in order to be free to discuss with the authors whatever I want, that's fine. But I need the ethical and legal possibility to keep this freedom, so collaborations are not strained by reviews I didn't even do.
While close colleagues shouldn't be invited to review at least for a couple of years, I know of several instances where this happened (oversight by overworked editor I assume).

You're assuming that somebody can only agree to confidentiality when they agree to review a paper. This is incorrect. It is perfectly possible to say "Here is a manuscript. You must keep it confidential. Do  you agree to review it?" Indeed, this is exactly what happens in my field (theoretical computer science). Especially if this is done via a website ("By downloading this article, you agree to keep it confidential"), the editor is in no way breaching confidentiality.

What David said.  I assume that any manuscript I receive, for any purpose whatsoever, is confidential by default.  Don't you?

Clearly, the conventions among fields differ. I normally wouldn’t even consider accepting a request to review a paper without seeing the full manuscript first (treating it as confidential, of course), as that makes it impossible to estimate whether it will be a complete waste of my time, and whether I can realistically meet the review deadline.

@DavidRicherby: I assume that no explicit agreement to confidentiality was reached because I assume that the question would not have been asked in that case. And I object to be bound one-sidedly to confidentiality by unsolicited email from a third party (see updated answer) - I agree the sentence about that was rather cryptic. Hope my points are clearer now. Download-implies-confidentiality is a clear agreement, I also updated the answer wrt. to this situation: I'd refuse to participate in this review process.

To me, two things are confidential: the fact that person A reviewed the paper; the contents of the paper (assuming it's not already been made public, e.g., on ArXiv). If one has declined to review the paper, the first kind of confidentiality is moot (we agree on this). Confidentiality of the paper contents mean that they shouldn't be revealed to unauthorized persons. But it is obvious that the authors are authorized to know what is in their own paper. So, if you decline to review, there is no breach in confidentiality in discussing the paper with its authors.

@DavidRicherby: that's a very good summary of my point. Thanks.

And your "ridiculous situation that I'm bound to not talk to a close colleague because a 3rd party sent me some email" quite simply does not exist. There are two cases. First, if you didn't previously know about the manuscript, you would have been unable to discuss it with your close colleague regardless of whether you'd received the email. Second, if you did know about it, you decline to review because of conflict of interest and you can still discuss the manuscript with its authors because it is not confidential from them.

@DavidRicherby: As I understand it, the ridiculus situation is what this question is about. And if it is a close colleague, chances are that I may not know the exact manuscript, but I do now what and how they are doing. The confidentiality terms I've seen so far do not distinguish between 3rd parties and authors in a way that say if you decline to review you're free to talk to the authors.

@JeffE: I certainly treat manuscript confidential. But I don't need to assume anything, I explicitly agree to not talk to authors nor 3rd parties (for some journals with the exception that I'm allowed to contact a colleague to get an opinion about detail questions).

@EmilJeřábek: That is quite a cultural difference: if I find after getting the manuscript that it is a waste of time, this translates to a "reject" recommendation. If it would take too long to get through, that's an indicator for reject & resubmit or major revision.

The point about deadlines was that if I a get a 50-page paper full of technical combinatorial proofs, I know it will take an awful lot of time to review even if the paper is of high quality, and I (probably) wouldn’t know this just by reading the abstract. Problematic papers that call for a major revision or rejection can also take a lot of time and effort, however this is typically something that only transpires on closer scrutiny, so I can’t use it for the initial decision whether to accept a review request anyway.

I've had anonymous reviewers disclose to me and I've always found it very uncomfortable. Almost as if they were asking for a tit-for-tat (an unspoken "I wrote a positive review of your paper, so I hope you return the favor in the future").
Unless the issues you found would be something that only you with your specialized expertise could provide insight into -- or there is something damning that needs to be said or people will die, I'd just hold your tongue. Wait until the paper comes out and then comment on it as if you've never seen it before.
Alternately, if the prof has posted a line in his CV with the paper's title and a note "under review" -- you could ask him for a copy of the draft and then send back comments as if you had just seen it de novo.

But the situation here is IMHO very different from what you describe: the OP declined to review exactly because there may be a conflict of interest. I agree with you in that if I am reviewer, and disclosure may seem a good option for whatever reason I'd always offer to the editor that they may disclose my identity (so I can discuss with the authors) The editor would then need to look for another reviewer.

Although I find the rest of your answer interesting, as cbeleites has mentioned, the firs paragraph of your answer doesn't apply to me. I have already rejected the review so there is nothing to bargain for future submissions.

I agree, it's just the preamble as to why disclosure in general is a bad idea.

Of course you could send your feedback anonymously to the mentioned professor, using an anonymous email service. In that case you would not breach any guidelines as you would not have revealed yourself. In the email you could explain that you declined to review due to conflict of interest, but want to send some suggestions anyway.

What guidelines say that it's unacceptable to reveal that you were asked to review a paper but declined?

I am not saying that I personally think that as a reviewer you should stay anonymous. I just want to point out that if you are worried to breach anonymity (for whatever reason), there is also a way to provide feedback while staying anonymous.

If you declined to review the paper, you're not a reviewer!

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Unable to complete journal paper by deadline, is this a problem?
Main Question:
I submitted an abstract to a well known journal (in the field of Civil, Aerospace, Mechanical Engineering) a couple months ago and the abstract was accepted.  Due to major changes in unrelated circumstances, it will not be ready/adequate.  Is this a problem?
Background:
I am a graduate student at an American engineering university.  I submitted a journal paper a couple months ago and it was accepted.  However, my circumstances changed over the past months, and completing this paper is no longer a priority nor plausible.
My funded research (unrelated to the said journal paper) is requiring too much of my time, and I am likely planning to leaving the program.  Also, my wife would prefer me to leave the program and pursue an engineering job with a salary.  To further compound problems, my personal computer (which carries the work corresponding to the paper) has broken down permanently (that is, the computer is completely dead).
As a result, my priorities have dramatically shifted to job applications and interviews.  At this point, completing the paper by the due date (one week) is no longer a priority, nor feasible.  However, I would like to one day return to a career in academia and get a PhD.  Would neglecting to submit this paper negatively effect my reputation?  In your opinion, would this hurt my professional relationship with my advisor (who was working on the paper with me)?  Would this hurt my ability to publish in the future with this journal?

If it will hurt your relationship with your advisor is something you should be asking him/her. Also, if you explain your problem to your advisor, maybe they will finish the paper. Having the publication will probably help a lot if you plan on going back to academia.

Is this a journal paper (as the text suggests) or a conference paper (as the tags suggest)? Please [edit] your post to clarify.

Well, it's not ideal, but it isn't unheard of. If your advisor can be convinced to drop the journal paper, a polite, apologetic letter to the editors that explains that you would need to put the publication on hold at this stage should not create too much damage. It's your advisor that you need to convince at this point.

Can you negotiate with your advisor to turn the data over to someone else in your lab and get authorship on the eventual paper?

I will focus on the journal, as your plans and relationship with your advisor really need to be worked out between you and them, and follow much the same lines.
Withdrawing from submitting an anticipated journal paper is not the end of the world.  Yes, people will think less of you than if you submitted it, but it is better than either writing a bad paper or dragging the process out indefinitely.  Sometimes bad stuff happens, sometimes plans change, and journal editors will not be shocked or startled.  Moreover, they will likely be happier to have a clear "no" than an open unresolved question.
To handle this as best you can, you just need to make sure that you communicate your change of plans clearly, e.g., emailing something along the lines of:

Due to a chance in circumstances, I will be unable to submit this paper in a timely fashion.  My apologies and thank you for your patience.

No further explanations or excuses are needed, just a clear statement that you aren't going to write the paper after all.

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


text:
Consequences of quitting a graduate-level Research Assistant (RA) position mid-semester, with little notice?
BACKGROUND
I am an engineering graduate student at a good American university, funded as a Research Assistant (RA).  The lab and professor rely heavily on my day-to-day work.
My PhD research is going nowhere and I am far less interested in obtaining a PhD compared to one year ago.  Most importantly, my wife wants me to leave and pursue an engineering job with a salary.  I have a colleague/friend who has a position lined up for me provided I begin to work ASAP.  Ultimately, this would mean quitting my funded research position mid summer (and mid-semester) with little notice.  Because of this, I am not expecting a "letter of recommendation" from my advisor/boss/professor, however I don't want to be blacklisted either.
QUESTIONS
How significant of an offense would it be to quit a graduate-level Research Assistantship in the middle of a semester?  Would it even be legal to do this at an American university?  What would be the consequences for simply turning in my resignation and leaving the program (again, in the middle of the semester with very little notice)?
Opinions from professors, PhD drop-outs, or people familiar with these situations would be great!

You may be responsible for returning/repaying part of or all of the money you've made since the start of the RA contract (as in, since the beginning of the most recent one you signed). Is there a reason you don't want to discuss this with your adviser? Odds are, if you present your case respectfully and let them know that your interests in the Ph.D. have waned, and after careful thought with your loved ones you've decided you'd like to leave the program, they'll be receptive to your message. They're human, after all, and they know that Ph.D.s are not everyone's idea of a fun time :)

tonysdg, I have never seen a contract written this way and do no see in the USA that it would hold up in court!

I'm a little curious about the timing of this question. Are you thinking about leaving like... now? Isn't the semester about over for every American University? I know there are summer semesters, but I would think that leaving during the summer would be easier than in the fall or spring.

@tonysdg I would be astonished if that were the case. It would be very difficult to see such repayment as anything but punitive, and punitive contracts rarely stand up in court.

I contacted a reference supplied by a candidate once and was told "This guy would rather quit a job than [perform an assigned and customary duty]." Needless to say, the application was circular filed. That particular interpretation does not apply to your situation, but you should make sure you know how your bosses feel about this choice before listing them as references in the future...

@NDEthos - I was referring to tuition, as Morgan Rodgers noted, but on re-reading my comment I realize that I did not word it like that at all. Whoops!!

@MorganRodgers They certainly could ask OP to pay tuition.  I could also ask you to pay my commuting costs.  Every day I ask for favors from God.  None of those requests are legally enforceable.

This will likely vary greatly from one department to another. It will also depend upon your relationship with your advisor, departmental needs, etc. As @tonysdg noted in the comments, it would be a good idea to talk to your advisor about this. Some departments are understanding of these situations.
In my (geography) department, a few years ago we had a student quit his masters degree and his teaching assistantship because he was a single dad and out of money. He dreaded going to his supervisor (who was not his academic advisor) to tell him this. But it ended up being no big deal. Everyone understood, and to my knowledge there were no harsh feelings in the department toward him. Other grad students and professors covered a few classes for him through the rest of the semester, and the department was able to fund a new student the next semester.
Like I said, these things are situational, so your conversation may be different. But I included this answer as a tangible example that it is possible to leave in the middle of the semester without causing bedlam. Also, there may be strict rules against leaving in the middle of the semester, but sometimes these rules can be bent under the right circumstances. Even if you find a rule against what you're thinking about doing, I would still talk to your advisor.

And the sooner you talk, the better. It gives them more chances to find a replacement.

@Davidmh Also, at a certain point it's more valuable for the research group to have someone who is really invested in the work and wants to be there.. even if the current person is doing a good job and others are reliant on her/him.

If you are leaving academia permanently, I see few consequences.  You should give standard two weeks notice to avoid harming your reputation outside academia.  You should also check your contract (if any) and institutional policies.

I would suggest you have a serious talk with your wife, for starters.  No matter how empathic your profs and others may want to be, they will certainly be annoyed at having to scramble to fill the gap your 'no notice' departure will create. You will be a central topic over coffee and drinks by those affected.  You have not even established a reputation in your field; this no-notice leavetaking will not be a favourable launch for you.


text:
Where can I study what I really interested in as a postdoc researcher?
I am a postdoc researcher in AI field. I was hired as a lead scientist in governmental project (named project A). I need to work on it at least eight hours on week days.
Apart from the study in the project A, there is another topic which is really what I'm interested in (named project B). I started the project B last year, and since then, I studied it after business hour every day with several researchers.
The progress of the project B is somewhat nice and we'll submit a paper by this summer. I'm totally fascinated on the project B. I wish if all of what I have to do would be only the project B.
But it was OK. The project A is also interesting and I can write many paper thanks to the project A and B. Moreover, there are a lot of nice and intelligent friends here.
However, recently, PI assigned me to another project (project C). The project C is totally out of my interest and expertise.
I feel it might be time to leave. Unfortunately, I've not had enough record to get tenure position (but tenure track might be OK). I can go anywhere if I can focus on the project B. Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, it's very difficult to study what he/she wants as a postdoc researcher in CS field.
So, my question is if there is a position allowing me to bring my own research topic and focus on it?
For instance,

applying for tenure track in some country
going to private companies to raise money (like sales person)
spin out and become CEO of startup company (don't laugh at me...)
persuade the PI to allow me to study the project B (0.01% success rate)

I can not open the location of my work place, but here is one of the worst competitive country on the planet to get tenure due to a low birth rate and long long economic depression... I guess I need go somewhere outside this country.

Related: Intellectual Freedom on PhD Comics

As a tenured professor you can choose your research area basically as you want (sometimes there may be some pressure from above to go into specific directions but where I am (Germany) there is freedom of research). However you will have many other things to do which can not always choose (particular courses to lecture, administration, meetings, committees...). So it is not like you can do the research you want to do all day.
So, staying where area may not be as bad as you think now: You are assigned to project B now but 1. you may ask to also contribute to project A at the same time or 2. do a good job at project B and then ask your advisor to work on the project you would like.
Personally I don't know anybody who funds his research on some private basis. One guy I know works in some company where his work is a bit close to research and he manages to teach courses at the university and publish papers and books. I don't know if he works part time or not...  In Germany you need the title "Privatdozent" to do so or get a "Lehrauftrag" each term.

Consider the time you work on things you do not like a tax on time you work on things you like. Because you won't ever get a 100% rate time on what you like.
If you work part of your official working time per week on some given project and the rest of the time on your favourite, I should think as long it does not exceed 50% tax, that's a pretty good deal (assuming you have something around 37.5-40 hours/week).

authors: أرياف جدة العقارية


text:
Is it OK to hire another lab's student?
An undergrad who's worked with me for just over a year (for course credit or for pay, depending on his preference in any given semester) presented a poster on his work with me at an event hosted by my lab. Afterwards, the student told me that he spoke to Professor B at the poster session, and Professor B suggested a project that he'd like the student to work on with him.
He had a meeting with Professor B to talk about the specifics, after which Professor B emailed me and asked whether I would recommend the student. I indicated in my response that the student is very capable and I would rather not lose him, to which Professor B responded, "He's planning on working with me for course credit next semester."
Was Professor B's behavior in this case OK?
More generally,
Under what conditions is it OK to hire another lab's student?
By "OK," I mean "not considered inappropriate behavior by the professor."
Hiring another lab's student is of course a continuum:

On the one hand: Student from Professor A's lab appears in Professor B's office, says "I've heard about your research and would really like to work with you." Professor B says, "Sure, I'd like that a lot."
On the other hand: Professor B attends event (open house, workshop, etc.) hosted by Professor A, where Professor A's student gives a talk about his ongoing research with Professor A. Professor B chats with the student after the talk, then says "You should work with me next semester."

Is either or both of these considered OK/not OK?
Does the type of student (PhD, MS, undergrad, high school student doing summer research) make a difference to your answer?
Do the terms of the student's position in either lab (earning course credit, getting paid, just getting supervision) make a difference?
Does it matter how long the student has been working with Professor A?
Should Professor B ask how Professor A feels about it before offering Professor A's student a job?

This is not an active, ongoing situation - I am not looking for advice on how to respond to Professor B, or whether I should say something to the student. (The student chose to continue his work with my lab and not to work with Professor B.) I just want to know whether Professor B's behavior was appropriate.

In fact all these things make a difference.

@Suresh I added the specific example that I'm really unsure about, but I would appreciate an answer that addresses those "things" as well

Having been a grad student with options to work under different professors, I would like to champion the student's right to make his own decision based on what is best for his own interests/career. At the same time, I would also agree that basic and professional courtesy would dictate that both of them discuss the idea with you, especially if there is any vested or ongoing commitment on the students part past the end of the semester.

@brichins Thanks for sharing your experience. I agree completely that the student did nothing wrong - my question is only about the professor's behavior.

not related to your question. but I want to say my idea maybe help  someone . When I read the question, I prefer to think in this way => You loos one good student, she/he prefer to work with another one, WHY this has happend, So I try to find why she/he does not like to continue working for me. If I can not find the reason maybe for next semester that scenario repeats with another student

Consider the following scenario:

I've been working with a professor for a year now, and at one of his
  events, I presented a poster. Another professor came up to me and
  started talking, and it turned out that this professor had a very
  interesting project related to my interests. I'm applying to grad
  schools in a year, and if I can get two recommendations from faculty
  it will really help my application. Should I work with this professor
  or not ?

Students have agency too. There's a lot of context and background missing in your description that Koldito alludes to. But in general students should be free to make their own decisions about their research activities and honor existing commitments that they've agreed to.
Personally, if I were Professor B, I might suggest that the student talk to you first before deciding, but it's also possible that B did that, and the student indicated that no continuing commitment existed. If I were advising the student, I'd also suggest they clear things up with you first. I might also suggest that depending on the level of interest in the project they have with you, they give you the right of first refusal.
But this exact situation has happened to me with students (twice). They worked with me for a while, and then found a topic that made more sense to them with another professor. I wished I could have convinced them to stay, but they did well with their advisors and I was on both their committees, with no hard feelings at all.

I entirely agree with your point about the student's agency - at the time I told him that he should definitely go work with B if he is more interested in B's project, and I gave him a good recommendation to B. But from what he told me, I believe B approached him first knowing he works with me, and I'm not sure whether that's OK to do (on B's part)

It definitely doesn't help maintain a collegial work environment if you feel that you have to hide your students from your colleagues, and I'd feel miffed as well. In the short term, maybe it's best to talk with B about this. In the long term, all you can do is be a good advisor and assume that people who who actually want to work with you will stay with you.

+1 To me, the various gentleman's agreements between professors regarding who is allowed to offer what to whom often have an unpleasant touch of cartelization to them. See, when Prof. A states that he will not "steal" a student from Prof. B, what he is also saying is that the student is not allowed to choose anymore whether he would rather want to work with A or B. It has been decided for him by the agreement between A and B.

@xLeitix Do you think it makes a difference whether the student comes to Prof. B or Prof. B approaches the student? And if not, is it OK if I start doing all my recruiting from now on at B's annual research open house :)

@xLeitix I don't think that necessarily follows. An understanding (gentlemanly or ladylike, you pick :)) between faculty not to poach each other's students become cartel-like only if students are actively discouraged from switching. I see it more as an application of the Golden Rule.

@ff524 In principle I see no moral problem with doing all your recruiting at B's research open house. I am not sure how practical it will be to do your recruiting at a place where people almost by definition will already have a research job, though. Let me make clear: I understand that "don't steal from each other" agreements totally make sense for the professors. However, if applied all too extremely, they can be quite disadvantageous for the student.

I am accepting this answer largely for your comment about applying the Golden Rule, which nicely explains what felt "off" to me about B's behavior. Viewing the situation as "I'm happy someone else wants to offer nice opportunities to my students!" is something I will aspire to, but I don't think I'm there yet :)

In this particular case, there are two factors to consider.

Prior to Prof. B's offer, had Student expressed an interest (or committed) to remain in your lab next semester?
Prior to Prof. B's offer, had you (or anybody in your team) already invested time and effort in the specific research that Student would be doing?

If the answer to both of these questions is "no", then Prof. B is totally entitled to try and get Student into his team. We'd be talking about a student whose connection to your lab finishes, as far as anybody is concerned, at the end of this semester. So why shouldn't other people try to hire him? On the other hand, if you had already prepared this semester with this student in mind, and/or he had already committed to staying with you, things are different. Prof. B would effectively be disrupting part of your lab's work, and you should let him know that he would be. You should also tell Student that it is not good behavior to suddenly abandon a project after committing to it. If he really wants to leave you under these circumstances, it should be because Prof. B can offer him something you can't (for example, if my brightest MSc student told me "I have been accepted to this super prestigious PhD program, under the supervision of Prof. Superstar, so I'm leaving at the end of the semester", I'd be annoyed, but I'd let him go for his own benefit).

The answer to both is yes, but how would Professor B know that? He didn't ask me before offering my student a job.

True, he couldn't have known, that's why you have to tell him now. If he insists, don't relent easily, because that will weaken your position in the department.


text:
Should I answer students' questions immediately or teach them to ask better questions?
I'm teaching an online lab (to accompany an in-person course) to undergrads in their 3rd or 4th year of an engineering curriculum this semester. The aim of the lab is not to teach them any particular technical skills. It's only meant to supplement the content of the course by exposing them to some more advanced concepts in a hands-on way. The lab itself is the means, not the goal.
So beyond a single "orientation" lab, they don't get a whole lot of training in debugging things that go wrong in the lab, and I don't expect them to become advanced users of the lab infrastructure. They're encouraged to post questions on a course forum if they have trouble running a lab exercise, and I answer their questions there.
Having said that, some students post questions that would be closed immediately on a Stack Exchange site for lack of detail, and for good reason. Questions like:

I can't log in to the website, please help.

or

When I run the experiment, it gives me an error. Can somebody help me???

or

I can't see the results of the experiment.

with no further details. These are perfectly reasonable things to ask about, but the student hasn't even attempted to give me any details as to what went wrong. In the "real world," people that ask questions like this won't usually get help.
Since I operate the computing infrastructure for the lab, I can actually find out the specifics of what happened by checking the student's username against the server logs. So I can give them an answer even if they ask a really incomplete question (e.g., I can check the server logs and see that their experiment failed because they mistyped a command).
But I'm not sure if I should answer their questions (because I can, and I want to encourage them to ask questions if they have trouble), or if I should try to train them to ask better questions.

On the one hand: it seems like I am doing them a disservice by not teaching them how to ask for help properly.
On the other hand: students are (legitimately) frustrated when they're using infrastructure they haven't been extensively trained in, and they can't get it to work. If I try to get them to ask better questions, they'll feel like I'm being deliberately unhelpful and making them jump through hoops to get an answer to their question. (I know this because that's been their reaction the few times I tried this.) They may stop asking questions and just give up on the lab exercises.

Should I risk the actual course goal (delivering content to the students) in favor of a general educational goal (teaching them how to ask questions)?
Is there a way to train students to ask better questions without making them feel like I'm not helping them?
Just to clarify: I already provide answers to commonly asked questions, and a lot of material to help students formulate better questions before they ask. Some students ignore that material and ask very non-specific questions anyways. My question is how to address this once they've asked the question: should I walk them through the process of reformulating it before I answer? Is there a way to do so without frustrating them further?

On [cs.SE], I mercilessly close with links to the material they should already have read. Takes 10s of my time. Some make an effort then, and these I help gladly; most never come back. This is similar to the "a student who does not ask twice does not have a problem"-mentality; often students will solve their problem on their own if you just answer after a day or two -- you were the easiest solution at first.

@raphael one minor comment: you don't want to be the easiest solution at first and then a disappointment and a source of frustration. Frustration is, to a great deal, due to disparities between expectations and reality. So you want to make clear from the start: the process of asking proper questions, the level of detail that these questions should have and the work they have to do prior to asking a question. The expectations that you have about the questions and that they should have about the answers should be as clear as possible from the start.

Are you able to expose the logs to the students?

@sixtyfootersdude No, I can't. But anyways, I'm not trying to teach the students how to debug on this particular infrastructure (it's conceptually hard to grasp and not necessary for them at this stage). They are supposed to ask for help if there's a problem; the issue is in how they ask for help.

@Raphael I think your goals as a mod on Computer Science might be slightly different from my goals as a lab instructor. I can't afford to have students give up in frustration, for one thing :)

@ff524 I should probably have said that "my" SE policy derives from my RL policy. Frankly, I don't care if people give up in frustration over "my TA did not respond within the hour". I'll help anyone who spends at least as much time by themselves as I'll have, but others... (One should note that education is basically free over here, so students are not typically viewed as customers.)

Being a student myself I know how frustrating it can be to work with technics or facilities you don't know enough about. Sometimes this means asking fully detailed questions can be tricky.
But there is a difference between a student that tries to ask a question to get help with their problem, and one that just declares that they have a problem and thinks it is another persons business to deal with it. What you posted above is the latter.
They have encountered a problem and instead of trying to get help to solve it they try to make you solve it. That might even be clever, because as long as you DO solve the problem, they get maximum effect with a minimum of effort. And as soon as students realise that, even the good students won't bother to read your FAQs anymore, because it is a waste of time, when you obviously can identify and solve a problem as soon as they write "Help, I have a problem."
Additionally you have to keep in mind, that as a student you often take from the experience that people don't respond to your question of, "can anyone help me" as indicating that this person is just checking, whether someone responds. It is not meant to be a question, but a phrase to start a communication about the problem. That is something adapted from face to face communication. In the real world you don't go to people and start with a 5 minute monologue to your problem, you ask "Hey would you help me?" Wait for a "Sure what is it." And than give your monologue.
So what I read above is not a question it is the reflex of a student to a problem. Before even thinking they are posting (in my generation a common reflex in every situation - we are the tldr - too long didn't read generation). If I were you I would respond with a reflex. Just answer with a standard answer that explains, that you need more detail to help. Students who get frustrated by this are already frustrated and beyond your reach.
If on the other hand a student tried to ask a proper question and just failed, you should provide the answer and give a hint on how his question could have been better.
How frustrated your student will be is less a question of what you respond, than of how you
respond. "I could solve your problem, but I wont because of your stupid question" is of course frustrating. But even in a standard answer you can demonstrate that you care, that you take the other person and his time serious, that you would like to help and that you need more information in order to do so. I would try to phrase it, but as you undoubtedly realised I'm not a native English speaker, so I leave that to you. Just don't advertise the fact that you are trying to teach them something.

This is a very thoughtful answer, thank you. Don't advertise the fact that you are trying to teach them something is not my usual approach. I normally explain to students for any assignment, "I'm asking you to do/learn X because I think it will help you with Y." It hadn't occurred to me not to do this for "asking better questions" - will have to think about this some more :)

Oh you allready read it. I just edited it again, because one of your example questions made me think of something. You said in the real world, they would not get help with such questions, but thats only half way true. In face to face communication you start a conversation about a problem not with a full explanation, but with and social opener. "I have a problem, would you please help me" "Yeah sure what is it?" You expect them to skip that, thats usual thinking in an online context, but people might not be aware of that.

So maybe that is a simple missunderstanding. You think they are asking a question, but they are't at this point of conversation jet. Maybe those students that don't ask proper questions, don't expect a solution, they are just waiting for an "Ok, you have a problem? We can fix that, what is it exactly?" And than they will ask a 'real' question.

I think in the case of my particular students, it is more likely what you said at first (they just want me to fix their problem for them), but this is an interesting point, too

And another one :-) About context again. Your approach to explain, that you want people to do X in order to learn Y, is very good in a learning-context. When people come to you to learn something they feel taken seriously when you explain your methods.
But when people come to you with a problem, they don't want to learn stuff, they want a solution. (That you want them to learn from their problems makes you a good teacher, but to let them do so quietly without lecturing them makes you an even betterone ;-) )

To me it seems pretty simple. Stop beating around the bush and tell them to not waste your time. If they want a specific answer then they have to give you a specific question. Or as an alternative you can ask equally bad questions until they ask you more in detail.
In your examples above:

Q - I can't log in to the website, please help.
A - How did you try to log in? Please help.
Q - When I run the experiment, it gives me an error. Can somebody help
  me???
A - Help me first? What experiment and what error?
Q - I can't see the results of the experiment.
A - What experiment? What steps did you take?

After going back and forth a few times even "slow" students will catch on to that to loose less time emailing back and forth, they have to ask more specific questions from the start.
Keep your answers equally short, and use "their" language. When they give you more information, ask more detailed questions. They will find out the answer in time.

I like use "their" language.

I like this answer. If a 3rd or 4th year engineer has trouble logging in to a website and cannot phrase a question fully describing the problem, quite frankly I'm not sure that they should become an engineer...

@Paul I don't think that the back-and-forth will teach them to ask better questions to begin with - I think it will feel like an email conversation, which they're comfortable with, and which they like. (It'll be positive feedback, not negative)

@ff524 You don't want to spend too much time to teach them how to ask questions properly. Instead, you want them to self teach themselves how to ask questions.

I thought academia was about teaching youngsters a new language.

I am not a big fan of this kind of approach. I think this (especially the first example) comes rather too close to trolling the students. It may seem smart and witty to you to answer in kind, but I am pretty sure this is not how it will be perceived by the students (assuming that they actually have a problem they cannot solve, which will be the majority of time).

@xLeitix I agree that this might seem like trolling, though the responses could easily be modified, i.e. by saying "I will not help you until you thoroughly describe the problem to me. The effort I put into a response is proportional to the effort put into the question". Something like that should be more appropriate. They're third and fourth year college students -- the time for mollycoddling is long gone.

@Moriarty You could even make the statement more neutral: For me to be able to help you, you need to thoroughly describe the problem. Fore more information on how to describe your problem see these links: link1, link2, etc. This is similar to my experiences on SO, stay civil and point out how their question should be improved.

Nobody replies with RTFM and STFW anymore, we are losing the traditions of the Internet and that is only bad.
Students should learn to make better questions, but they should also learn something much more important how to answer their own questions, because at some point they will not be students anymore and they may not have anyone to ask their questions (specially in research, where people are meant to find knowledge beyond the state of the art).
There are some related readings (I can think of now) in this context:

How to ask questions
How not to ask questions
Ask the duck
How to ask

Also, don't give a man a fish, teach him to fish. In general I agree with this: Rubber duck problem solving
But... (there is always a but, nothing is ever so simple not to have it), additionally to giving students the tools for them to answer their own questions it's important to give them the information so that they can do that. There are a number of things that work quite well in that sense.

Clear definitions, terms, pointers, references and maybe even a glossary. It's much easier to search on the Internet for additional information when you can write a few words on a search box.
Detailed step-by-step instructions of the set-up and all the things they should do to get their work done. (RTFM is quite pointless if there is no manual in the first place).
A FAQ. If you are getting the same question repeatedly, then it's likely that something is not clear (which we could say it's your fault...) and it may be good to have a FAQ. If the FAQ deals not only with singular and particular questions but groups of questions then that's even better. E.g.(@cs): "I have an error in the code, how can I solve it?" There are many possible errors and the way to solve most of them is debugging, some instructions about how to debug would be very useful to solve many questions.

About your final questions:

should I walk them through the process of reformulating it before I
  answer? Is there a way to do so without frustrating them further?

Yes, definitively. I would consider forcing them to reformulate the question is good for them and helping them to do so is very kind. Frustration may be good as well, as long as it is not desperation. Desperation could be good, but it's not for everyone (sorry, I've to link this). I'd personally suggest to help them to improve their questions by asking your own, which very likely you can copy and paste from a template, because there should be a pattern in those questions. Allegedly, Socrates didn't make many friends by asking questions, so try not to ask more than necessary.
In any case, this "template" or process is something they should be able to learn and do by themselves, to make better questions and (if possible) to answer their own questions by themselves. Answering in this way would be teaching by example. You can also make the template explicit and part of the FAQ or a sticky post, teaching by example is not incompatible with other forms of teaching.

It sounds like what you need is a couple of generalised forms/web forms and/or a student driven wiki/knowledge base specific to this lab. The latter is obviously more strenuous to implement, but might pay off in the longer term if you are going to be teaching this course for several more years.
As for the forms approach, a stickied post on your forum with clustering like below might be a good starting point:

general interface issues: can't log on, can't work out how to find x/y/z command
execution issues: errors and their likely resolutions
other: can't find results, stylistic questions about approaches etc

Within each section you can indicate steps for them to proceed through on their own, both in resolution of specific issues outlined as well as in general, while also providing a format for a question if that doesn't solve their problem. This approach can address your goals simultaneously: showing them how to formulate technical questions properly, requiring a modicum of thought and problem solving to proceed and transferring knowledge with less burden on the teacher for the generic queries, freeing you up to spend more time on the specific or advanced ones!
To answer you more specifically: I think it is reasonable to require that the effort put into the question at least equals the effort required to answer it. Asking if they have tried the solutions in the FAQ or other questions should be a standard first response to such a vague question, then using logs/user to steer a dialogue to reach a solution. I think a good benchmark for focus/specificity would be 'could I help them without omniscient access?'

Thanks, but I already do most of this. I still have students posting very vague questions (they don't bother to read the FAQ or past questions); my question is whether I should answer them, or make them reformulate their question until it is specific and focused.

Gotcha, it might be worth expanding your mention of the course forum to indicate it includes such provision to prevent similar suggestions. To answer you more specifically: I think it is reasonable to require that the effort put into the question at least equals the effort required to answer it. Asking if they have tried the solutions in the FAQ or other questions should be a standard first response to such a vague question, then using logs/user to steer a dialogue to reach a solution. I think a good benchmark for focus/specificity would be 'could I help them without omniscient access?'

Thanks, I have done so. Perhaps you could add that last bit of your comment into your answer :)

Future academics are not able to phrase a comprehensible question and your solution is to give them first-level support treatment? Don't think that's wise. They want to learn.

I have added my comment to my answer for visibility.

You should recommend your students that before posting a question they should REALLY try for themselves to solve it out; and at the end if they send you the question, ask them to submit all the details to you. So questions like "my program does not run" are not acceptable. You will see a change in their attitudes.
Also remember that in the way you can get some questions that maybe will seem silly to you, but they are learning; and that is a process. I bet if you ask some question to another professor or a renewed researcher maybe your question will seem also silly to them.
Bottom line, try to give the advice that I told you in the first part of this post, and remember that your task is teaching for now; and that requires patience and skills (which you will get in the long run)
Good luck!

Well, I have recommended that they ask detailed questions. Students feel free to ignore these recommendations :) the question is whether I should enforce it by making them supply more details before I will answer their question.

@ff524 - I'll assume those recommendations are spelled out somewhere in writing, in a syllabus, or in an announcement on your LMS, or someplace like that. If that's the case, I would recommend a nudge, by answering a question with a question (one that ends with some positive spin). To "I can't login, please help," my answer would be, "As it specifies in the course guidance, I need specific information in order to troubleshoot your problem. Please look over that guidance [and I might put a link here], and then ask your question again with sufficient details so I can provide the help you need."

Should I risk the actual course goal (delivering content to the students) in favor of a general educational goal (teaching them how to ask questions)?

No, and you don't really have to.  (Though the goal definitely is lofty.)
It is certainly frustrating when people offer no context or appear to make no effort in the question, because that makes it more difficult and costly for you to help them.  You also seem to be in a position where it is expected of you to help them to the best of your ability, so ignoring people may not be an option.
When helping people in general, I find two strategies especially helpful:

Assume ignorance over malice/laziness.  For all we know, the students are computer-illiterate.  It takes experience and knowledge to know what context is relevant and what isn't.  Computers are magic!
Frame any questions as you asking them for help, rather than telling them that they failed to provide information you need.  Avoid sarcasm or jokes at their expense.  ("Sure, I'll just scroll through a couple of days of network traffic to look for failed login attempts.  Not too many of those, right?")

Is there a way to train students to ask better questions without making them feel like I'm not helping them?

To prevent it from feeling like a brush-off, show that you care about solving their problem by leaving the door open and offering an inviting hand.  Do refer them to standard texts that you or your institution have provided, perhaps even quote a relevant part if possible, but do not end the reply there, because it will appear as final.
Give it your best guess, even if your best guess is a sort of standard response, and solicit extra information from them if it doesn't resolve their issue.  Ask specific questions that you may need, like user name, estimated time of the problem, and let them know that this sort of information helps you find and diagnose the issue for them.
Some (most?) people won't write back to you.  That's okay.  Perhaps the problem was temporary and resolved itself.  Perhaps they solved it.  Perhaps a fellow student helped them.  Or perhaps they really have given up, and you've done what can be reasonably expected.
Examples:

I can't log in to the website, please help.

You'll need your XYZ user name and password to log in to the website.  If it's been a while and you've forgotten your password, our FAQ (link) gives instructions on how to get a new one.
Do you have an idea about when you tried logging in?  Did you get an error message?  This will help me find anything in the logs.

When I run the experiment, it gives me an error. Can somebody help me???

If I can find out what experiment and what error! :)  Some of the more common issues are listed at our FAQ (link); did you take a look there?
If the FAQ doesn't address your issue, could you let me know what experiment you are having issues with, and what the error message is?  That will help me narrow down the search.

In teaching martial arts, what we expect from a new student, and what we expect from an experienced student are completely different.  Even a student experienced in one style, is not expected to be of the same skill as a student of equal belt or rank, when they change style.
The methodology here, as applied to your situation would be as follows...
Ask the correct question, along with providing the answer.  Over time, the expectation is that there will be fewer times when the correct question will need to be explained and more times when it will be asked in the first place.
Something along the lines of:
The question you asked: "blah blah blah"
The place where the question is answered: document, memo, FAQ, whatever
The question you should have asked: "how do I do Xxxx?"
The answer: "insert tab a into slot b"
The first couple of times each person gets the whole answer.
After that, you start removing lines of the answer.
Telling them where the answer is, and make them go look it up, is the first step.
Over time, you get to the point where you just parrot back bad questions, with no additional response.  In the case of "good" questions, you provide both the answer, and some sort of recognition of the form "this was a good question".
The hard part of this sort of approach, is remembering to reset your expectations with each new batch of students.  Remembering that each of them will arrive at the level of competence at different times.
Hope that helps.

+1 for the "remembering to reset your expectations with each new batch of students." It is the same whether you are grading homework assignments or answering questions on an online forum. As you (the teacher) learn things, the basics become "obvious," but each new class is starting from where you started from oh so many years ago. Nice answer :-)

I think you'll teach them a valuable lesson if they learn that when you start writing, nobody knows what you're asking about. You have to communicate that. As you've observed on StackExchange and we've probably all seen at work from time to time, a lot of people struggle when it comes to asking detailed questions or just describing what they see vs. what they wanted. They can get better at everything by improving this skill.
They'll only think you're being deliberately unhelpful if they realise that you can solve the problem without any further information. And if they know that, then you can't conclude from what they write that they're bad at asking questions. If I know that you know which experiment I'm working on and what I typed, then it's pretty reasonable for me to write, "why didn't my experiment work?", and I don't think you can really "teach me a lesson" by "making me do it properly" and not seem obstructive. If I don't know that you know that, then I should know better than to ask such a vague question. If I know you can find it out but it's time-consuming for you to do so, then there's a lesson in there somewhere about being respectful of other people's time, but I can't say whether this is the place to fight that battle.
Aside from this, the process of asking a good question often solves the problem because you spot your own mistake. They might benefit from learning that too, and solving their own problems might reduce their frustration with the system since it turns it from "something that never works and ff524 has to sort out" into "something that's difficult to use but I can make work".

Here is a bit of real world, non academia experience.
We sell a software package to school districts - funny that.  When a problem occurs, I'd say maybe half of new clients tell us about it in an actionable way.  We get emails with nothing more than "it doesn't work" all the time.
Now, this is a hosted service and we maintain some fairly detailed logs.  So we can usually reconstruct exactly what was going on at the time of the "problem".  However, that takes time and we typically don't go that route unless we are talking about either an irate client or an issue in which the client couldn't possibly give us the details.
Instead our support people reply with a message such as "What were you doing? What was your expectation?  Approximately when did it occur? Here's how to send a screen shot..."  It takes maybe a couple times of that before that client sends us the needed info the first time.
The thing is, they are busy so their first instinct is to fire off a general query hoping someone will just take care of it for them.  However once they realize that we aren't going to do anything without details then they learn that the fastest way to a resolution is to gather those details to begin with.
The key is to simply be polite.  I'd think the same thing applies to students.  They are busy with several classes.  As soon as a roadblock occurs in one they are going to raise a flag for help and move onto the next thing.  If you consistently require them to provide details up front then they will learn that the fastest way to resolution is to get those to begin with.
tldr;
It's not a problem specific to academia.  Rather, it's a more generalized problem based on how much work everyone has to do combined with the hope that someone else will just take care of it.
That said, some people just won't learn.  For those, especially in academia, I wouldn't put forth any more effort than they are willing to as they need to be responsible for their own education.

All this is a life style preference.
What do you have the attention span for? There is no "right way".
How do you want things to happen.
Answering inconsiderate questions leads to only one thing, more inconsiderate questions.
The only way to significantly reduce the number of inconsiderate questions being asked is to get a reputation for low tolerance to them. Many people fail to consider what information is useful or required to supply an answer when asking. Why bother thinking when you can use someone else's brain at the price of only moving your mouth a little?
Most people take the rude approach when they get bored of this, which is just as useless. I use the sarcastic. Last time someone walked to me and asked me what I was doing when I was making a salad in front of their eyes I said, "Building a vegetable based space ship, what did you think I was doing?"
For the persistently annoying people you can add a sour note: "Here's the salad, want some extra cyanide to go with your lazy question?" (and you put a bit of salt when you say it).
When I have the attention span for it, I say "try to answer your own question from my perspective..."  They then ask it again and realise that they need extra information to go with it. When they've made this extra effort you can then choose to answer their question.
The shortest way of doing this is using one word "Define?", "How?" , "Why?" ... mostly people understand they need to rephrase or add detail.
In any case there is no polite way of doing it. You will always find people unhappy about YOU not going out of YOUR way to solve THEIR problems. Makes no difference if they could solve them by applying a brain cell to the task for 30 seconds...
You no doubt have co workers who get asked way less broken questions. Observe their behavior and emulate or integrate.
Regards Helen.

In class there are always good students and not so good students (I know you are teaching an online lab, but still). Do you feel that even goods students are having problems formulating questions?
If only not so good students have that problem, then it is probably a case of laziness or not care attitude. There is no much you can do about that. If you try they'll probably just get frustrated. And they probably can ask very good questions about something care about. [I think this is the case].
If even goods students have that problem, you should explain that their future co-workers or people in online-communities would not be able to help them, if they don't provide more details, and therefore they should provide more details in questions. Good students should pick it up quickly.

The "good" students ask detailed and focused questions. But I'm not going to write off the "not-so-good" students as lazy or uncaring - it's my job to teach them!

@ff524 A "not-so-good" can be so because of lack of natural ability or because of their attitude, I feel like if they don't put enough effort to form a good question it is the latter. I think it is really hard to help somebody who doesn't care. This is just my view. And if you can do it, Awesome!

So, you are advising to answer the question as is without making them go through the exercise of writing a "good" question? (Just trying to clarify)

That's what I would do.


text:
Where to publish research if I do not want a peer review process?
I have a few papers, one of which is on a topic that, after thorough checking, has not been researched from this particular angle before.
My question is where can I publish this without going through peer reviewed academic journals? I only have my undergrad, and am looking to publish the work to make myself competitive for a PhD finance program. The paper is on real estate finance.
I just need a quick- one, two, you're published! Will finance programs look highly on this, or will they ignore it completely?

Publication typically is much more highly regarded if it is peer-reviewed. I am not always sure that this is justified, but that's the way it is. So, what's the point of publishing without peer-reviewing, if it's for your application? If, on the other hand, you want people to know about the result, and it's scientifically sound and scholarly written, you could try arXiv, if it's mathematical in content (e.g. finance mathematics).

The purpose is time mostly. I need to apply to these programs by Dec. 15th, and I don't have the time, or the money to go through the refree process. I am really wondering if it better just to save my work for more vetting in a PhD program, or if it would help me stand out if I published it on something like arXiv.

PLOS ONE may be a suitable venue. Submissions are generally only excluded for publication if the paper is of poor quality, rather than of little importance.

The easier it is to get it published, the less helpful it will be for getting into grad school.  Anything like "a quick one, two, you're published!" will not be valued, because if anyone can easily do that, it tells you nothing about the author's qualifications.

Beware of journals that dont have a peer review process!They are generally full of garbage, and they are VERY BADLY seen in academia! Better nothing than something in a predatory journal!

@Moriarty - while that is true, PLOS still has review and takes time.

Don't you have to send a writing sample with your application? If so, if they are seriously interested in your application, they'll read it. (And if not, it doesn't matter whether they read it or not.) Every PhD programme I applied to required a writing sample. I don't know if this varies by discipline, however.

I hear /dev/null has no peer review process.

@Moriarty Does Plos accepts paper on topic that aren't biologically related?

people look highly on published work because it is peer reviewed

@Devin "I don't have the time, or the money to go through the referee process."  I don't believe it costs any money to have a paper published in a well-respected peer-reviewed journal.  Of course it's true that it does take time.

@AriBrodsky some well-respected peer-reviewed journals cost money to publish in

A blog would work

This seems to be a classic X-Y problem. What you want is fast publication and you've decided that no peer review is the way to get that. As the answers explain, it most likely isn't a good solution.

"…a quick- one, two, you're published!"

That's not how it works.
What works is:

Make it a publicly available preprint (online repositories like
arXiv, a preprint series of some institute, university, maybe via your personal website or blog…).
Submit to some peer reviewed journal that complies with papers that are available as preprints (and there are journals that do not cost you anything; you will not get "open access" for free, but in many cases the preprint can stay freely available).
Put the paper in your CV and add "submitted for publication".

Then the paper will be visible and checkable and it also shows that you know how scientific publishing works.

To the real question behind this, "will such non-peer reviewed papers count towards getting into a PhD program?", the answer is "probably not at all" (I'd be interested in proof that you can do worthwhile research that is regarded as such by people knowledgeable in the field, i.e., reviewers), "and it might even be harmful" (it looks an awful lot like trying to game the system, and cheating in any form is frowned upon).

I'm not really "game the system;" I think it would be explicitly apparent that my research was not published in a peer reviewed journal. But I may just attach my un-published papers as proof that I can do research effectively, as others have pointed out. I will also likely submit this paper to a peer reviewed journal.

@Devin, then get them published as e.g. a technical report or something like that.

@Devin, the problem for beginners is that just generating a document is not really persuasive that they "can do research effectively". Admissions committees are not usually inclined to read all the documents that come their way, but would prefer to have the "vetting" done by others, e.g., referees. (I am not such a fan of refereed journals, don't get me wrong...)

@paul Can they reasonably expect this though? Finance journals (respected ones) can often take years of vetting before getting a piece published. Is it normal for undergrads to be touting published pieces in respected journals?

@paulgarrett: True, but then, "just" generating a document (that looks and reads like a publishable document, in style, grammar, orthography, choice of words, and structure, upon the first attempt without many iterations of remarks and revisions) is something that an awful lot of STEM students at the Bachelor level seem to be hopelessly overburdened by. As such, I could see why peer-reviewed or not, the mere existence of one or a few such documents could be a slight plus.

@O.R.Mapper, yes, if it could be created to meet those minimal-superficial standards. Even so, I doubt that admissions people would be eager to look... Couldn't hurt to send such a thing, I guess, unless, by mischance, it did not in fact meet such appearance-standards, and made the applicant look like a crank? Better to have it vetted by someone...

@Devin, although I'm not acquainted so much specifically with "finance" journals, no, I'd not expect that an undergrad to have gotten something through the refereeing process. (Calling it "peer review" makes it sound better and more idealistic than it really is.) If you want to send an un-refereed paper as part of your applications, have some more experienced person check at least the superficial aspects: format, language, citation style, tone, and approximate general correctness... to avoid gaucheries. :)

You could put it on your blog, but it will probably be ignored. Part of the point of peer review is to help make sure that what you have published is new knowledge and not just a rehash of old things. So some experts in the field are asked to check. There are other reasons for peer review, but those might not be relevant here. Why do you want to avoid it?

Again, it's a timing issue. I put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into this particular project, so I would rather not muddy the water by publishing it online without peer review. But if it will help me get into a top PhD program, it may be worth the sacrafice.

Perhaps you can submit it as a Technical Report of your Alma Mater? You would need to ask your previous supervisor (or someone else) for support, though.

I don't see how peer review muddies anything. If you want to keep the value of your hard work, I'd hang onto your results until you can publish them properly. A non-peer-reviewed "publication" unless it's in The Economist or Financial Times isn't likely to help your PhD application very much. If you can condense it down and get it published as an editorial in a periodical, then it might help.

No, you've misunderstood. I was saying that not getting it peer reviewed would taint my work, but I am running up against deadlines. Thank you though, that answer was helpful in making a decision.

Taint, probably not, since it doesn't make it worse. But not getting it peer reviewed will certainly make it less valuable for PhD applications.

A Technical Report sounds like the least bad option so far.

I strongly advocate against this solution (beware, unethical scientific behavior), just answering part of your needs.
There exist low-standard journals (predatory publishers), that publish "anything": they claim they have peer-review, but you just have to pay fees and bam, your paper is published in a (so-called) journal and often  open-access.
If you are lucky, your targets won't bother or won't check the quality of the journals. And you will get the payback of your investment in low-standard publishing.

Should be taken as a warning, not a recommendation

I hope I have been clear enough

And - if you're unlucky they will check and decide that either - you're gullible, or you're trying to trick them.   I wouldn't take a student who had published in such a journal.

Of course, misconduct has downsides

@Joel I have hired a postdoc whose first conference paper was in one of these spam conferences. It was a mistake, he was not supervised, and did not know. He was a great postdoc. I'd suggest asking the student first before making a decision

This already has a lot of suggestions but if you have research you are thinking about making publicly available without peer-review, consider https://www.journalunpublishedresearch.com/.

Publication without peer-review isn't really publication, in any real academic sense. Might as well just print it up and send them a copy, or stick it on a web site.

It is literal publication. It's not status-enhancing "publication". I shudder to think that "in any real academic sense" would exclusively refer to status-enhancing activities, disjoint from literal publication and accessibility of the fruits of academic labor.

But just doing something and putting it out there is meaningless. Peer review exists in part to make sure people don't just turn out garbage.

One problem is that if OP publishes "without peer review" (except for a technical report or an informal preprint on e.g. arXiv) the paper can not be published formally (with peer review) later on.

I recommend github or something similar.  It is a format that is more conducive to collaboration.
Graduate committees are not going to consider this to be research, but it does show research interest.  This should count for something (though probably not much).
Way more importantly, the sooner you get started collaboratively researching the better.

Self publish
There are several open-access and open-source initiatives and websites. You are now able to self-publish at different websites.
Open access publishing
You could upload it on Zenodo and/or ResearchGate. The additional benefit of publishing it at Zenodo is a permanent DOI link referring to your uploaded PDF. If you update it in the future with another version of your document, that link will always point to your newest version.
Zenodo is a European initiative of several European organisations, and everyone is free to publish there in an open-access and open-source way.

I would caution that while this is indeed "publishing" in the more general sense, it is not what academics usually mean when they say "publish". I would describe something like Zenodo as an "archive" or "repository" rather than a publisher.

@BryanKrause You're right, they call themselves: "Zenodo is a general-purpose open repository" but you can also request peer review at so-called communities and those are usually educational institutions, European or American organisations or universities.

I wouldn't really call that peer review. Anyone can create a Community on Zenodo, and a Community can decide which works get associated with that Community. It doesn't mean they are peer reviewed in the sense of academic peer review (which involves having an academic work reviewed by relatively impartial peers), it just means that whoever created that Community (or the people they designate) can decide which items deposited in Zenodo can be grouped into that Community.

For example, when you become a PI with your own lab, you could create a Cavdar Lab Community and have your graduate students submit all their papers there as a way of organizing papers from your research group. When someone from your lab submits a paper to your community, you would review and accept it; if someone else submitted a paper to your community, you would review and reject it because that would defeat the purpose of keeping an organized community of Cavdar Lab papers, not because you deemed the work shy of academic standards in your field.

You would also want your lab members to submit their work to academic journals so that they would go through the academic peer review process, because your Cavdar Lab Community is just a way of archiving and organizing your lab's work, not "publishing" in the academic publishing sense.

@BryanKrause Thank you so much for your explanation. I didn't know this.

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


text:
"Official" grade conversion is skewed at my disadvantage, how to proceed?
I am a Master's student in Italy, and I'm applying for a thesis internship in a lab in the US. To this end, I'm required to send my Master's transcript as well as my Bachelor's; however, in the case of the latter i have a problem with grade conversion.
My institute offers a supplement that is meant to convert grades to their ECTS equivalent (A to E scale, similar to the American one with one additional step); however, they do so by grading on a curve even when the original courses weren't. As I followed a program with an unusual concentration of high-achievers, my (not distinguished, but acceptable) grades average is strongly shifted downwards according to this system (think a hard C instead of B+), yet in Italian grades it's higher than the institute-wise average for Bachelor's degrees (26.0/30 vs 24.3/30).
The absurdity of this system is evidenced by the fact that, for the same exact course and exam , the ECTS grade calculated with this system widely varies according to the different program overall averages, resulting in Italian grades lower than mine translating for other programs in ECTS grades higher than mine.
Regarding my application, I believe this leaves me with a few options:

Not doing anything, and expecting the person in charge of scrutinizing the transcripts to understand that a system translating a 30/30 score as a B is far from perfect
Attaching a note to the transcript explaining what i explained here
Supplying my own transcript with only Italian grades and letting them figure that out; maybe also attach a reasonable suggestion for conversion, like the ones evidenced in the answers to this question

Does anyone have suggestions on the best course of action?

It sounds like a horrendous system, if I’m understanding you right that its translation of grades for students within a single course/exam can depend on the student’s path (=other courses?).  I would suggest supplying just the Italian transcript — however the recipients choose to interpret it, it can hardly be worse (either for accuracy or for your resulting grade) than the “official” conversion.  (Comment not an answer since this is mostly speculation, I have little relevant experience.)

@NajibIdrissi that's precisely the point: I believe the ECTS algorithm doesn't reflect accurately the reality of my situation, and my question is what should i do to give an American professor a better idea of what my grades are "in the wide(r) picture".

If ECTS standard is to reflect percentiles then your university seems to be doing the right thing. How else do you think they should convert the grades?

@CapeCode well for starters the same grade from the same course can be translated very differently according to the student belonging to a program instead of another, which isn't really fair if then students from both backgrounds compete for the same position.

If the reason for your low grades is because you took unusually difficult courses at an especially competitive school, it seems likely an admissions committee will spot that, given they've been doing this for a while.  But as Cape Code points out, it will still matter how you did relative to your peers.  Like it or not, a lot of life is graded on the curve.

As someone who spent several years working in university admissions in the UK, I would suggest that you supply just your Italian transcript to the US university and let them figure out the grade conversions on their own. The US institution should have access to international grade conversion guidelines so it's likely that they'll convert your grades more reasonably than your own university has.
You might want to consider attaching an official English translation from a professional translation company so they can read the course titles etc. in English. Where I worked, we always asked for official translations in English but never for ECTS equivalents.
You can supply them with the supplement (and an explanation) later if they ask specifically for that.