text:
I feel like I got screwed over by my PI? No name on publication
I am an undergraduate student working under a PI in a research laboratory. My PI pushed out a paper very recently, and I was not mentioned as an author. My PI did not even notify me that he was going to publish this paper. I can comfortably say, without inflating, that I did roughly 1/6 - 1/5 of the work. 3 out of the 8 figures (quantitative figures, not just bar charts slapped in Excel) in the paper were created by me for past posters at conferences, including code I have written to do some analysis that was used as a tertiary argument/talking point in the discussions section. My PI is not very quantitative, and being a qualitative field of study, I felt like a gem asset as someone who is heavy into maths and code.
When I approached my PI, he said he felt like my work was minimal (!!!) and he would put me on the next paper, seemingly brushing me off in the process....
I understand as an undergraduate I should be appreciative of this opportunity to be in a lab in the first place, but I think it's more than fair to get credit for substance that went directly into a paper.
What can I do?
I will be applying to graduate school soon and I don't want to jump labs as looking inconsistent. This is a topic I'm interested in. I feel like I'm stuck, though.

While I have no way of knowing whether this applies to you or not, making figures and such might not reach the intellectual contribution necessary to be counted as an author.  This is why Acknowledgement sections exist.  Before deciding on how to respond, think about what your scientific contribution was.

Did you contribute to writing the paper? It is often considered an essential criteria to be listed as a co-author.

It is generally a good idea to discuss issues of co-authorship on the outset, to avoid these kinds of issues. As an undergraduate, you probably don't have much leverage, but at least you can try to avoid unpleasant surprises of the kind you experienced. A word of advice - don't expect people to be nice and fair, and watch your back. (I don't think this merits a separate answer, but if you want to follow up, I'm happy to talk.)

I generally adopted an abundance mindset. Assuming it was a substantial contribution, I would chalk it off as learning experience about an ungenerous PI, and move on. You will learn how to find labs that appreciate your contribution, Don't waste time with labs that don't.

I'll follow up on my comment, as none of the answers go in this direction, and I don't think you're getting the greatest advice.

While I have no way of knowing whether this applies to you or not,
  making figures and such might not reach the intellectual contribution
  necessary to be counted as an author. This is why Acknowledgement
  sections exist. Before deciding on how to respond, think about what
  your scientific contribution was.

You may or may not have made a contribution that merits inclusion as an author.  Some labs/PI's are very generous about this, and some are not, but if your work was purely "technical", my own inclination would be to offer Acknowledgement and not authorship.
Generating figures:  scientific illustrators do this every day as a living (less so these days, but they're still around) and don't get authorship.  Photographers too.
Writing code:  this is a little less clear, and probably depends on direct contribution to algorithms.  If you are, for example, writing code that takes the mean and standard deviation and spits them out in a readable format, that's technical.  If you HAD TO UNDERSTAND THE SCIENCE in the paper to write the code, that would push me toward authorship.  If I could hire a contractor who knew nothing of the research to do it, I'd lean toward acknowledgement.
There's a disconnect here between the your perception of the contribution you're making and your PI's perception.  Just because he feels that your scientific contribution was "minimal", that does not mean he doesn't believe your work is valuable.
You might sit down with him and ask if there's any way you can make deeper contributions to his body of work, or if there's a small project you can really make your own.  Another option would be to use the experience you've gained there to apply for summer research opportunities (depending on what year you're in).
Of course, there are curmudgeons who just won't believe that an undergrad can make author-level contributions regardless of the contribution made, and that's unacceptable.  As I said before, from your description I have no way of telling whether you're dealing with someone in this category, or whether your contributions were of a basic technical level that arguably don't merit authorship.
I can say that many moons ago, as an undergrad, I was doing single-unit neural recordings in spinal cords (running electrodes up and down, listening for neural activity), and building electronic lab apparatus that helped with the experiments, and doing histology.  Some of the rasters I generated were used directly in publications.  I didn't consider that authorship level work then, and I still don't, as any technician could have done it, but it was certainly a valuable experience that helped launch my career.  Now, almost 30 years later, I'm still in touch with the PI of the lab (I was working for his postdoc), and he's been a wonderful advocate of mine throughout my career.
Your PI's recommendation, at this point, should be treated as a valuable commodity, and if you negotiate this disconnect with maturity, that letter will be even better.  Also, the experience you gain now will give you something real to talk about during interviews, which is also incredibly valuable.
Directly relevent: What are the minimum contributions required for co-authorship
http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html

This is a very good answer. I will only add that, if you still feel you should have been a coauthor, you should discuss the details with another senior professor familiar with your branch you can trust. Tell them exactly what you did, and they should be able to tell you if your contributions were enough, insufficient, or borderline.

+20 Excellent analysis.

Forget about the first paper, it is already done.
Be clear up front that you want your name on the second paper, and that you are willing to take on any additional work necessary to be given authorship.
Having good references is more important than a couple of papers, so don't jeopardise your relationship with your supervisors going after authorship.

Disagreed on the relationship part in this instance. This is how exploitation happens. This is an injustice at best and a sign of more exploitation in the pipeline at worst.

There are examples of people not jeopardizing their relationship with their supervisors for years until they drop academia out of despair. Sometimes, a good paper will make more for your career than a bad PI.

This is several years late but I have to reply because the replies have irked me here.
You said you suggested a quantitative means of analysis, and you said you produced posters, which I assume you were an author on.
So yes, you should have been a co-author in my humble opinion. Maybe not a main author though.
Research fields and journals are different. There are research fields that are relatively small and lesser impact journals where it’s typical to see only a few authors in total. Then there are nature papers with many more authors and collaborators. In the latter, people get added as authors for acquiring patient samples or sadly, even political reasons.
So yes, it’s okay to feel disappointed here. In my humble opinion, if you contribute a figure or bespoke code that positively impacted the paper, you should be a co-author.

It's not clear from what you have written whether "created the figures" means that you generated the data, or just that you made graphs of data that the PI handed you.  If you actually generated the data, then you definitely should be an author; otherwise, authorship is questionable but you should at least be mentioned in an acknowledgement.
From you you have written, it appears that your name is not on the paper in any way.  This is definitely improper.  Moreover, even if somehow the PI thought there was a reason that your name should not be on the paper, they should at least have come to you before publishing to talk with you about this fact.
The fact that this has not happened means this person does not have your best interests at heart, and that you are likely to be exploited in a research relationship with them.  I would thus recommend:

Leave the research project.
If there is another PI who you have a trusted relationship with, inform that PI of what has happened so that somebody else will know and so that a record of this behavior can be established.  Don't do it in an accusatory manner, just explain that the PI published a paper that included your work without acknowledging it in any way.  Say that feel this is inappropriate scientific behavior, and are therefore seeking to work with a new advisor.
Find somebody new, and clearly establish conditions for authorship before you begin work with them.

This seems impractical to me. The asker needs strong recommendation letters and since the damage is done with respect to the publication, they should do everything possible to maintain a positive relationship even while pursuing other opportunities for future work.

I would alter (2) slightly - simply ask the other academic for advice, in an open-ended, non-accusatory manner. They might offer to speak to the PI, or explain some strange departmental rule governing undergrads in the lab, or offer to write the amazing reference letter, or simply give some great advice. However, they are in a position to actually do something, while we here can only give advice.

These recommendations seem over the top to me.  Aside from not knowing the exact situation in enough detail to see what applies here, "generating data" does not imply intellectual contribution sufficient for authorship.   Tens of thousands of lab techs generate data every day, and are not considered for authorship.

I also think this is too hasty. It is not clear that the present PI has bad intentions, it would be unwise to burn bridges so early.

The code was not a mean and a standard deviation. It was applying a metric him and I discussed TOGETHER as a way of measuring something. He didn't approach me and say, "Hey, write code to test X". It was more of a joint discussion on what constitutes a "hit" in our case, and then me implementing it. He couldn't have hired a code monkey to do it because it required an interdisciplinary knowledge of the situation.

You have been treated unfair and if you ask me you should look for a different opportunity instead of getting stuck in the same work group for grad school. Switching fields or the work group doesnt necessarily looks inconsistent but can also be considered as a broader array of interests or competences.

could you explain why you think it unfair? it really depends on how large the intellectual contribution in the "figures" was. you don't get authorship for drawing figures, typesetting tables or compiling reference lists.


text:
What is normal pay in U.S. for RAship in STEM field?
I am a PhD student in statistics/math in the U.S. I go to a large, state run institution. I am currently hired for the summer as a research assistant for a professor.
On the department website, an RAship is listed as being a 20 hour a week job, paid at $21 per hour. This is what she and I agreed to before my starting researching with her. However, now my professor wants me to work 40 hours a week for $7.34 an hour. (She is actually going to pay me $14.68/hr, since only 20 hours are bookable for legal purposes. Well, and the fact that $7.34 is below minimum wage). I never got the $21 in writing, so that is my error.
Working 40 hours per week is in essence requisite to retain the job (since the workload she requires to keep the job necessitates such). She is offering me no dissertation credit for my work, only this pittance of a grunt wage. Outside of a weekly hour long meeting via Skype, she does not have any time to mentor or guide me. Her promise is that at some point the research I do for her will become a dissertation topic. But, as of right now, I am just reading papers she is too busy to read and then telling her what they say.
This professor is not from the U.S. and I believe is somewhat unfamiliar with U.S. practices in fair wages. (For example, she offered me $10/hr to do some other things related to her research for her. I earned more than that as an undergraduate TA for a sophomore level class). I am not asking for $15/hr for flipping burgers, just a fair compensation for the work I am doing for her. She has a large NSF grant that she might end up losing if I do not produce results for her to show them.
She justifies requiring these hours at this pay because she says that I will end up possibly, maybe, hypothetically, if the moon lands on earth, theoretically finishing a third of my dissertation.
I am aware that I need to pay my dues so to speak. Naturally, I know that I need to put in a lot of time to a PhD that is not monetarily compensated. Nevertheless, I feel a bit like I am being taken advantage of. Is this pay structure/workload normal for an RAship, or should I take it up further with her?

Weird accounting is normal. Being paid $1175/month as a math PhD student in the US doesn't seem normal to me (though I'm not in math).

In Germany, this used to be quite normal. If you can make use of the work done here in your dissertation, consider it contributing to your dissertation activity (i.e. a kind of "studentship"). If it does not help you with the dissertation, then the situation is different, of course.

I never got the $21 in writing, so that is my error. -- Sure you did. It's right there on the department web site. If you object to the terms your advisor is offering, refuse the RAship and find another advisor.

How does she justify going from 20 hours a week at $21 per hour to 40 hours a week at $7.34 an hour? It seems to me she should be paying you at least $10.50 per hour, for theoretically 20-hour weeks that are really 40-hour weeks. She is probably violating the department's pay guidelines, and if you contacted the department's HR person you might get a raise. I know I couldn't get away with violating my department's guidelines that way. Possibly they have you down as working less than 20 hours per week.

I only have two US experiences to offer for comparison, one from a public university and another from a private.
The public university pays it's TA/RA's ~$8000 for a 9 month stipend.  The private university pays TA/RA's $19,000 before taxes for a 9 month stipend.  Both have stipulated that the expected workload is 20 hours a week.  While the public university pays significantly less than the private university, the hours for a pure math graduate student rarely exceeded 20 hours per week (new teachers sometimes spend more prepping, but any hourly help session positions were strictly 20 hours).  Paywise, I think the rate you're being offered for a 20 hour work week is not unheard of, especially for a public university.  However, being told you actually have to work 40 hour weeks means you're working for a rate less than the legal limit.  That certainly counts as getting screwed in my book.
Personally, I would say run like hell.  I know that academia has a history of overworking/underpaying graduate students, but I would find an alternative arrangement even if it means finding another school to attend or delaying a year.  Another consideration is that working 40 hours a week makes it difficult to actually do well in your studies and it wouldn't be ridiculous to consider picking up a side job just to make ends meet (meaning you're potentially working 60+ hours a week).  If you enter this arrangement, I suspect you'll be back here asking how to deal with burn out or how to recover from a mental breakdown from stress.  If you seriously want to be successful in your program, you need to find something better.

Being given a TA/RA position that only pays for 20/hours a week, but being expected to do 40+ hour of research is normal in the STEM fields.

Is it normal to only pay $14.68 per hour for 20 hours in STEM fields? Not that I am trying to money dig this lady, but I hold a large stake in the success of her $300k NSF grant. The hours are perhaps understandable if I can get some of my dissertation out of this.

While I agree that the hours are pretty typical, I'm not convinced that the pay is. Is it really normal to get under $1200 a month in stipend? I know a graduate student who gets more than twice that much for a TAship.

@Vladhagen the money seems a little on the low side, but I don't know how much math PhDs are normally paid or what the standard of living is for your school. I believe most schools have a set hourly amount and your professor should be paying you that.

It might be normal, but it's wrong to offer more and retract. It's also definitely wrong to offer less than minimum wage and make it up off the books. Neither may be strictly illegal, but a verbal contract is still a contract. Unfortunately, raising a stink about it will probably cause more damage to one's career than it's worth to one's fellows by trying to break the prevailing system by reporting the problems to the Department of Labor. Asking for more than 40 hours and not paying overtime, unless one could argue STEM PhD students are exempt, is definitely illegal and should not be accepted.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
My PhD advisor keeps asking me to revise the last manuscripts from my phd thesis in a very limited time
I have graduated last year and I sent my advisor the last manuscripts (In last May, which was actually the fourth revised version) to my advisor to review for journal publishing. She gave me the feedback in August, when I was also busy with finding a job. But still, I tried to give her feedback in around two weeks, by sacrificing my rest time, just because I want to get it done soon so that I don't need to work with her anymore.
But then, she did reply to me after a long time. Actually, I knew at that time she was working on another manuscript (not mine). That's understandable. I obviously won't ask her to put my work as her first priority. Then in November, she suddenly sent me an email (which she also sent to my new email address from my new workplace --- another university where I am a postdoc). At that time, I had just moved from the old place to a new place (different state). I needed to unpack things, buy new stuff, organize the home, and also my new boss asked me to write some proposal. I was crazy busy at that time, so I told her that I am currently busy. I cannot complete it very soon. Then she started sending emails to me every day. In ten-days! to both old and new emails!
I just ignored it and did the revising when I had free time on the Thanksgiving holiday. I finished all the revising (she always has a lot of comments, tons of comments... takes really long time to revise). Then she disappeared again. She did not reply to me in December, January, and February... I asked her when will she be available to review my work. She said she will do that soon. But then no feedback.
Then until now, at the end of June, she finally starts to work on it. She sends me the first part to revise and asked me to revise the figures. There are about 10 comments on one page! And she told me she hopes to submit it at the end of July, which is in three weeks! After six months when I almost forget all the details of my work and I need to reread and re-remember everything!!!
I would be very very very happy to get it done and submit it in July, but I am a human, not a robot! I have also a lot of postdoc work. And I have another two projects in my previous school with other professors, which was also needed to be done in the summer as we planned.
The thing that upsets me most is that she can decide if she wants to work on my paper or not. She never considers if I am busy if I have other schedules or at least asks me what my plans are or targeted reasonable submitting time. She can just ignore my work for six months, but now suddenly she asks me to finish it in 3 weeks without being paid by her???
I was not paid by her actually from the last whole year of my Ph.D.!
Everyone in our lab/department knows that it is hard to work with her as her student. she is kind to other people's students, but not to hers.
I don't know how to reply to her email now. If I just say okay, I will revise them soon. Then she just takes it for granted. Actually, I will need to work 7days a week for the whole month if I have to finish all the things. If I mentioned this to her, she will also be upset. She never feels sorry about asking her students to do things that are unreasonable.
BTW, I am a girl too. I know only one of our masters ( a boy) knows to say no firmly to her. And it still does not work.

I think everyone will agree that this situation is not fair to you. However, I don't see a question here, either. What are you asking?

"she will also be upset." who cares.

Send a polite, concise, short mail to your former advisor, asking if she agrees in submitting the paper in one month time.
Whatever she answers, submit it as it is, without her if she did not agree, with her if she agreed (but without waiting for further comments).
Do not worry about your professional relation or burning bridges with your former advisors: you are doing a PostDoc, it is unlikely she will end up being a reviewer of a proposal of yours (since you have a past connection) and she will think anyhow you are a pain in the neck because it is taking you so long to finalize the paper from your thesis (do not take it as a moral judgement from my side, I am just reporting how selfish advisors are seeing their PhDs ... it is almost funny. Almost).
So it is the time of playing nice, but with yourself only.

Side note: you do not need to take into account all the comments she gave. You are the main author, it is up to you to decide and comment. "I can't include this comment because of lack of time" is a perfectly fine counter-argument, among responsible persons, but with a selfish advisor there are no reasonable counter-argument, just give the less time-consuming argument for you and don't bother about her answer.
If her contributions were very important, but she does not want to be a co-author, there is the acknowledgment section.

And do not even think about keeping her good for reference letters&co: given how much she cares about your time and how much she valued your work (no pay for one year), she will not spend more than 5 minutes writing it, probably hinting at your defects (because she is clearly one of those objective, neutral advisors striving for excellence in science, ignoring the fact that scientists have this defect of being persons, such an unlucky occurence).
A reference letter from any of your current colleague would be much more relevant.

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


text:
What are benefits of writing a survey paper?
Currently, I am in 4th year of my Ph.D. and my area of research is very big and quite active. Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, no one has ever written a survey paper that could summarize the important results of the last 20 years. A few survey papers that I have found till now, span a very narrow variety of results.
I have made a notebook for myself where I have written down all the major results that I have encountered through my Ph.D.. I find it very useful from time to time; for example when I write the introduction of a paper or look for an open problem in the area. I keep updating the notebook whenever any new result appears.
Right now, I have enough knowledge to write a survey paper. And, I would have to study a bit more to make it more complete. But I am finding it wasteful. I think that writing such a paper would only benefit other researchers and not me since I already have my personal notebook with me. Also, I think, I would be wasting my Ph.D. time writing a survey paper when I could be solving my own research problem.
Are there any self benefits for writing a survey paper? If so, maybe I can get the motivation to write one. Thanks!

Benefits for who, exactly? Yourself? Potential readers?

@Buffy Yes, benefits for myself.

For yourself, it helps provide a clear picture, improve your writing skills (especially if you write with another experienced author), and gain a better appreciation of good surveys.    A good survey paper is a massive effort to write, even for an experienced author.  In my area,  many  articles are written by a 'team' of people.

"I think that writing such a paper would only benefit other researchers and not me since I already have my personal notebook with me."
I do not understand your reasoning. Isn't that the nature of all research publications? That is, the researchers already know the results of the research, so they do not publish to teach themselves something new--they publish to share their knowledge with others. Why would a survey paper be any different?

@Tripartio By writing a survey paper, I am not solving any new problem. And, conferences in my field do not accept survey papers, only journals allow that. And, people in my field are most judged by top conferences (SODA, STOC, FOCS). Moreover, a survey paper is not adding anything to my Ph.D. thesis.

I'll assume you're doing PhD work to train yourself primarily, preparing for your later career. If you're looking for worldwide recognition for a survey paper, well that's likely a mistake. But being able to organize and simplify your thoughts and perhaps add a bit of maturity to your understanding of your field, well, writing a survey paper can help a great deal in that direction. In the end it's your decision where to invest your time and energy.

In many fields, well-executed literature surveys are widely read and widely cited because they help a lot of researchers not have to retrace the steps of the survey authors. Readers can quickly benefit from getting a big picture of the domain and then be guided into specific articles to dive into according to their specific interests. This is a very valuable kind of research contribution.
So, the primary intrinsic benefit would be that you would be providing a valuable service to your research community. By "intrinsic", I mean a benefit that is its own reward--in this case, the satisfaction of sharing helpful research.
For extrinsic benefits that would justify the time and effort (that is, indirect benefits that lead to other things that might be valuable to you), a well-executed survey article would be widely read and highly cited, so your number of citations would go up. For this reason, a highly reputed journal would like to publish such an article, since they want those high citations. High citations in reputable journals should generally be good for your career.
All that said, it would be good to talk to a more experienced researcher in your field to get their assessment of if your ideas would indeed be valuable and appreciated, since it is often difficult to assess that yourself, especially if you are a junior researcher.

Thanks, Tripartio. It seems that a survey paper does add to the career in a long term.

As a publication, the result might be a minor item, but for the practice of writing clearly it might be very valuable when it comes time to write up your research, and beyond.
I'm assuming that this is in your major field, and even in a fairly small subfield. In such a case, writing up what is already known will help firm it up in your mind, and in some fields (mathematics) might lead to additional insights into the subfield and even additional research opportunities for when you finish your degree.
You are doing well, by the way, in keeping a notebook. Writing is more valuable than reading for helping your mind work retain ideas, integrating them, and extending them. An idea in your notebook isn't the same as an idea in your brain, of course.
Of course, it shouldn't be a distraction from your dissertation, and it need not be.

Thanks @Buffy for the answer. I agree with you. Can you please also tell if writing a survey paper be anyway helpful for career?

Probably not a big factor, but if people read it you might get a reputation.

If you're going to be in an environment that "evaluates" research by counting citations, then the value of a good survey article is increased, because it's likely to get lots of citations.

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


text:
What options are there for main research contributor who doesn't agree with the order of authorship on a manuscript?
Long story short. I was the first author of a research manuscript submitted but rejected previously. I am the main contributor of all stages of the research from planning and research question to running the entire analysis, writing up the report and manuscript, and presentation. Since I left my previous job, someone took over. However, it was the unspoken assumption that I would be still the first author for the next journal submission. When I received the slightly changed manuscript which is primarily based off of my original manuscript, I found out that I was pushed into the second author position. What are my options?
I am going to confront my previous team since the current first author only oversaw the research at high level and has not written neither the first nor the second manuscript. I feel putting this person as first author is an offense of academic integrity and ethical standards. Do I have the authority to block the publication of this manuscript if this is not resolved justly?

Before "confronting", I would try to find an amicable return to the old agreement. Once you "confront", returning back to a mutually agreeable conversation may not be possible. That does not mean that confrontation is not an option, but it's definitively up the escalation ladder.

A good reminder for future readers to make sure plans for papers are explicit when you leave a position.

Technically, yes. All authors must signal they are happy for a paper to be published before it can be submitted. Some journals will require specific acknowledgement of this from each author, others rely on the communicating author to accept this on behalf of the other authors.
So in theory, you could just say "I will not authorize the publication of this paper until I am first author". If they submit it anyway, you can write to the journal and say "I am not happy for this paper to be published with me as an author". Don't say why, because almost all journals have a policy on not weighing in on authorship disputes. Just say, I am an author, and I don't agree with it being published.
There are several risks to this. The primary one is that you are removed from the authorship list entirely. This, in theory, would be a pretty outrageous case of academic misconduct, but your only recourse would be to complain to the communicating author's institution, and try to get them to start a misconduct investigation. This would probably be long, protracted, bruising for all involved and would be far from guaranteed to find in your favour.

I did upvoted. I won't to add that it happens often. Albeit not very ethical, it can have practical reason. OP: If you feel that Academia isn't in your scope, you could let it be... But my answer would be more or less like this one. Perhaps I would add that you can try to fix it with the group. They might just have assumed that first coauthorship is not as much important for you, at this stage. Let them know isn't the case.

To summarize, there are three options. Someone can relent so all agree. They can continue the discussion. Any of them can block the paper. But they need to agree if they want it published.


text:
What's the benefit of pursuing PhD research at a foreign university vs staying in the home country?
If I work on a topic and in a field that is also available in my home country, then why stay in a foreign country?
For example, I work in computational materials science. Many researchers in my home country work in this field. If the quality of work is the same in my home country and in a top ranked university in the US, what's the incentive in pursuing research for 5-7 years in a foreign country, living away from family and suffer from loneliness/homesickness?
Assumption: The advisors in the US and in the home country are of equal reputation.

Sometimes in the Academia mobility is evaluated "very good" just for the sake of itself, without adding any decent thought to it.
In fact there is no point, as you say, unless you feel the reputational burden of considering worthwhile things only if coming from the medieval but highly technological country of the USA.
On the other hand, being immersed in a different scenario for prolonged times really help lateral thinking and motivating oneself and to put at ease its own inner person. We as persons are constantly changing.
Considering your situation, you do not need to move abroad to do that, but you better leave the door open for some extended period abroad during your PhD, something like 3 or 6 months in the US. Keep your eyes open for scolarships allowing that, or discuss it with your potential PhD advisor at the interview stage (later is too late ... you need to put already on the table the discussion about reserving funds, evaluate them in at least 1000eur flights + 1000/1500eur per month above your salary for an US stay, and time for that)

I think I agree to the sentiment of this answer, but maybe not really the way you phrased it. I think there are indeed very good reasons mobility is evaluated as very desirable in Academia (benefits of being exposed to different research culture). The problem is that the profile of an average PhD student and academic has vastly changed from the system originally geared towards a bachelor Oxybridge academic (or one with a partner that runs the household while the researcher... frolics), for whom mobility did not include great life sacrifices, but was more akin to an adventure. (continued)

So biggest anachronism really is that very frequently requirements for mobility are formal, immutable, irreplaceable and consider candidates without context. Mobility as become a proxy for the skills one could obtain through mobility; if you are lucky, you will actually get evaluated on those skills (adapting to new environments) which you may demonstrate in whichever way. If you're unlucky, a 3-6 month internship/exchange might not be sufficient to tick a box.

On top of agreeing with the answer by EarlGrey about mobility valued for the sake of itself, I'd like to add that there are sometimes specific grants available only if you're coming to country A and only if you haven't been working in country A for the last N years. In the case A is your home country, doing a phd in a foreign country and intending to come back makes you eligible for these grants, unlike the case with doing a phd in your country.
Of course, yet two other obvious points are the (1) availability of phd positions and the level of competition for them (if any), and (2) salary (or stipendium) which can be very different even across Europe.

reg (2), remember that 1500 € in Poland can be good, in Delft they would be below poverty level. I mention that because sometimes stipendium are even higher, but without any social guarantee attached (i.e. unemployment benefits, quite useful after your PhD, often used to close the thesis in Germany, or at least they are psychologically good if you have to leave your PhD because of personal/working issues with your supervisor).
Money have always a relative value ;)


text:
German Fachhochschule (university of applied science) degree validation in USA and other countries
I'm currently trying to start a bachelors in Germany as an international student. However, I have to decide between going to a normal university or a so-called Fachhochschule. According to what I have found, studying at a Fachhochschule is more job-oriented and practical instead of theoretical. So that's what I like more.
After finishing my bachelor, I would like to continue my studies in Canada or the USA. I am unsure, though, if I can continue with a masters or PhD in the USA with a bachelors degree from a Fachhochschule. Does anybody have any information or idea? Is the Fachhochschule degree valid in the USA or other countries like Canada?

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/34457/68109

From my personal experience both in the US and in Europe, a Fachhochschule will be seen as technical education and not equivalent to a Bachelors. I believe there is a now a route to convert your Fachhochschule degree to a Bachelors equivalent, but don't remember the details or if its true. Personally, if you are thinking about further education, I would go the Bachelors route, since the Fachhochschule will limit your further options.


text:
Should I cite the citations made in a quotation in the bibliography as well?
Should I cite the citations made in a quotation in the bibliography?
Here is a fictitious text illustrating the situation:

The authors Dupont & Albert (2019: 23) recall: "The resources of the
country started to plummet at the end of the first era (e.g. Paxton
1982; Hurlish & Planck 1976; Deplon 1967)."

Here, my citation is (Dupont & Albert 2019), so it should of course be in my bibliography.
But what about the references made in the quotation from (Dupont & Albert 2019), that is : Paxton 1982; Hurlish & Planck 1976; Deplon 1967?
Should they also be in my bibliography?

Why wouldn't you? Also, perhaps you could name a (wide) field?

Why are you citing a secondary source? Is there something to be gained by citing Dupont & Albert? In my experience you would cite the claims themselves directly, not secondary authors who are themselves citing the claims. In general, you don’t cite a resource just because you first read it there; you cite it so that your readers can follow the chain of knowledge, and secondary sources disrupt that chain.

Potential duplicate of https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/24424/17254

The main reason for quoting Dupont & Albert would be if you are specifically analyzing their argument and their use of evidence (e.g. if reviewing their book). It's not clear from the question what you're doing.

I have started to write an answer, but then decided it is mostly covered by other SE answers. TL;DR: only cite Dupont & Albert if it adds something to the original sources (https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/4899/crediting-sources-one-has-found-citations-from, https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42440/is-it-okay-to-incorporate-a-block-of-citations-from-a-review-paper-into-my-own-p). The prime example would be citing survey papers, although the 40-year gap makes it a bit unlikely in this specific example.

More apparent controversy here: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/65670/should-i-cite-a-paper-for-its-literature-review/65706#65706

(The paper is in the humanities, language sciences) Thank you all for your answers. If I remove the quotation, and just paraphrase the text as "The authors Dupont & Albert (2019) recall that the resources started to finally disappear", I guess there is no need to include Paxton 1982; Hurlish & Planck 1976; Deplon 1967 in the bibliography?

@Stuart F, The illustration I gave is more about the structure, not the content. About the content, in my situation, the author (illustrated in my question by Dupont & Albert) makes a general statement about a stance that is hold in the literature (illustrated in my question by Paxton 1982; Hurlish & Planck 1976; Deplon 1967).

The answer to your question will almost certainly depend upon the referencing style of the particular journal that you are writing for. For example the 6th edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association says in section 6.09, page 173:

Do not omit citations embedded within the original material you are quoting ...

but then:

The works cited need not be included in the list of references (unless you happen to cite them as primary sources elsewhere in your paper).

Despite the APA instructions there will doubtless be other referencing styles or journals that make a different choice.


text:
What is most gracious way to exit a doctorate program?
I've made an internal decision to leave my doctorate program of 3.5 years. The reasons are many, but the major one is that I have realized that I don't need a doctorate to fulfill my career dreams, and that I am at a point in life where I prefer to start a family and build my marriage with my husband. I'm a more conservative girl in many ways, so some may not understand, but that's ok. I own my values 100%.
I got married to the love of my life who is also a PhD student about a month ago. He is defending in about a month from now and has a job offer in another state. I am younger than him in both age and my graduate progress. If I were to stay in my program, I probably would defend in about 1.5 to 2 years.
To me, at this point, it is simply not worth it to stay. I have learned so much from my program and the field I'm studying and am extremely grateful to be surrounded by a network of highly motivated talented scientists and engineers. However, there has also been tremendous toll taken on my mental health, and I dread the 60 - 80 hour work week that is required to be "successful" in my field.
So I have made my decision to leave with my masters after I wrap up the project I'm currently working on. But does anyone have advice on how to go about telling this my advisor without marring our professional relationship?
She doesn't see it coming, and I don't think she'll fully understand my reasons, but this is a necessary conversation to have.

Have you read the other questions tagged [tag:quitting]?

Whether you can do this without marring the professional connection with your advisor depends more on who she is than on how you go about telling her (yes, the conversation is necessary). Do thank her for helping you learn all you have.
Your commitment to wrapping up your current project is important.
If she's the kind of advisor she should be, she will wish you well and tell you she hopes you resume your research some day and keep in touch, even if she does not fully understand your choice.
(I like your SE handle.)

And, face to face is best.

This doesn't address the question you ask, but is more long term advice from someone looking back, rather than forward. For a good answer to your actual question, see that of Ethan Bolker here.
You may find in coming years that you wish to return to academia and continue doctoral studies. It might be after your children are grown, but it might be sooner. If your spouse gets established then it might be possible to manage studies and family and all the rest. Finishing a degree later (or even late) in life can lead to both satisfaction and a career. That was the path my former spouse took and she wound up doing very well.
But, if you take simple steps now it will ease your return should you later desire it. At this moment, you could talk with your current advisor about keeping in touch in case you later want her assistance. If she thinks well of you she will be more than happy to do this. Do the same with others in your circle, especially those who helped you get in to the current program. Some people will write a letter for their own files with important information.
If possible, keep in touch with these people. Let them know about your life (kids and all) and whatever you then see your goals as. Too many people lose touch with those who would be happy to support them but tend to forget over the years.

The last paragraph of this is exceptionally good advice in general and I wish I had had it 10 years ago!

It's great that you are asking about this, because it shows some concern for your advisor.  Students sometimes do not appreciate all the hard work that goes into advising a PhD candidate, so it is great that you are cognisant of this, and you want to be gracious to your advisor as you exit.
I think you will find that most academics are understanding of changes in students' career choices and life goals, and we appreciate that our own career path is not for everyone.  Your reasons for leaving sound fine to me, and you needn't be worried too much about defending them.  Life and marriages and love are important, hopefully not just to conservative girls.
I would recommend that you go and speak to your advisor face-to-face and let her know your change in goals and let her know that you appreciate all the work she has done with you.  I don't usually recommend that students buy gifts for advisors, but if you wanted to buy some flowers or a nice box of chocolates to say thank-you, it might help to soften the blow of her losing a student.  In practical terms, if you have any outstanding projects/papers, your advisor will be interested in knowing what you want to do with them (particuarly if you are writing any joint papers) so you should be prepared with a plan for answering this.  In terms of leaving without marring your relationship with your advisor, the most important things will be to be thankful, show your appreciation for her work with you, and try to arrange things in a way that minimises any inconvenience to her in relation to the projects you are working on.
If I understand correctly, it sounds like you are converting your program to a Masters program, for which you have satisfied the requirements.  That is the best way to do it; if you can leave with a lower credential (instead of no credential) then that is obviously much more satisfying.


text:
Is it possible to resubmit a manuscript to the same journal by a different author?
I received a response from the editor in chief saying that he cannot recommend my manuscript for publication. But he encourages me to address all the 4  reviewers' comments and resubmit a substantial revision.
The manuscript was submitted the first time by the "second" author who used to be my PHD supervisor 2 years ago. Actually, i am the first author of this manuscript and would like to resubmit it by myself to the same journal. Is it possible to do that ?
I will keep the same authors and the same order as the previous version.
PS : I finished my PHD 2 years ago.
Why do i want to be the corresponding author ?
I have done all the job regarding this manuscript : writing, idea, simulations and corrections. During my PHD, I had too much troubles with my PHD supervisor. He even told me one time that if he modifies my manuscript he could put himself as the first author.
When I finished writing my manuscript, he offered his help to submit it to the journal in order to save time (because I had a full time job in a company). I accepted but told him to send me every update regarding the publication process. He didn't do that and didn't answer my emails. He waited 4 months to submit it without any modification or correction. Actually, he tried to delay the submission as much as possible so I give up asking about my manuscript.
Now, he is asking me to send him the corrections but this time I want to take in charge the resubmission to the journal.

The editor will likely question the removal of an author.

I don't want to remove any author. i will keep the same authors and order.

OK, misinterpreted the 'I want to resubmit it all by myself' - you want to be the corresponding author. That is not an issue at all.

Yes i want to be the corresponding author. Are they going to choose the same reviewers as before ? How are they going to know that it's a resubmission ? The answers to the editor in chief and reviewers should be adressed by email or in the personal profil of my advisor ?

They know it is a submission of a major revision because you tell them that in the cover letter. Whether the editor chooses the same reviewers or not is up to them.

If all authors agree, and the required revisions are made, then the one who submits it need not be the same.

As far as the journal is concerned, your paper was declined (if I understood you correctly) and the next submission will be treated as a separate paper (even though the journal may know it's a new iteration of an old paper and it may still get the same associate editor and reviewers). This paper may have different authors, substance, or whatever -- it's a completely different manuscript, so anything goes. Whoever does the "submitting" is not important: in some places papers are still submitted by departmental admins who have no other relationship with the authors.
Having said that, from your personal perspective, the situation is tough. It's really the conflict with your advisor and how you can resolve it. Perhaps your advisor now thinks that the paper needs substantial improvement and that's why he wants to retain control of it. He probably thinks that there's something good in it (that's why he wouldn't just remove his name from the list of authors and allow you to do whatever you want with it), but at the same time, he may see some issues, so he also doesn't want to have it published in its current form. This situation is as old as the academic world, and the only peaceful resolution is to somehow settle your personal conflict to the level where you can productively collaborate on the paper.

If the advisor has a valid claim on authorship it would be misconduct to remove them as an author. Probably plagiarism. The journal would object if it knows, which it might, due to the earlier submission.
I think you would be wise to work this out with your advisor: who is author, what order, etc. It they decide to let you publish as a sole author you still need to give them an acknowledgement.
Who submits is much less important than the authorship question. That is more an administrative question than one of conduct. The only real issue is keeping some sort of good relations with the advisor (if possible).

Why plagiarism ? i am not going to neither remove any author from my manuscript nor change the order. All i want,  is to take in charge the resubmisson process.

It would only be possible plagiarism if you removed an author. But to take charge this is not an issue. I'll clarify a bit. (Your "by myself" led me astray.)

I hope he will let me take the corresponding author role. It's not only an administrative question but also a matter of trust. Delaying the process and lying to me, makes me doubtful.

There's clearly a conflict of interest here and it might clearly affect your reputation (if by chance, not your academic profile/publication). However, the way out will be to either ask your advisor to submit it or solve this matter with him first.
Then and only then, the matter of resubmission is to be taken into consideration.
If you're resubmitting to the same journal, it is best to address all the concerns raised by the authors during the rejection of the article when you submitted earlier. That in essence, gives EIC an understanding of your positive intent in improving the paper to a newer version. Although, it does not necessarily guarantee the chances of the paper getting accepted. But it surely is a best practice.
Even if you're to submit to any other journal and you already feel that the concerns raised by the reviewers earlier were up to the mark and in the best interest of your paper. Even in that case, it'll be great to address each concern one by one and improve the paper which will surely positively affect the paper and its acceptance chances.


text:
Which is better: to achieve my master degree in usual time or use extra time to prepare myself for a PhD?
I am currently a master student at UFMG, a university in Brazil. I am at my last semester (out of 4) and, due to the pandemics, it was given to us the possibility to extend our study for one semester.
Here goes some details: I'm studying Homotopy Type Theory (HoTT), I have a scholarship, I'm  a bachelor in Physics, my grades are OK, I have completed my credits and the only thing remaining to get my master degree is to finish a dissertation. I have attended to graduate courses such as Advanced Algebra, Complex Analysis, Algebraic Topology and some others less relevant ones.
I can finish everything in the usual time if I want to, but I really would like to use the extra time given to us to read more interesting stuff, attend to some extra advanced classes, prepare myself a little bit more to engage in a PhD.
The thing is: what do you think is, in general, more valuable in regards to a PhD admission process, to finish all my duties in the usual time or to have some extra advanced classes in my transcript?
For instance, my department will offer a course on Homotopy Theory, which is quite relevant for the area I am currently studying (HoTT).
Thank you.

I suppose it might vary between different countries, and I have no idea how things work in Brazil. Here in Europe, extra classes would probably have some value, while the fact that you finished earlier - not so much. If you could start some actual research activity it would also be quite helpful in your application.
Another aspect is that when applying for a PhD you might need reference letters from established academics, and maybe you could use this extra time to impress someone and make sure the letter you'll get will be stronger.
Of course, all this neglect the financial aspect of this decision, but since you mention you have a scholarship, maybe this won't be a problem for you.

You could also consider a hybrid plan, though I don't know if it is possible where you are. But some places you apply for doctoral studies before you finish your earlier degree. You might be able to do that, depending on timing, and make a final decision depending on what you hear from places you apply to. If it looks promising, just file for graduation. Otherwise plan on spending the additional time on some other appropriate tasks. Research is good, as is advanced coursework.
In the US, at least, it is typical to apply for a doctorate with still about a year to go in the bachelors. Decisions are contingent on successful completion, of course. Similar for those completing a masters prior to the doctorate.


text:
NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, how much input from one's own advisor is ethical?
I know someone who recently got the fellowship and unfortunately everyone else in his circle of friends and colleagues are complaining that he got an amount of help and input from his advisor that they feel was unfair.  (He was the only fellowship winner in his group.) My friend is currently feeling like crap because of these hurtful comments, instead of getting congratulatory comments.  He admits to being lucky for having a caring advisor but he also worked extremely hard on his application.
What amount of help from the advisor is bordering on unethical, when it comes to the NSF GRFP application?

This is not quite a direct answer, but has a bearing on this and similar issues:
If the grad student is able to learn from their advisor so that they can write a better proposal, isn't that a good thing? Or, facetiously, is it required that somehow advisors should not impart useful, insightful, expert information to their advisees?
(Amazingly-to-me, some of my colleagues have said so to me, indeed, that it is unethical to give one's PhD students any help on their thesis work, for example. It was not possible to have a sane further conversation about what "advisor" meant, under such hypotheses...)
Also potentially confusing: there is much mythology promoted on the internet that gives the idea that 20-somethings (perhaps especially in STEM fields?) are "all grown up", and will very shortly become world experts in whatever they're doing. This is horribly invidious, in many ways. E.g., as a corollary, surely one's advisor cannot really help much (not that decades of experience might help: the main miscalculation entailed by inexperience seems to be the failure to appreciate the advantages of experience...) ... and then as a logical distortion of that, one's advisor _ought_not_ help. (Since they can't, anyway?)
In my observation, many talented, smart people waste far too much of their energy by attempting (often for egotistical reasons) to be prematurely intellectually/mathematically "independent" of "old people" (=faculty). In my own direct experience, going to a very good graduate program in math helped me overcome the notion that mathematics was "a good vehicle for ego", even for the very best mathematicians. That is, learning from (and respecting) other peoples' efforts is perhaps the premier skill one should desire.
E.g., if one can pay attention to experienced experts well enough to write a fellowship-getting proposal, one is succeeding, not only money-wise, but in terms of assimilating the larger mathematical culture and expertise. It is absurd to object to this. It would be more to-the-point to consider the relative failure of advisors who decide... for whatever reason... to with-hold such guidance. (Teachers who don't teach? Advisors who don't advise? Etc.)
Still, yes, I know, there are popular beliefs that are at extreme opposites of the above.

"Amazingly-to-me, some of my colleagues have said so to me, indeed, that it is unethical to give one's PhD students any help on their thesis work, for example." This made me smile, if only at how differently people in the same profession can think.  I think they have an epsilon of a point, in that there are some ethical issues involved in the wildly differing amounts of help (both intellectual and professional) that students get from their advisors.  Still...self-serving much?

@PeteL.Clark, yes, there is a bit of a point, that senior people should not simply use junior people purely as amanuenses/cat's-paws, even though a great degree of that is the whole idea of mentoring! But in all the particular cases, such remarks did not bear on those possibilities, but were most likely rationalizations for laziness and irresponsiibility... as alleged virtues.

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


text:
Can MS be done with full scholarship?
Although graduating from a low ranked college I was able to become research associate at a well known research institution. My work there provided me with three research papers.
Is there any possibility of getting a full scholarship for a MS program?

How common it is to get scholarships for graduate work is highly field-dependent.  (In some fields, if you don't get a scholarship, they are really trying to tell you not to come at all.)  If you provide more specific information you will probably get more pertinent answers.

@Pete L Clark. My field is  computer vision and image processing.Do low ranked colleges provide full scholarship?

I did an MS in math.  My tuition was waived and I received a stipend that was enough for me to live on (albeit very cheaply).  In return for this I taught one class of either business math or college algebra every semester I was there.  I think everyone that was there with me at the same time was on the same deal.
It shouldn't be hard to get this information from the school or schools of your choice.  If they have a program like this they probably recruit for it.
This might be different from what you are asking, since it more or less involves working for the money, but for anyone that needs a way to pay for a Master's degree, this is definitely a way to explore.  I can't say how common an arrangement like this would be outside of mathematics, however.
You should contact the school(s) you are considering attending and find out what kind of arrangements are made there.

Yes of course.  I personally had a full scholarship for my MS.  Even more specific, for example, no one from MIT media lab can be accepted WITHOUT a full scholarship (http://www.media.mit.edu/admissions/faqs) .  Your full scholarship is based on how much the university/professor/department needs you.  If you have the ability to perform at the level of a researcher or PHD student, there is no reason they would not want to pay for you to be working there.
Of course, this depends on both school and country.  Some places may have specific rules on how you can have a scholarship.  It may be contingent on teaching assistant or research assistant positions.


text:
Writing Sample for Graduate School
When submitting a writing sample for a graduate school application, what exactly are review boards looking at?
I ask, because when looking at my own writing I find it is difficult to judge beyond the grade I was given and when I can judge, there are different strengths and weaknesses.
For example, writing wise (clarity, concision, etc.), my strongest writing sample is on a topic that was written for a course in my field (Art History) but is still relatively tangential to the field itself (about visuality rather than Art History per se). That being said, topic wise, I have a paper that was written on the same topic as my fourth years honours thesis (still a work in progress) that speaks to the areas that I want to continue studying. It is still a good piece of work that received an A grade, but I personally feel that the writing and organization is weaker.
Which is better to send as a writing sample? The more on topic, but weaker piece, or the stronger tangentially-related piece.

Could you share what discipline your are applying to grad school in? Certainly a chemistry program will have different criteria they are looking for than a history program.

I am applying for an MA in Art History.

I am only familiar with the humanities through my wife. When she reads writing samples for admissions she seems to talk about the quality of the research, organisation, and clarity. She doesn't seem to care about topic so much. It seems many Art Historians change their topic area early on during the PhD process in the US.


text:
Are Master's becoming required for USA PhD programs?
In the USA, many universities enroll PhD students with BSc degree. I think this is the classical scheme, which remained in the US universities. In many countries, it is almost impossible to enroll in a PhD program without MSc degree.
I am curious how is the trend for MSc programs?
At least in the USA, do more universities allow PhD enrollment with BSc degree or those allowing are shifting to MSc requirement?

I'm not super familiar with the mechanics, but I always heard that the master's degree was traditionally the "booby prize" awarded to students who had failed to complete the PhD.

@PaulProgrammer: Not so, in most of the cases I know. Stopping at MS is often the additional-study-but-not-pure-research path, engineer rather than scientist. And in some fields, an MS is considered a Terminal Degree.

PaulProgrammer, with regards to master's degrees being "booby prizes" that's pretty rich for someone with an MBA listed on their website resume. ;-)

@PaulProgrammer Maybe in the US, but it's generally impossible to get into a PhD program in Europe without having your master and doing your PhD is really only done by the small handful of people who actually want to go into research. Having a PhD won't help you much if you're looking for a job outside of research or academia.. having instead 3 years of actual work experience will be much more valuable.

At least in my field (mathematics), every US PhD program I know of accepts students with a bachelor's degree.  I see no sign of this changing.

Same in computer science.

In physics, doctoral programs typically admit students with bachelor's degrees.  Some programs will award a master's degree partway through, usually upon completion of coursework and successful defense of a research proposal.  A master's degree is also a graceful way for a student who wants to leave a PhD program early to do so.

I disagree with the statement that a MSc is some kind of a door prize. I'm sure that this does happen but I don't think that it is set up that way. A certain amount of coursework is required as a part of the doctoral evaluation. A subset of which generally overlaps with the requirements for the related master's degree. Conferring the master's just recognises the work that has been done.

I didn't mean to imply that an MS is a "door prize."  There are respected programs in physics that end in a master's degree, and some students leave one doctoral program with a master's because they are interested in working with a professor somewhere else.  However students who get an MS and PhD from the same department typically earn both degrees for research on the same topic.

In the field of biology they don't require a Master's. When I interviewed with top Universities, it was pretty uncommon for the candidates to have a Master's degree. Everyone did have a Bachelor's though.


text:
If I have an academic dismissal from a school should I ever go back there?
As a 19 year old I had to withdraw from a university because of depression. However, at the time, one professor refused to let me withdraw and gave me an F. On the strength of that grade I was dismissed from the university.
I got myself together and went to DePaul and graduated Cum Laude. Now I have received an offer for an assistantship (full ride) and a stipend from the university I had to leave as a young student.
I want to teach at university level and will someday be sending transcripts on to a PhD program from my MA. Will the dismissal show on my transcript? Will it matter? I appreciate you help and input.

Ph.D applications typically ask for transcripts from all undergraduate institutions you attended, so the question of whether the withdrawal will affect you is generally independent of whether or not you go back to that school.
That said, it's extremely unlikely that it will impact you negatively; your subsequent good work more than makes up for it. If you absolutely feel that you need to explain it in your statement, I would not spend more than a few words and be vague (after taking some time off to deal with a health issue, I transferred to DePaul where....) However assuming your subsequent work is good enough to stand on its own (and it surely is if you were accepted to the master's programme with scholarship) I would advise not mentioning it at all.

I'm going to answer your question for a general case (i.e. not the school that you are applying to but what happens in most cases).
A drastically bad mark in your curriculum is much better than a mark which is just bad. To make it clear, allow me to clear my point with an example. In my country the max you can get from an exam is 20 and anything below 10 is fail. I somehow was absent during an exam an as result, I got 0.25 for my final mark (0 is was not acceptable by the software system).
When I was applying for post-graduate studies, that 0.25 was a concern. But the fact is, the committee easily understood that this mark is somehow a particular case, they simply asked me about it and it was dealt with within 5 minutes.
The point I'm trying to make is, an inhomogeneous result in your career automatically tells that it is a particular case and it does not necessarily represent you. Moreover, post-graduate committees are more into your recent career rather than a dark point in your teenage years. Proceed with self-confidence and above all, with honesty and you shall prevail.

Usually from what I have seen, as long as you can explain yourself and be honest, you should be good. A lot of good places look at the drive you have towards your goals and fortunately professors these days are getting out of the "only-grades-matter" attitude (albiet slowly).
Please do what you want to do instead of pre-empting what may happen. I wish you all the best.


text:
Is there examples of mathematicians who had to lose years
Is there examples of mathematicians who had to lose years before proving themselves in the field? I'm asking since in most of the cases I noticed a steady career path for most of the mathematicians.

By lose years, do you mean have 'unproductive' years?

No!! Productive, but not involving in any outworldly matter, just improved their skill on their own.

Perhaps an older example than you're seeking, but my favorite mathematician! http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Biographies/Weierstrass.html

Yep. I forgot about Weierstrass. He had loosed 4 years during college. Any other example?

what does "not involving in an outworldly matter" mean ?

Yitang Zhang seems like the most noteworthy example in recent years.

@AnonymousMathematician that's the example I was thinking of as well.

There was the Cultural Revolution in China.  One mathematician later joked about the 10-year gap in his record...he was in the countryside working on a collective farm.

Should this be a community wiki?

Persi Diaconis?

A large number of Mormon mathematicians have taken time off for a 2-year mission, including Jim Cannon (a founder of geometric group theory), Stephen Humphries (found minimal generating set for mapping class group), and Tyler Jarvis (recent Annals paper on string theory). Very little time is spent on math during a mission.

Vladimir Berkovich, as he writes "I finished studying in 1976 and got a Ph.D. a year later. Getting an academic position would be too much luck, and the best thing I could hope for was the job of a computer programmer at a factory of agricultural machines... As a result, I practically stopped doing mathematics." The context here being the he was Jewish in the Soviet Union and made trouble for him. He did not really start working on non-archimedean analytic geometry until 1985 and then did not really return to academia until 1987 when he was able to emigrate to Isreal.
The quote is from his introduction to: "p-Adic Geometry: Lectures from the 2007 Arizona Winter School" published by the AMS.

Not a theoretical mathematician but John P. Snyder was trained and employed as a chemical engineer. He came up with a map projection useful for a United States Geological Survey (USGS) satellite-based mapping system (Landsat), then was hired by them as a cartographer. He published several more map projections and recast others to take advantage of electronic calculators and computers.
He was over 50 when hired by USGS.


text:
What's the point in a "list of figures"?
What is the point in a "list of figures" in the following cases?

Masters thesis
Ph.D. thesis
Academic (text)books

A list of figures allows one to find the figures contained in a book. This could be useful, for example, when you want to quickly find one of the figures you recall seeing in the book, but you can't remember which page it is on. You could also use the list of figures when buying the book to see whether it has lots of figures or only a few.

"I know they had a figure of those results somewhere..."

To add to Dave Clarke's answer, especially in large publications, like the ones you mention, having a list of figures can be very helpful. E.g., a researcher cites a particular finding from a doctoral dissertation, which has some 100 pages and 20 figures. In such a case, researchers usually mention the figure's number. To the reader of the researchers article a list of figures in the dissertation would make locating the referenced figure much easier.

Of course hyperref makes life with PDFs so much easier...


text:
As an undergrad student, how should I ask a professor for an opportunity to do research with them?
I was wondering what I should do in this situation as an undergraduate student:
About a month ago, I applied for and did not get into a program that allows first-year students to work on research projects that professors put forward, with the intention of introducing students to research, which included a research stipend, housing, etc.
I was very interested in the professors topic of research, and was wondering if it would be okay for me to ask the professor for the opportunity to work with him essentially as an unpaid intern, as I would really like the opportunity to learn more about the topic.
Would he view this attempt to do research under him as desperate? Or would he appreciate the opportunity to have an extra research assistant?
I know that the answer would depend on the professor himself, and on my relationship with him, but how do professors in general feel about students coming up to them and asking to be a part of their research?

Absolutely, with no qualifications, approach the researcher and ask what it would take to do research in his/her lab. As a first-year undergraduate student, it's very likely that you don't have the knowledge to contribute to the projects. So approach humbly, asking what you can do to prepare yourself. Ask for suggestions for a review paper or a few research reports that would bring you up to speed. Ask if you can attend lab meetings as a fly-on-the-wall to absorb the controversies and decisions being made day-by-day. The very worst possible case is that you're told, "no." If so, you're already there. Next worst is that you invest your time and get only an education out of it. That's not so bad. You'll be positioned very very well for next year.
Good luck!

Personally, I am always happy to talk about possibilities for working in my  research group with a student who's interested in the group. The challenge is that most first-year students might not have the background to understand what's going on in the research, so they end up being more "technicians" than researchers.
So I don't think it's a problem for you to discuss the possibility of doing the "internship"; your university may even offer an opportunity to get course credit for it as an "independent study." However, you should be prepared for the possibility that the professor feels you're not quite ready for the work—but he may definitely suggest ways to overcome that deficit.

Here's another option: email or talk to one of the professor's graduate students. By working with the graduate student, you'll be working with the professor anyway.
For context: I'm a computer science PhD student at a large United States research university. At my school, most professors are bombarded with emails and requests from undergraduates (in addition to, of course, PhD and masters students, and postdocs). Indeed, my PhD advisor told me that he/she gets about one email each day from an undergrad requesting research opportunities.
I've worked with roughly 20 undergraduate researchers to some extent. About half of them got in our lab by emailing PhD students, who then recommended him/her to the professor if the undergraduate's resume exceeded a certain bar. The other half emailed the professor directly, but often in those cases, the professor ended up forwarding the undergrad's resume to the PhD students. While I don't have hard statistics on what this is like throughout my entire department (let alone university) I think this is a common strategy that students pursue, and the one I would begin with if I were back in my undergraduate days.
As another positive note, sometimes graduate students' research websites are more up to date than those of the professor's!

It is worth noting that etiquette in approaching a professor to discuss research opportunities can vary by institution. At the university I currently attend it is considered extremely poor form to approach a professor out of the blue and ask them if they have any opportunities for research. This includes professors you are taking a course with -- rather, it is expected that you will work with your advisor to go through established channels to find research opportunities.
At my undergraduate institution this was not the case, and reaching out to professors to discuss research opportunities was strongly encouraged. I suggest discussing this with your academic advisor and seeing what he/she thinks just to be on the safe side.

I am curious why this is a poor in your institution? Is it because of the culture of the country where you live? Please elaborate

It's just part of the culture and processes of the institution. I believe the intention is both to avoid the embarrassment of a student getting "rejected" by the professor for being unqualified to do research, as well as to protect a professor's time by ensuring that any research applicant has been "vetted" by their advisor to being a possible good fit.

There are basically two strategies to get a research opportunity in university. By
excellence or by motivation. For both situations, you have to find a way to show your excellence or your motivation to the professor. Working as an intern for him is a good idea. It gives the professor an opportunity to know more about you. If you are excellent enough, the professor will ask you about your plan in the future (to see if you're going to pursuit a PhD, probably with him), show his interest in you or even offer you research position in this team.

This is not particularly useful advice. I am interested in students who are motivated more than insisting on academic excellence!

the professor will approach you if you are excellent enough — [citation needed]


text:
Are there US universities that do not need GRE and TOEFL score for admission in PhD in Mathematics?
I have completed my Bachelor's degree (3 years) in Mathematics and pursuing MSc(2 years). Currently I am in final year and expect to obtain MSc degree in next May. I am willing to do my PhD (in Mathematics) in USA.
From the information obtained from my seniors and friends, I found that most of the USA institutions ask for GRE and TOEFL score. But are there universities of USA which do not need GRE and/or TOEFL score for admission in Phd in Mathematics?

I do not know why you want to avoid those tests, but I do know that those tests are generally just score "good enough" requirements. Furthermore, I'm willing to bet that most of the places you would want to do your PhD in the USA require the GRE; you would be severely limiting your opportunities. You can apply to both types of schools, but only submit the GRE to the schools that require it.

Shopping questions are not allowed on SE sites, I have therefore removed the parts of your question asking for lists of universities.

The only time I have heard of a US university waiving the TOEFL requirement is for students who completed their undergraduate studies in the US (I believe there is usually a minimum number of years the candidates had to have been in the US enrolled in the undergraduate program)

@AruRay I think you need to look at the program-specific requirements. I had no formal education in the USA prior to applying for a PhD program, but the program I picked said "TOEFL is required for international applicants whose native language is not English and who have not studied full-time for one uninterrupted academic year at a university-level institution in which English is the language of instruction and in a country where English is a dominant language." which exempted me.

I could be wrong, but the last time I helped someone going to the States, the TOEFL requirement was partially because of visa's as well.  There was a section in which the sponsoring party (the univ.) had to claim the english skills were good enough to accomplish the purpose of the visa.  Through some special situation it was possible to have faculty write-off on saying the person could speak english, but I doubt that would be standard at any university.

The truth of the matter is that while you may find many schools that do not require the GRE, virtually every US school is going to require either the TOEFL or a similar test such as the IELTS.
The reason for this is that one of the important criteria for admission to most US graduate programs is the ability to do coursework and interact with fellow graduate students and faculty in their lingua franca, which in the US is English. Consequently, schools need to ensure that the students they accept have a certain level of proficiency in English before they enroll. (A number of grad school admissions officers have mentioned that they blacklisted candidates from certain countries because of problems related to fraud—candidates would hire other people to conduct telephone interviews with universities in the US, and the actual candidate would come with hardly any English whatsoever.)
So, for most schools, you will find it a requirement to be able to speak the dominant language of instruction—and not just in the United States. (For instance, all students at our university must show the ability to speak either German or English, depending on the program to which they apply.)

Avoiding the tests is a false economy. If your English skills aren't good enough to pass the test, you're unlikely to do well in an English-language graduate program. I've known a few cases where students' language ability isn't up to scratch, and it never ends well.

The ability to speak English fluently is also tied to funding. Most mathematics PhD students in the US are funded by teaching assistantships. But many universities, especially public universes like mine, require a certain minimal provable level of English proficiency to be allowed in front of any classroom.

I think you should change your strategy for choosing a doctoral program.  That is, determine which programs would provide you with the best training for the work you want to do.  It might (probably will) involve these standardized test scores.  You run the risk of narrowing your choices by starting with these types of requirements.
Also, you stated that you are "willing to do my PhD."  Your decision for doing a PhD should be motivated by your ultimate career trajectory.  I think you should clarify this career trajectory (i.e., Why do you want to do a PhD?  Because it will prepare me for ...).  Then, you should find a PhD program that would be best suited to help you establish this career trajectory.  You don't want to get into a PhD program that is inappropriately matched with your trajectory, even though they don't require GRE and TOEFL scores.  If you have scores that are not competitive, then it would be a good idea to focus on improving those scores.
Bottom line is you want good training.

I wouldn't be surprised if the OP's "I am willing" was intended to mean "I want".