text:
How to organize a journal article with unexpected findings
I'm struggling with how to present a research article. The research questions were along the lines of "Does the difference between X and Y predict Z?" It turns out that the difference between A and B predicts Z better than the difference between X and Y. We explore reasons for this finding in the discussion section. Should the literature review (which comes before the research questions) address previous research on the difference between A and B? Can I put some of that literature in the introduction? Or is it disorienting to then come to the research questions and find that they're only about X and Y, not A and B? Should the research on A and B go in the discussion section instead? The field is education, if that matters.

Are you forced into a particular outline of the work? Can you have an introduction or abstract in which to mention things of importance? More important, since the research questions focused on X and Y do you have anything more than anecdotal evidence about A and B? If you aren't testing A and B, how do you come to "conclusions" about them? Something seems off.

If you actually set out to study:

"Does the difference between X and Y predict Z?"

...you would never be able to find:

It turns out that the difference between A and B predicts Z better than the difference between X and Y.

There's just no way that this conclusion occurs by accident.
At some point in your project, perhaps your goals changed, but you certainly must have studied which difference, A-B or X-Y, best predicted Z, so that's your actual research question for the study.
If you actually also tested C-D and Q-R and all sorts of other possible predictors, you should report those as well. You should definitely make clear what variables you worked with and what your procedure was for testing them, as your study has very different implications if you just kept testing different things until you found one that was "significant".
To summarize and address the question you asked, your framing of the paper should reflect the actual study you did, not the study you wanted/expected to do. You should contextualize all the variables you measured and tested, regardless of the results. You should make clear what results you might have expected for all of those variables ahead of time based on previous research in the literature, including literature that is contradictory. Your discussion should explain how your results, both positive and negative, affect your field and suggest future work. Your discussion should also make clear possible weaknesses in your work, including the possibility that testing multiple hypotheses raises the likelihood that the relationships you find are false-positives (or, alternatively, if you correct for testing multiple hypotheses, how the reduced power in your study makes it likely you've missed some true positives).

+1 Indeed, the description in the question immediately sets off one's HARKing alert.

(Although, following the Wikipedia article that I linked in my previous comment, the notion HARKing might be overly harsh in this case, since the question does not indicate (at least not to me) that OP tries to "[falsely portray] post hoc hypothesizing [...] as a priori hypothesizing".)

Your introduction should preview and motivate your work. Your statement that the literature review comes before the research questions seems like a bad choice in your case, because the previous literature is off to the side of what you studied. It seems to me that a clear way to organize your introduction would be:

It is important to predict Z because [reasons, citations]. Previous researchers have attempted to predict Z using the difference X-Y [citations]. Our main result is that the difference A-B is a better predictor of Z than X-Y is ...

Of course, as other answers have pointed out, you should make should be concerned if this hypothesis was formulated after you analyzed the data. Ideally, you would collect new data on (A,B,X,Y,Z) and see whether the superiority of A-B over X-Y held up in the new data.
If this isn't possible, you should at least analyze how many different pairs (A,B) you could have considered as predictors and do the appropriate statistical analysis to make sure you aren't making the error of this XKCD. The norms regarding how careful you should be here will vary from field to field.


text:
How can I access an eBook or an article?
I come from a part of the world where neither I nor my institutional library can afford to access certain eBooks, not because of any imposed restriction but because of a lack of funds. It is quite frustrating at times.
How/who can I request for an eBook if that is not available with me or my library?

or an article? -- Do you know about SciHub? Also, the preprints of many articles on Math, Physics (and many other subjects) are available on arxiv.org

Also see https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/158575/best-ebook-website-for-phd-students/158583#158583 (not all of the sites mentioned in the link are legal, though).

Are you a student? Professor?

Libgen for textbooks, books, etc.
Scihub for research papers.

Note that both of them have been accused of copyright infringement. There are ethical considerations.

@Buffy The authors of articles within academic journals often receive no money for their work. I implore you to read sci-hubs website, as they talk about the ethical motivation behind the site.  https://sci-hub.se/medicine Unrealistically high paywalls are driven by publisher greed and prevent those who are less privileged (doctors in poorer countries, college students) from having access to valuable information.

What about textbook authors?  I suppose they don't deserve any royalties for their work?

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How can I get funding for my research article?
An article of mine has been accepted by a Springer journal.
I want to publish this article in Open Access.
My institute is a pretty small one and cannot fund my research. Is there any worldwide funding agency I can approach? I am from India.

Sometimes journals offer reduced or free rates according to economic circumstances in different countries, but you have to check with the individual journal. We don't allow questions asking for specific journals/institutions/funding agencies ("shopping questions").

I assume that you mean have Springer post it as open-access. Otherwise you have to get copyright permission from them. But they may be willing to waive fees (or reduce them) if you ask and plead poverty.
I haven't dealt with Springer on this but some professional societies will waive fees in such situations, especially for small institutions that don't normally produce a lot of publications.
But funding for papers, rather than research projects, is pretty rare. If you have the opportunity to apply for grants for research, keep this in mind and include a portion in the grant request for publishing fees of the results of the research. Too late in this case, of course.

In fact, it is pretty common by now (at least for European grants) to have part of the funding for open access. In fact, the EU pushes for open access publishing.

@user151413, yes, if you have a grant to charge against. I think the OP does not in this case.

You can contact Springer directly about this, they have an "OA funding support service" who can inform you about your options.
From https://www.springeropen.com/about/oa-funding-and-policy-support:

In partnership with our parent publisher, Springer Nature, we offer a free open access (OA) support service to make it easier for authors to discover and apply for funding for OA publication charges for articles, books, and book chapters.
To use this service, visit our OA support pages and discover our lists of organizations which offer funding for article processing charges (APCs) or book and chapter processing charges (BPCs/CPCs). Here you can also find further OA funding and policy guidance, including a checklist and FAQs to help with securing funding and meet the requirements of funders’ and institutions’ OA policies.
For further advice on the funding available to you and guidance in approaching funders and institutions, please contact us at OAfundingpolicy@springernature.com.

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


text:
Very short submissions in mathematics
Regarding publishing a paper on mathematics, are very short notes, say a page or two or even half a page, publishable in mathematics?

Yes, see for example this question over at History of Science and Mathematics SE. This links to a few papers that are only a page long:

Eigenvalues of the Laplace operator on certain manifolds
Counterexample to Euler's Conjecture
Can n² + 1 unit equilateral triangles cover an equilateral triangle of side > n, say n + ε?

The first two are old (> 50 years). The last one hasn't been published in a peer-reviewed journal, as far as I know.

@N.I. see the January 2005 issue of the American Mathematical Monthly.

@JoelReyesNoche What am I supposed to see? In any case, I cannot find the article either in mathscinet or zbmath. Also, that journal isn't a research journal.

@N.I. The American Mathematical Monthly is well refereed for correctness (among other things) and a good place to publish new research that's (sometimes surprisingly) accessible to the ordinary professional mathematician. What is your personal definition of "research journal"?

@N.I. I see your point.  The "paper" is on page 78 of the AMM Jan. 2005 issue, but is considered a "filler" and so is not listed in the table of contents.

@N.I. "Also, that journal isn't a research journal."  The OP's question doesn't specify a "research journal."

@JoelReyesNoche Thanks for the clarification. No, the OP's question doesn't specify "research journal", you're right.

@EthanBolker Do you want an honest answer? A journal in which, if you publish an article, you can list in your CV under the section "Publications" and expect it will make a difference when comparing your research output to other applicants. It's a subjective definition. What is your definition of research journal?

I am certainly not trying to denigrate the AMM. And the publication has value, for sure. Publishing in it has value for yourself, your career progression, and for the readership. But I think we can all agree that a journal which states "Novelty and generality are far less important than clarity of exposition and broad appeal." is not of the same kind as what is traditionally called "peer-reviewed academic journal". It's peer-reviewed, academic, and a journal, but the expression has a certain connotation that is not applicable here.

Two and three page papers are rather common.  The Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society used to have a section called "Shorter Notes" that had a page limit of three.  This has been ended, but it is easy to find a two-pages paper published there in the past year or so, and many three-page papers.
It seems that two-page papers are often published.  At one page and below it is possible but rare enough to be noteworthy.
Back when PAMS had a shorter notes section, it ran this description see the "about journal" bit.  "A section called Shorter Notes was established to publish very short papers of unusually elegant and polished character for which there is normally no other outlet."
So at one time it was seen as difficult to publish shorter notes.  Perhaps it is easier now that the competition for our attention is the twitter and not a newspaper.


text:
Adding an author after acceptance
After sending a paper for publication, in the scenario that the paper is accepted for publication, is there a possibility of adding an author, who was somehow mistakenly been left in the pdf that was sent to the journal? Assume that the authorship is not gifted here; the author has actually contributed quite significantly to the paper.

"somehow mistakenly been left in the pdf " left out?

A student of mine did this to me.  He/she submitted a paper of ours to a low ranking journal without my knowledge.   It got accepted, and he wanted to include me as a co-author so that I could pay for the page charges!  Even though there was clear evidence I was the supervisor, the work was from his/her PhD thesis, the publisher said no.   As an aside, you probably have a bigger problem: the left out author may claim authorship and ask the publisher to withdraw your paper!  In my case, I relinquished my authorship.

You'll need to convince the journal that it actually is a mistake as opposed to gift authorship.
If you do convince them then yes, you can add an author.

@OP The answer from Allure says all. Still, I would add that actually you must pursue this happy ending


text:
On Writing Statement of Purpose for Grad school Applications
I'm currently preparing a Statement of Purpose (SoP) for my grad school applications this year, and I have some questions about the content and organization of SoP.

Some people say that SoP should primarily discuss what one learned from the past research experience (collaboration, soft skills, etc.) since Curriculum Vitae basically includes all the information about your past research works, while others say that SoP should be structured around one's research achievement, detailing what you've done in each project (even though it might be a duplicate from CV) since SoP is basically a research statement. Which one do you think is closer to what grad schools are looking for in general?

How detailed should I be in discussing my future research plan during grad school? I feel that detailing to the extent of usual project proposals might be too much, but just mentioning some keywords and big topics might look too superficial. I'd appreciate any comment on this issue.

Possible duplicate/definitely related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/102107/how-to-tailor-the-statement-of-purpose-for-a-particular-grad-school

I think that both of the suggestions in your first numbered point are incorrect. The SoP should be about the future, not the past. The CV has the information about your past achievements.
The SoP should detail what you plan to accomplish in the future, both in studies (at that university) and beyond (your career goals). Use the past (such as research accomplishments) only to demonstrate that your goals are realistic and that you are well prepared to achieve them.
Don't duplicate what is already in the CV, but only point to that as necessary to give clear indication that you will be a success in the future.
What do you intend to focus on in studies? Where are you pointing your career. Assure me (the reader) that I don't have to worry about you if you join this program.


text:
Salary of Junior Professor in Germany
I checked the W1 salary of junior professors in Germany but noticed that there is no health insurance, unemployment insurance, and pension contribution.
Source : https://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/c/t/rechner/beamte/bund?id=beamte-bund-2021&g=W_1&s=0&f=0&z=100&zulage=&stj=2022b&stkl=1&r=0&zkf=0
Questions- Is it true? And at what level does a junior professor start their job?

A Juniorprofessor is a "Beamter", which basically means you can almost not be laid off from the job, but generally "auf Zeit", which means your contract ends after a given time (typically 5 years).
Beamte in Germany are freed from public health insurance, because the state reimburses for a certain percentage of the healthcare costs (and you can - and have to - quite cheaply insure the remaining parts), and free from unemployment and pension contribution, because defacto they can't become unemployed (unless, of course, they are "auf Zeit"), and the pension is given by the state (in German difference between "Rente" and "Pension"), approx. 70% of your last salary.
Also Junior Profs only have one level W1, because they are expected to become W2 or W3 Professors later on.

Several things claimed in this answer are only partially correct: Junior professors in Germany are typically "Beamte auf Zeit" rather than "Beamte auf Probe", which is a considerable difference. They get W1 salary (there is no W0). That beamte "de facto [...] can't become unemployed" is certainly not true for junior professors, and the health insurance issue is much more complicated: in additon to the important caveat mentioned by @Roland, things also become less clear if you have children or if you have any kimd of health problems (which can make private health insurance quite expensive).

Oh, and the nice pension claims that you collect as "Beamte auf Zeit" tend to become muss less worth if you happen not to become "Beamte auf Lebenszeit".

@JochenGlueck I guess the "Beamte auf Zeit" applies until the W1 professor gets tenured or the W2/W3 professor and the same with unemployment(due to a 3+3 years contract), right? Do they need to pay for health insurance from TK or AOK?

The state doesn't pay "a certain percentage of the health insurance costs". It reimburses you for a percentage of the actual healthcare costs incurred.

@RohanVaidya you're required to insure the remaining part of your healthcare costs which depending on your exact situation and state should be somewhere between 20% and 50%. You theoretically can stay in the statutory health insurance as "voluntarily insured", however you would need to pay the full ~15% of your salary yourself as the state does not cover the employer contribution. That'll be somewhere upwards of 700€ per month. It's usually significantly cheaper to go with private insurance.

@Maeher: Just to avoid any misunderstanding: those somewhat more than 700€ are the entire health insurance cost, not only the half that comes from having to pay for the employer contribution - so the difference between public health insurance and private health insurance will be considerably less than 700€. And as I mentioned above, when you have several children, public health insurance might even be cheaper since they'll get health insurance for free if you have public health insurance.

@JochenGlueck there may be some narrow circumstances where that is true. But for most people it won't be. Especially because (for reasons unclear) the Beihilfe percentage für yourself goes up when you have kids.  The exact details friend in the state but as an example, in NRW with at least two kids the Beihilfe pays 80% for the kids and 70% for yourself. So you only need to insure 20% and 30% respectively. In my personal case I would need to have about 10 kids for private insurance to be more expensive. If you have a non-working spouse things might be different.

@Maeher: Thanks for your response! That's a good point - I didn't know that the Beihilfe percentage changes when you have children (and that it's even 80 percent for children).

@JochenGlueck thanks a lot, now I understood Beihilfe. But if spouse is working then can children get covered by health insurance from spouse?

@RohanVaidya: That's complicated (again). The last time I looked it up, it was as follows (if I remember correctly - so please double-check with a more reliable source): if you have private health insurance and your spouse is working and has public health insurance, then your children can get public health insurance (i.e., they can get "mitversichert" with your spouse) if and only if your spouse's gross salary is higher than yours.

Rohan, but please also take @Maeher's comment into account that there's also Beihilfe for your children if your are "verbeamtet" - although I'm not sure whether it's always 80%; this might actually depend on the federal state.

@JochenGlueck, thanks a lot it's clear, during the first 3+3 years of being a junior professor, are they considered as beamter?

@Rohan: Yes, junior professors in Germany are typically "Beamte of Zeit", i.e., they have the status "Beamte" for the time while they are junior professor. (Although there might be some exceptions.)

@JochenGlueck Thank you so much for entire discussion and providing the meaningful information.

Another thing that is only partially correct: The pension is not always "approx. 70% of the last salary" but it is "x*1.79375% of the last salary" where x is the number of full-time equivalent years you worked as a Beamter.

To complement the other answer by one aspect:
If you terminate your employment as a "Beamter" (whether due to expiry of the junior professorship, or any other reason, including voluntarily), you will be retroactively insured in the pension insurance. However, the insurance amount will be computed based on your gross salary as a Beamter, that is, it will be less if you had been employed as a regular employee with the same net salary (as in that case, the gross salary would have been higher, due to precisely those deductions). So it is not a good deal. (In fact, I would claim "Beamter auf Zeit" is never a good deal, unless you transition into a lifetime Beamter employment afterwards.)
On the other hand, if your Beamter status is terminated, you did not have unemployment insurance, so you would immediately fall into social welfare. (This is of course only relevant if you intend and are allowed to stay in Germany after that, and don't terminate because of another job.)

thanks for making the point. From a health insurance point of view, it's true. From a pension insurance point of view, if the junior professor is not confirmed, then will the person will be eligible for a pension based on the last salary? For, unemployment benefits, is there any possibility of getting some compensation?

@Rohan The state will retroactively pay into the pension insurance, with the amount of pension paid into the insurance computed from the total salary -- just as if you had been employed with that very same total salary (before subtractions) as a normal employee. (Note that this is a bad deal, for several reasons.) As for unemployment benefits - no. ("Beamter auf Zeit" is in some sense a fundamentally flawed concept, because the very concept of "Beamter" is based on it being for lifetime.)


text:
Salary of researcher in Germany
There were many strikes in Germany recently, but there is no news about salary increases for researcher TVL employees. The next due date is on 30.09.23.
Is there any information about the salary increase for researchers? Will there be a similar hike?

The negotiations will start at the end of October.

@Maeher, thanks, is there any website or source to follow it?

All information will be posted here https://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/tv-l/allg/. There are also websites that cover the negotiations. But all information will probably be in German.

The increase will be limited to a percentage which is not decisve for choosing a career as a researcher?! More decisive is the general level of salary, which can be found on the webpage mentioned by pgunnink

@pgunnink thanks for sharing the link, currently there is no information.

@Heinrich exactly, Researchers are always less paid workers but several pros and cons. But in the current situation, a significant hike is necessary.


text:
Part time visiting researcher in UK while doing postdoc in Germany
Currently working as a scientific employee in Germany and have an opportunity to work as a visiting researcher in the UK(top university). Is it possible to work at a place that considers the working hour's law?
In Germany, after having a permanent residence holder, is it possible to get work VISA for UK?

Could you clarify what you mean by "Is it possible to work at a place that considers the working hour's law?"? Do you mean is there any sort of a protection/law/gauarantee that you will not be required to work more than a reasonable/contractual amount (8/h day or similar)?

@penelope in terms of VISA and regulation

It might matter how this is organized; rules for freelancing while being employed in Germany are different from those holding a second job. - In any case, talk to your boss: If I would learn that one of my people were working on the side somewhere else without telling me, I would be rather upset.

Note that the phrase "visiting researcher" can often mean that you don't get paid by the hosting institute...

@user151413, are you suggesting going for freelancing instead of a side job? If yes, what are the rules?

@RohanVaidya I don't know for sure; but if you are freelancing, there is no fixed working hours for the other job. There is still constraints on how much you are allowed to work on the other job (typically 8h/week), but this might be harder to quantify. Also, there's (soft) limits on how much you can earn - it cannot be unreasonably higher than your primary salary (per hour).

What does the sentence "Is it possible to work at a place that considers the working hour's law" mean? Perhaps to guide the question a bit, in general, a visiting researcher at a UK institution must be paid by their overseas institution. As such, the UK institution has no involvement in pay.


text:
Are TAs expected to solve the homeworks or do they get the solutions from professor
Is the TA expected to solve the homework for the professor or is the professor supposed to provide the solutions to the TA for grading homework?

If the professor wants the grading to be good, then the professor will provide the solutions and guides to the distributions of points. Otherwise, the grades of a student depend on the individual decisions of a TA. Alternatively, the TAs can grade together and create the solution and grading guideline among themselves. The result might or might not conform to the intentions of the professor. Finally, a professor can have a single or a single trusted TA who generates the grading guidelines.

I am the only TA for about 50 students and the homework is long. The point system is extremely complex and the professor expects me to grade all of them within my 20 hr/week. Just doing the homework is an issue because I get only a few hours to do it. And there are other duties like office hours. So am I being irrational that this professor is making me do extra work?

@SarvagyaGupta, your reasoning is valid. Have you discussed this with your professor?

I have. The professor is not bothered. They say it's my "duty" to put in that many hours even though I am spending more hours and I have no proof of it.

It depends on the professor.  Some professors will always generate a solution, and others will have the TA generate the solution.  It also probably depends on the experience of the TA.  If the TA is going to generate the solution, they have to have some knowledge about the material.  A lot of times a TA will be assigned as a "grader" but has never taken the course.  Still another option is that a professor will have an assignment that is "close" to an assignment from a previous year.  The professor will give the old solution to the TA and ask them to update it for the new assignment.
I think your question really should be "what is a reasonable work load for a TA?".  If the grading is taking much longer than 20 hours/week, I would first talk to the professor.  They may not understand how long it is taking you, or maybe you are doing more work than they expect.  If you can't resolve the issue with the professor, your next step is to escalate to the department head.  Some TA's are part of a union.


text:
Is more than 20 hours per week too much workload to students?
I am checking my course evaluation for the last course I taught. Among all the statistics, one thing surprised me a bit is that there are about 50% of students who did the evaluation reported that they had worked 20-28 hours per week on my course. The university in general suggests that a course like mine should take students 20 about 20 hours, including lecture time (5 hours), which means half of their workload.
If the students are not exaggerating, I feel maybe I have packed a bit too much information into the course. (The average grades are quite good actually. About 1/3 of the students got an A.)
Should I perhaps reduce a bit of the material given this information?

Do they have other classes? If the course is not the main content of the semester, spending more than 20 hours a week on a single course seems excessive.

It should be about half of their total workload.

Then it seems to me that if half your students are spending a little more than 20 hours and half are spending a little less, you have the workload right

@Significance This is true. Although I feel a bit surprised that they would actually spent that much time.

It's worth mentioning that students spend more time on courses they enjoy as well, and they'd like more, not less, material. This is more likely to happen in non-required courses.

@PasserBy I hope that's the case. It's just one student told me "This hardest thing I have done in my academic life."

Hard isn't mutually exclusive with enjoyable. Enjoyable hardness is called "challenge".

What did the other 50% report? Less than 20h? More than 28h? Or did the other 50% not answer that question?

Do students actually answer these question truthfully?

If this is a 5 credit class, and I'm taking 20 credits (a load that was challenging, but doable at my university), and if the time spent on schoolwork is based on that 20-28 hours for 5 credits, that would be a 80-112 hour school week.  That seems like an enormous amount, to put it mildly.  You say this class should be about "half" of their normal workload...so the average student is only taking two classes for 10 credits at this point at this institution?  (That seems odd, so I'm just trying to verify I'm not missing something.)

@FedericoPoloni yes. Why not? If you were slow, you want them to know it is too hard. If you were fast, you want them to know the speed/difficulty is good.

@Beska The total number of credits does not matter for my question. It's about 40%-50% of total credits they are working for when they took my course.

@LeafGlowPath The total number of credits does matter.  In the US, the typical rule of thumb is that a student taking 12 credit hours is considered a full-time student (though most students are advised to take 15ish credit hours per semester).  "Full-time" means (roughly) 40 hours per week, and 12 credit hours is about 10 hours of class time per week, leaving another 30 hours of work outside of class.  So the expectation is that 1 credit hour corresponds to roughly 2.5 total hours of outside work, hence a 5 credit class would expect around 7.5 hours of work outside of class.

On the other hand, if 5 credits is half of a full load (hence 10 credits is a full load), and each credit corresponds to 50 minutes of in-class time (so 10 credits is a little more than 8 hours), then it would be fair to expect students to do about 32 hours of work outside of class, or a bit more than 3 hours per credit.  This is more than 15 hours of outside work per week for a 5 credit class.  So the total expected load is important in understanding load.

Ack... math error in the first comment:  5(2.5) = 12.5, not 7.5.

Your university should provide some guidance here. As an arbitrary example, UCLA states that "One unit represents three hours of work per week per term by the student, including both class attendance and preparation." It seems that Physics 1A is a 5 credit course, and it meets for four hours a week, so 5*3-4 = 11 hours/week of homework and studying. In this case yes, if the average student were spending 20 hours/week, you should consider lowering your expectations.
In your case, I'm not sure what "the university suggested 20 hours/week" might mean, and I'm not sure what "more that 20 hours/week" means (how much more?). You should probably clarify these points.
Finally, note that students are pretty bad at estimating how much time they spend studying. You should go through the course yourself and estimate how many hours each assignment, reading, and exam will require. You can then occasionally cross-check these estimates by asking the students how long they spent on a specific task. Even here, you want to ask the question in a very precise way: having them write down the time blocks that they devoted to the homework onto a piece of scratch paper, sum then, and report the total will be much more accurate than just asking them to estimate the total time.

One thing I have found helps is to ask students for time assessments in smaller increments. For example, I ask for every hand-in an (obviously ungraded) question "how much time in hours did you spend on this assignment (including reading, self-study, debugging, etc.)?". This is much easier to estimate for students than at the end oof the course how much time they spent on all things together.

As opposed to mit, which uses a system where most classes are either 9 or 12 credits, and those numbers roughly represent the total number of hours per week most students will spend on that class. How many hours are reasonable for any given student in any given term is something they and their advisors need to figure out, but this gives them a basis for making those assessments. Note that there are students who thrive on 60 hours of class and homework a week, and others who struggle at 40.

My experience is that students spend a lot of time on a course, but it’s rarely efficient time, i.e. there’s a lot of chatting/checking social media/searching youtube  but not a lot of actual working.

I applaud the OP for caring enough to try to improve their teaching. I have had the exact same experience. Our academic credit hour policy states that students are supposed to spend 12 hours per week on each course (with 4 courses, that's 48 hours). I used to get similar evaluations to the OP, so I started to survey the students during the semester. Around the middle of the semester, I give students a Google Form to ask how things are going, and call it a midsemester evaluation. I added a question asking how many hours per week students are working, and got wildly varying answers. Then I honed the question to instruct them to think about a specific week and count, and I got the expected normal distribution. It was indeed high, so I streamlined the course, cut a bit from the homework (removing any "busy work" style questions), and cut unnecessary sections.
I do midsemester evaluations every semester and keep the data on student hours. After midsemester evaluations, I show students the data and the credit hour policy. I also point out that a lot of students who report not doing well are working less than 12 hours a week. From doing this, I have learned that most courses on campus do not meet the credit hour policy, and assign less than 12 hours a week, making mine look like an outlier to the students. But when I show them the policy, this seems to help, and complaints drop. I invite students to seek extra help if they are putting in way too many hours, and I devote a day to time management. I do this because many students who report spending more than 12 hours a week will reveal, if I ask them, that they are often doing their math homework in bed, while watching a movie or texting with a friend, etc. The midsemester evaluation is a teachable moment, to teach them effective and efficient work/study habits.

What kind of questions do you ask other than the hours? I did try this before but what I usually got is "This is too hard!"

The simplest evaluation would be four questions: (1) What's going well for your learning? (2) What's not going well? (3) What can I (the professor) do differently? (4) What can you (the student) do differently?

Mine has those, but also some Likert scale questions about whether or not they like the book, read it before class, watch the videos, feel they can learn from the videos, feel they learn from the HW, feel the exams are fair, etc. Another option would be to use the language from the end of semester evaluations that the university administers.

You don't state what formula your university recommendation uses to come up with 20 hours a week for your course, but 20 hours per week for the average student seems super high to me (almost a factor of 2) for a course that is approximately 25% of a student's course load.
The NYS definition of a semester hour is  (from https://www.rochester.edu/provost/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ur-credit-hour-policies-updated-march-2019-v.-for-posting.pdf) "Semester hour means a credit, point, or other unit granted for the satisfactory completion of a course which requires at least 15 hours (of 50 minutes each) of instruction and at least 30 hours of supplementary assignments, except as otherwise provided...."  We have to play some games to scale this to a 14-week semester, but however we do it, it comes out to way closer to 10 hours a week than 20 (I believe our "official" policy comes out to around 12 for a 4-credit course.
Let's look at it this way.  We'll start by assuming your course is about a 25% work load for a student — one course out of a "typical" 4 course load (even though that feels low to me).  That means that if we go by your 20 hour guideline, that the average student will be putting 80 hours per week into nothing but classes!  I rarely put in 80 hour weeks.  I'm sure it happened every now and again when I was a student, but it would have been pretty rare.  Not every student is average, and some will need to put more than the average time into a course than the average student.  Under the 20-hour guideline, these students may be putting in 90–100hrs/week.
My own rule of thumb for time expectations is that a work week should be about 40 hrs, and that four courses a semester works out to and average of about 10 hours/wk for each course, split between class time and everything else.  Some students will need more, and some can get away with less.

In a comment, the OP states that the course is half the workload, not a quarter. Not typical, of course.

OP didn't mention the country, but their description is definitively reasonable if applied to some European institutions using a quarter system with 15 ECTS credits/quarter and (some) courses with 7.5 credits.

Here you will find the European credit system (ECTS units): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Credit_Transfer_and_Accumulation_System
As you can see, there is some variance between countries how many working hours amounts to 1 ECTS (a whole year = 60 ECTS). You should consider the total workload for a student, not of you course in isolation. For example, I teach in Denmark where a semester (half a year) amounts to 30 ECTS. On my 10 ECTS course, I can demand 10*28=280 hours from a student (confer with the table in above link). The student might haven chosen 4 courses, for example, at 10+10+5+5 = 30 ECTS. Students might on occasion sign up for more or less than 30 ECTS, knowing exactly the workload to expect. Just multiply the ECTS by 28 hours/ECTS.

This.  I think that it is entirely reasonable to expect a full-time student to devote somewhere between 40 and 50 hours per week on their schooling.  Maybe even a bit more.  It is impossible to know how much work is reasonable on a per-class basis without knowing the expected load a student is taking on.


text:
Single system to track status of all journal submissions?
Is there a software or website where I can track the status Editorial Manager system for all, or most, of my journal submissions rather than logging into all of their websites individually?
As an example a website like mint.com tracks all my banks together.

A nice problem to have.

If systems like ORCID exist to unify citations and all, such a system makes some sense as well.

@bissi, actually there are many journals today that support login via ORCID.

I found an almost complete answer in this website : Research Square. It seems to track almost all my Springer articles...

There isn't. That isn't even possible in most cases if different journals use the same software system (say, between all Elsevier journals) and it certainly isn't possible for journals managed by different publishers.

"impossible" is too strong of a word here ;) I'm sure a few years ago someone would have said you cannot "compare" a literature journal with a quantum physics journal. probably some entrepreneur would take on this idea

@bissi I didn't say that it's "impossible". I just said that it isn't possible right now. "isn't possible" is not the same as "impossible".

I would say that it's technically possible right now (based on scraping of HTML pages), but the solution might be very fragile.

Not automatically.  I do use a ticket tracker to keep track of these things manually.
A ticket tracker is also known as a bug tracker or an issue tracker.  The one I use is https://osticket.com/.  There are many.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_issue-tracking_systems

A what? The only thing a "ticket tracker" to me means the tags you'd get at an ice cream shop

please explain what's a ticket tracker

+1 for manual tracking. I use a Google Spreadsheet (comparable to PowerPoint) to emulate a virtual "wall with post-its": have a slide (a.k.a. "wall") with separate areas "in preparation", submitted, accepted" and move colorful boxes (a.k.a. "post-its" representing papers) between the areas.


text:
What software is best for digitally commenting on drafts papers?
As I am asked more and more to review drafts of articles, I was wondering what software is best for giving comments digitally on draft papers (pdfs)? I know this is opinion-based, but I am curious what workflow is generally preferred/most popular.

You said "I know it's opinion-based", and I agree, so I'm voting to close. however, maybe you can think of a way of reframing/rephrasing so that the answers could be more objective? For example, you could come up with a list of features you would find useful and ask what tools/workflows have them. (This would have the advantage of getting answers that would be more useful to you.)

Me and people I know have often experienced compatibility problems when different software programs are used to write notes on the PDF. For example, you wrote your comments on a PDF program different from Adobe Reader, but your student opens the commented file on Adobe Reader, and there are comments missing, or no comments at all. The opposite situation is also common. Either use Acrobat to convert the PDF into Word, and write notes there or do everything in Adobe Reader making sure the student uses the same program to view the notes.

For pdf files, I started out using Skim for comments. When similar functionality became available in my standard pdf viewer, Preview on the Mac, I used that instead, until it lost a lot (but not all?!) of the notes in a couple of files. So now I'm back to Skim. (When collaborating on papers, my co-authors and I usually use LaTeX, and we insert annotations into the TeX file, using environments that show them in color in the resulting pdf file, different colors for different authors.)


text:
How Can I Ethically Adjust Grading Without Violating My 'No Grade Curving' Policy?
I always tell my students that I don't curve their grades, and that their final exam and quiz scores will directly determine their letter grades. I do this to avoid giving them false hope that they might still pass if the majority of students perform poorly.
However, in practice, I often adjust the grading rubrics to ensure that the average grades aren’t too high or too low, especially when the assessments turn out to be easier or harder than intended. This adjustment process makes me feel uneasy, as it feels like I'm effectively curving the grades despite my claim that I won’t.
How can I handle this dilemma ethically? Should I revise my policy, or is there a better way to approach grading adjustments without feeling like I'm compromising academic integrity? Or is there better way to gauge how difficult or easy an exam/quiz would be?
BTW, I do let students retake a portion of the quizzes and I drop the lowest grade of the quizzes.

My aim for not curving the grade is to discourage students to assume they will pass even if they get only something like 36% of the points, which some of my colleagues do. And I also want to avoid student come to beg for more points.
My aim for adjust rubrics is that some times I think a problem is very easy, which turn out not to be the case for most students.

Do you change the rubric before or after you see the exam outcomes?

@Buffy I change them after I see the average grades.

I think the issue here is your 'no grade curving' policy - it seems unlikely that your exercises and test are so finely tuned to the material that no curving is needed.

Start with outlining what it is you want to achieve. Both with your "no curve" policy, and with your tinkering with the rubric. You can't set up good policies and strategies if you don't know what it is you want.

At the risk of sounding glib, I genuinely fail to see what the dilemma is supposed to be here. You can both (1) communicate to your students that you may curve your exams if you misjudge their difficulty and (2) communicate to your students not to "assume they will pass even if they get only something like 36% of the points". "It feels like I'm effectively curving the grades despite my claim that I won’t" – yes, this is precisely what you are doing.

@AdamPřenosil The thing is if I say that I " may curve your exams if you misjudge their difficulty", they always come to argue that the exam is too difficult.

I don't think that this is a big problem, but if you do, I am sure you can also figure out how to convey the message that you reserve the right to fine-tune the grades but also discourage student complaints. (Note: I don't think discouraging student complaints is necessarily a good thing, it's better instead to just get comfortable with saying "no" to students, but that's a separate discussion.)

The idea of curving is to ensure that you hit some distribution of grades (e.g. you want to make sure that 10% of your students get As, 20% get Bs, and so on).  What you are describing does not seem like this.  Rather, you are adjusting the relationship between score and letter grade to reflect errors or unfairness introduced in the writing of the exam.  This is totally different, and I don't think that you should have any qualms about it.

When you say "to encourage students to assume they will pass," do you actually mean "to discourage students from assuming they will pass"?

@shoover Yes. I have updated it.

@LeafGlowPath Have you, in the past, actually adjusted grades only to reach a certain number or percentage of (some) grades (e.g. "at least one person should get an A" / "not more than 50% of students shall fail")? Or did you only do this if an assessment turned out to be easier or harder than expected?

Perhaps what you really want is a set of rules around how and when grades will or will not be curved that can be communicated to your students? So you have leeway to set a curve based on the distribution of student performance, but also have students know that they can't change only their grade by arguing over difficulty?

Fundamentally grading needs to be fair to every individual. If a good grade by X results in a lower grade for Y then it is fundamentally unfair as the grade no longer depends on the efforts and skills of Y alone, but on something they can't control.
No individual class has a predictable distribution of skills and none will closely match the distribution of the population from which it is drawn. So, you can't make assumptions.
Suppose, hypothetically, that you have a class with 30 students and they happen to be the "best" 30 students on the planet. Assuming, hypothetically, that they are properly engaged, then they will all get full marks in any fair system. Any system that guarantees failure (or low marks) for some of those students is fundamentally unfair.
So, a grading rubric should be constructed when the exam is constructed and "points" per question should be determined at that time. You then live with those decisions (caveat below). If they all deserve top marks based on those decisions then they should get them.
What you can do is, in future delivery of that course, make the rubric a bit lower or make the questions harder. I used to put one very hard (near impossible) question on every exam and warn the students that it would be there. I didn't give it especially large weight, but it would tell me who was excelling in the study of the material.
Caveat. You can advantage a student slightly as long as it doesn't disadvantage other students. So, if 90 was required for A, then 89 would probably also get an A. This only recognizes that my questions aren't perfect and might be misunderstood and my grading isn't perfect either, requiring some small grained decision making on answers. If I'm not perfect, then my grading scheme isn't perfect, so some sloppiness is included so that no one is disadvantaged.
Another practice of mine was, at the end of the course, look at the grade distribution (actually the numeric total, not the letter grades). I'd make a determination informally whether I thought that distribution matched what I considered the actual learning of the students generally (I had reasonable scale for this: 30 or so students.). If I thought the distribution was too low, I'd up it a bit, giving everyone a bonus, raising the distribution. No one was disadvantaged. Students considered me "tough but fair". People didn't pass without effort, but if the effort and results were there, students got what they considered a fair grade. Aim for that.
I've had classes where every student is excellent and so the distribution of grades is naturally at the high end. There is nothing wrong with that. I do my job. They do theirs. Fairness over all.
Changing the rubric after seeing the grades can hardly be fair. It makes grading something other than skill-building into a competition where the students don't actually have any idea of the rules until after the exam.
If department heads and deans complain that your grades are too high, explain the above and defend the students. Toughen the course for the future, if you like. And if you see grades higher than your judgement of the overall skills early enough, toughen the course for future exams. But after the fact downward adjustments are just wrong.

Thanks. It's more often that I adjust the rubrics to increase the average. But I do see your point and will try to stick to pre-defined rubrics.

Though, rubrics cannot really be entirely designed before grading. Sometimes students make mistakes in ways I did not expect, and I have to judge on the spot how much partial points to take.

@LeafGlowPath: Regarding rubrics, my comments to this Academia SE answer briefly discuss what I did, such as: As for the rubric, this was often a "work in progress" in the sense that I made grading decisions whenever a certain type of error showed up, rather than trying to anticipate them in advance. As for my grading in general, see this Academia SE answer and this Mathematics Educators answer.

"Changing the rubric after seeing the grades can hardly be fair" - I agree, but just want to point out that sometimes "seeing the grades" causes a realization that some external factor caused a shift and I support responding to that if it harms no students.

I don't think it is unfair if the grade of X depends on the grade of Y. Grading can be understood to measure (absolute) skill, but it can also be understood to measure your relative strength, i.e. the percentile you are in. Different people have different approaches to this.

The Hunger Games, then, @JFabianMeier?

The computer science department I studied in worked exactly like this. Exam cohorts ("Classes" in the American sense I think) were small, so that it was sometimes the case all students did very well, eg half with first class, and sometimes they generally did badly. There is a correlation effect as well - good students can pull up those around them. Assuming a normal curve is a very bad assumption for many real populations.

@Buffy If the question is "Has person X mastered a certain skill?", then you need absolute grading. If you need to fill a limited number of positions, then you need relative grading. It does not help you if everyone has an A.

@JFabianMeier "then you need relative grading" -- not necessarily. If every candidate for a position has an absolute A grade, it means, practically, that they are all fully and equally qualified with respect to what that grade can measure. Rather than trying to amplify small differences that are likely noise, you would be better served by weighting other meaningful qualifications for the position. Or, maybe in the future you should require a tougher course/test where the absolute grade will properly distinguish your candidates.

@nanoman You are right, you should not try to find small differences to generate arbitrary grades. But you should also be careful not to set a very low hurdle, and everyone jumps over it and gets an A. Often, I am not mainly interested in people with a given skill, but people who are intelligent, and -- lacking other measures -- getting better grades than 95% of the rest is an indicator of intelligence.

Making good exams and quizes is more of an art than a science.
When I design a test, then I do that with the goal that anyone who knows everything I taught during my lectures should get 100%. But people actually acing a test is very rare. When a student answers a question wrong, then there are three possible reasons:

It's the student's fault, because they didn't pay attention or didn't study.
It's my fault as a teacher, because I didn't teach that thing properly or didn't properly communicate its importance.
It's my fault as a test author, because I phrased the question in an awkward way and the student had no idea what I actually wanted from them.

If it's the students fault, that's on them and they deserve the bad grade. If it's my fault, then I might want to consider being lenient on grading. But how can I tell?
Usually by looking at the results for an individual question in isolation. If everyone got a question wrong, including people who answered most other questions correctly, then it was probably my fault and the question wasn't possible to solve. I might want to reduce the number of points for that question or remove it from grading altogether. But if there are some students who answered a question correctly, then it seems like it was indeed possible to answer it, and those who didn't should lose their points for it.

The rationale of "curving" as you call it is (at least in many places) to produce the same average or distribution of grades in every course. The idea behind that is that this makes grades comparable across courses (and particularly when different people teach the same course at different times), but obviously it will bias things if one group of students in a course as a whole is stronger than another, which can easily happen.
You don't want to do this kind of thing, and I agree with you (assuming that there is no general policy in your university that prescribes this).
There is however another issue, which is that we may sometimes assess the time required for an assessment wrong, or we may misjudge the difficulty of some questions.
In fact we'd be happy to grade so that grades over different courses and different runs of the same course are comparable and fair, but this is not achieved by "curving". If possible, this should be achieved by qualitative descriptors of what the different grades mean in terms of competences and understanding of the students.
A personal grading policy could be guided by such descriptors, which allow for the possibility that some groups of students are just overall better than others (so no "curving"), but they also allow for the possibility to adjust the grading scheme in case that, for example, questions turn out easier or more difficult or more time consuming than expected.
It should be possible to communicate this to the students, making clear that (a) "curving" will not happen but (b) adjustments may happen (for good reasons).

Your second topic: "Should I curve?"
When I taught, I looked at the median average.  I ordered the scores from high to low and looked at the one in the middle.  If that one was below 75 then everyone in the class got the same amount of points added:  Whatever it took to get the middle score up to 75.
Example:
Abby:    95 +12 = 107 (recorded as 100)
Bob:     63 +12 = 75
Cedrick: 36 +12 = 48
My reasoning was that if average wasn't at least C, something was wrong.  I wasn't teaching well enough.  The material was too hard.  (Good reasons to curve).  I got a bad batch of students.  Too many of them arrived lacking prerequisite skills. (Bad reasons to curve).  If you feel like you can 'smell' why students weren't doing well then you'd have a better idea as to whether you should curve.  If you have taught your classes 3 times or less then I'd say curves are on the table.  You'll continually build better curricula, methods, and ideas about what students can accomplish.
Your first topic: "Is changing my rubrics curving?"
Are you changing rubrics after students have received grades so that the next batch of students has different rubrics?  That's improving your classes and not curving.
Are you changing rubrics so that students will get different grades on the current test/assignment?
Sub question: Did the students clearly receive the rubrics you are using to grade?
Yes > then yes, that is curving.
No > it's curving, but only you will know.  You get to decide whether it's ethical.

My experience as a (former) student: in my University, it was a general rule that a gaussian curve must be applied before providing the grades for a final exam. In practice, what most professors would do is to grade each test (which were always MCQs in our case) according to the agreed-upon grading rubrics, compute score, and students who scored under 50% of maximum score achievable would fail. After that, the final grade would be given by dividing the score of each student by the highest score achieved by a student. I found this system to be good, because:

Passing/failing would not be influenced by what others did, only by how each student fared against the exam questions.
There would be always a perfect grade, even though nobody got some questions right (if the questions were too hard or not correctly written).
Worst case scenario, if there were a student that aced the exam, everyone would get their grade according to the grading scheme. (Although in practice this rarely happened, and virtually nobody got a barely passing grade because not even top students would manage to ace the exams, but rather students would either fail or get one grade upper than the passing grade.)
Adjustments were done always in favor of the student.
If all students would be top performers, all would get (near) perfect scores.

The main caveat of this method would be that students could theoretically ally and ask the top performers to underperform intentionally, in order for bottom of class to get a higher grade, but this never happened because 1. This was a competitive environment (there were incentives for top students) and 2. Top students wouldn't risk having a bad day and accidentally fail by over-underperforming.

Re your worst case scenario: It's always possible to ignore the one outlier. I once managed to score 78/80 in an exam where "common knowledge" said that 65-70 was the best that could be achieved in practice. So when doing the usual adjustments, they would not take my 78 as the "highest student score" but the 70 (or something, I don't remember exactly) scored by the second best student.

If you ask questions of somewhat different difficulty year to year, then it makes sense that the exact percentage grade needed to obtain an A, B, ... would vary from year to year.
It's hard to tell exactly how hard a question is until the you see the students' performance, so it makes sense to set the grade cutoffs based on student performance to some extent.
This is kind of a curve, since you'd be lowering the standard needed to achieve a grade and, to an extent, lowering it more if students struggled more. But it's definitely a different type of curve than deciding in advance how many As, Bs, etc you will give out.
In some of my classes, I follow this kind of policy. At the end of the term, I rank students by percentage grade in the class, and look back at students' work. If a lot of students in the 87-90% range are doing what I'd call A-level work, I may drop the cutoff for an A down to 87%. And so on.
Also, if you don't worry about designing the rubric to give the right average number of points, you can focus better on designing it to assess knowledge.

Curving and adjusting mean the same thing, and I recall being shocked (as a teaching assistant) when a professor who professed no curve explicitly told us to calculate the median and other statistics and assure that about top 10% get A's and so on. Whether it actually works on students is hard to say - some children learn early on that parents and teachers often fail to make good on their promises/threats.
However, as a teaching assistant I also adopted a lenient policy that I would add a few points here and there in an appeal. My justification is that, if a student bothered to come to the appeal, and especially if they bothered to figure out or to ask for a correct solution of the problems, they deserve a few extra points. This is especially true for those who had been generally diligent students, but had a bad day on the exam. One could even stretch this philosophy by saying that the exam does not end when the papers are collected, but only when the final grades are submitted to the administration.


text:
Writing a B.Sc. thesis with only failed results
I'm writing my B.Sc thesis about analysing coin cell batteries that I made by hand. Most of them give off voltage when I test them with a multimeter, but when I try to do a formation cycle I get bad voltage data. My thesis is a further analysis; working batteries is just a expectation. Therefore I don't really have anything to analyse. My supervisor isn't much help and I'm running out of time to try again.
Is it possible to write a good thesis using only these bad/failed results? How would one go about doing it?
edit:
i was given pouch cell batteries and told to make them into coin cells becuase the test rig only works with coin cells.
The research question is "Investiagion of DVA (differential voltage analysis) as a measure to predict self discharge in batteries". So if the problem was that i couldnt find a connection between self discharge and DVA i would know what to do. But since the batteries aren't even working it feels like i havent even begun to experiment.
My result would "just be" "I couldn't find a connection because the batteries didnt work" haha. I hope that explains the situation better

Particularly for an undergraduate thesis, the point is more in doing some work and analyzing it (and writing it up) than what the results actually are. So, you will spend more time (and writing) on what you measured and why it is not what you expected.

@BryanKrause This is the first time i'm using stack exchange so i dont know if this is normal etiquette. I added some information to clarify

@Buffy added some info to clarify

Editing your post to add clarification in response to comments is exactly the correct thing to do in the Stack Exchange model, thank you.

What does your supervisor say if you ask them just this? Who decides about the grade of your work, and what role does your supervisor have in this (this is different in different places; sometimes the supervisor is the most or even the only important person)?

@ChristianHennig I've been told to just keep trying, its just that time is running out. I dont think he has anything to do with the grading, but he will help with defending it

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30995/what-to-do-when-you-spend-several-months-working-on-an-idea-that-fails-in-a-mast/31082#31082

Sometimes research doesn't go well. Usually persistence is required along with being flexible and changing plans, but it may not be possible to go through all the necessary iterations in the limited time available for, say, an undergraduate student.
It's unfortunate your supervisor is not more helpful, this is exactly the circumstance you need them. I would make sure you've asked them for very specific guidance, though, don't ask "what should I do ?" be sure to ask exactly the question you pose here about writing the thesis.
Without other guidelines I can give the two options I would give my own mentee. One option would be to pivot and write a thesis about modifying batteries. Explain what you tried and exactly how it failed. Think of your audience as your past self: how would you help yourself know everything you've learned before you get started.
The other would be to write a hypothetical paper where you write your introduction and methods exactly as you normally would, but when you get to the results present possible ways the data could have come out and how you would interpret those results. Include the result you might have expected as well as alternatives that would be plausible if your assumptions were wrong. You can even prepare simulated data and figures to practice those steps.
You can also combine these approaches.
Remember that this project is mostly to 1) expose you to research and 2) show you've learned to present results the way scientists do. You don't need actual research results to achieve the second goal; by trying and struggling you've made excellent progress towards the first as well.
All that said, it's also possible that your efforts so far are insufficient. If you put in the time and work then you shouldn't be penalized for struggling. But, if you tried to put something together last minute or waited too long to get help it's possible this cannot be salvaged satisfactorily. I don't think this actually fits your situation but I unfortunately have direct experience with undergrads who disappeared after an initial consultation and then showed up when their paper was due wanting to know what to write. Yikes.

Thank you. This has given me the right mindset to continue. I think the hypotethical approach will work and i already have some ideas about how to start it. Again thanks a lot

@Markus See also the comment by Christian above; if the supervisor is not who grades/assesses your thesis you should contact whoever is.


text:
Do I take tenure track job for one year for the money?
I've been offered a TT job at a very small school: 4-4 teaching load and no research other than educational research. Poorly organized interview process and just felt lots of red flags. For example, I'm also fairly certain this campus will close at some point, as they are removing majors close to the one I teach. I also will not be able to move to another TT job if I take this one, without having any research in this position and no postdoc- so I think this is not a good fit for me.
The problem is I'm also interviewing for a postdoc at a top rated university, and this TT job would give me the money needed to go (expensive city). Without this job money, I will be going into debt for postdoc.
Do I take a TT job for one academic year and tell them in Nov that I am leaving after May? (giving them some time for a search). Or is this a terrible thing to do? I mean I might like it and stay, but I am really committed to doing a postdoc. I've also considered declining but telling them if they need a one year term faculty I could do it.
Any thoughts on how to navigate are helpful!

Ethics of the question aside, I’m a bit confused by your timeline — a postdoc starting 9 months from now is January 2025, so it’s not clear where May comes into play. Also, notifying the university in November that you’re leaving isn’t really enough time to post an ad for that hiring season — the ad should be up by September/October, and it takes time to go through the administrative procedures to put up the ad.

Why would you be going into debt?

And consider that wherever you apply next will contact people at that institution. Leaving them in the lurch will not reflect well in your future hiring processes.

I think that would be a pretty mean thing to do to a department willing to invest in your career.

If academia doesn't care about your financial well-being why should you care about academia?

OP needs to clarify some of the questions above before an answer can be provided.

I don't see a problem as long as you are honest with them. Your suggestion that a one year position would be better indicates that you are, and will be. They can take whatever action they think is appropriate to cover their needs.
But, again assuming you are honest, a continuing contract might be better for you as a backup in case things go wrong elsewhere, or in case you change your mind about the place and its future.
Consider also how easy or difficult it will be for you to keep in contact with potential collaborators. The location of the place might be a factor, whether it is isolated or in a place with other universities.
While the teaching load is high, I doubt that it will challenge you much if the place is small (small classes) with courses you are already qualified to teach. It will take time, of course, especially in that first (only) year.

Why would a department be willing to end a tenure track search to put someone in the job for 1 year.  If "being honest with them" involves telling them that there's no intention of staying in the job for more than one year, why in the world would a dean sign off on this??

@ScottSeidman, the point was being honest so that they can decide. I don't know what they might do, but a small place might have a lot of flexibility. If they have few other options at the moment it might work out.

No idea why someone downvoted this.

Regardless of the route(s) you do choose to take, as others have already said, just be transparent. You will never lose by being upfront about your needs/plans/desires, and your prospective employer will only respect you more for it.

the problem is I'm also interviewing for a postdoc at a top rated
university

You are assuming a bit too much here. You can have 1 year money for sure, and you are weighting it again a possibility starting in 9 months.
I am sure the start of the postdoc you are discussing can be deferred. So you can have both. Or only one (the current teaching). Or none of them.
Regarding the college currently offering you an one-year position, they must know you are looking for something else and there is a small chance you will leave earlier.
If not, their bad, nothing in your behaviour would make them more in trouble than they already are by not thinking about the consequences of having one-year contracts.

As best as I can tell, the school making the offer is not using one-year contracts. The OP seems to want to use a less-desirable TT position as if it were a one-year contract.

Tenure track is still a one year contract, technically, every year, until tenure. At least that's how it's been in my experience. Of course there is an expectation of the contract being issued.

OP is in doubt between "getting in debt to get a future position" and "being a coordination problem for an institution". As I see it, OP is putting is physical existence at stake against the well-being of an institution.
This is borderline slavery, and it is self-inflicted!


text:
Is there an hope for a stuck post-doctoral career to recover
I'm an 'old' post-doc, meaning that I completed my doctoral studies already in 2015. This career length presupposes eligibility to tenure track professorships in Germany but unfortunately, I do not qualify. I have experienced a bullying situation from a senior researcher that postponed the publication of my data and I experience additional challenges because I have two small children. Therefore, the list of my publications is small, I haven't been around on conferences in the last four years and my scientific network has shrunk seriously due to these obstacles. However, I was awarded my own research funding which nevertheless was completed in the beginning of this year. I am waiting for two papers being published this year. Is there an hope for a progress of a academic career or should I consider leaving the academia? I'm in my forties and it seems to be the latest time point for leaving academia. As more of a background, I'm striving for the positions in language sciences in Germany.

Please edit the question to limit it to a specific problem with enough detail to identify an adequate answer.

@DanielHatton: Thank you for the suggestion! I am absolutely willing to try any strategy;) And did your academic career recover?

What kind of funding did you have? If you haven't done so, have you considered applying for Sachbeihilfe/Eigene Stelle with the DFG? You may even want to reach out to "your" Fachbeirat and ask them what they recommend you apply for.

you also need to be aware that what most people will answer to you will not apply, because Germany is especially tough for "junior" researchers like yourself (and me).

Yes, there is still a chance. I have friends who were in your position and succeeded in getting an academic job. It is also true that your chances are diminishing, but you already know that. Having said that, you need a two-prong strategy:

Continue to apply to as many academic jobs to which  you are qualified and willing (e.g. within the geographical range you can commute/move/etc.) There's a lot of luck involved in getting an academic job, and the search can be very discouraging. Take the search as a job itself, for example, by committing 3 hours a day to writing/searching/replying/networking and sending, say, 2 applications a week (if the positions exist, of course.)
Start steering your search away from academia. For example, start researching for academia-adjacent jobs like editor, school teacher (depends on locale requirements, of course), industry/commercial researcher, etc., then slowly move to jobs that are farther from academia but which you would still enjoy. There are lots of fulfilling non-academic jobs that academic types can do.

In general, I always suggest to start hanging out with people who left academia and are happy. Your attitude will change and paradoxically, your chances of getting an academic job will improve.
I wish you all the luck.
PD I recommend this very nice video from your fellow German, Sabine Hossenfelder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKiBlGDfRU8 . I find her very inspiring.

Thanks, this response contains quite a few good ideas.

There is always hope - and given the amount of time that has transpired since you earned your doctorate - I believe you already know that. Is 40s some sort of death sentence? Absolutely not. As long as you wish to remain in Academia, there is an earned place/spot for you and your expertise. No matter what, after all the time and energy you've already expended, please do not quit/give up!

Thank you so much for your encouragement!

You are SO welcome, and please feel free to continue keeping us abreast!

Since you are publishing again, you have a chance. I was working outside my field for three years but had a big review article published, which got me the position i then had for 30 years  so keep applying.


text:
How to get back to academia after a rough phase?
I am looking for some advice to return to academia around financial math and related branches. I used to be a pure math enthusiast. Back in my school days, I was a competitive mathematician (qualified Japan MO) and programmer which got me interested in the subject initially. I eventually decided to join a local university that didn't require me to gamble away a lot of money on rent, food and some tuition by moving abroad (to Cambridge, in my case). However, in the process, I gambled away my career - I graduated with extremely poor academic performance and I want to restart my career again. My current goal is to get into a graduate (PhD) program but I understand that it won't be easy.
I checked out several Master's programs across the globe and they all are extremely expensive. I was thinking of getting a Master's at a relatively cheaper university in Japan to offset the effect of my grades and then join a PhD program at a good global university. Is that a good idea or should I continue working as a banker (with JP Morgan) in risk and later try to get into Master's/PhD programs? I am slightly unwilling to bank on the former since a small uni is unlikely to have the environment that will allow me to conduct good research.
Please suggest me options that will give me more realistic chances of eventually pursuing a PhD in applied math. Your suggestions will be appreciated. If there's anything you would like to know about me in order to guide better, please ask.

"a small uni is unlikely to have the environment that will allow me to conduct good research" – this entirely depends on the university. Unless your research relies on access to prohibitively expensive computational resources, the environment you need at the Master's level is mainly good researchers in your particular area of interest, and those can certainly be found also in smaller universities.

@DanielHatton Yes, they fund employees and also allow relocation (someone suggested me to relocate to the US and join an affordable MS program). However, all that is not pragmatically possible given I'm an employee for less than a year. While this may not be true, I also felt that they love funding professional degrees (like CFA) and MBA much more than an MS.

If your past academic performance is poor then a good coursework Masters program will give you the opportunity to reset this, and give you a good platform for later applications for a PhD program.  (If your past grades are not good enough for direct entry into a coursework Masters program then you might be able to get into a lower-level postgraduate degree such as a Graduate Diploma and work your way up from there.)  Since you already have a plum banking job, you might want to consider part-time study at a nearby university while you continue to work.  Here you will need to weight the trade-off between income, cost, living convenience, etc., which is not something we can help you with.

Not all good universities are expensive. University is largely free in Germany and France, for example.

Thank you Professor Wolfgang for your response. Universities in France and Germany indeed offer extremely affordable (subsidized) courses and despite that, the quality of faculty/equipment is very rich. However, as I said, my GPA is below-average (around 2.5 on a 4.0 scale) and French/German universities, as I hear, are very strict in that regard.

I am thinking of three options. Which one do think is something I should consider? (1) leave job > get an MS from a good uni in Japan in a related field (since there are no good unis that teach financial math) > join a PhD in a good school (unlikely in financial math) > talk to Professors, work with/under them and take a transfer to the desired PhD program. (2) same as above except to join a mediocre uni in Germany/France since I am unlikely to meet the eligibility criteria for the good unis. (3) Work for a few years, join the research teams, and then directly apply for a pre-doc or a PhD.

@quant-puzzler This really isn't a very good place to get life advice. We can help with facts. We can't help with your big life choices.

You're right, I'm sorry for asking that. Could you please tell me what German and French unis focus on while admitting students to their Master's programs, that is, how much they stress on the GPA, research experience, internships, extra-curriculars and other things? Given my GPA is around 2.5 on a 4.0 scale, how do I get into a Master's program in Germany/France?

@quant-puzzler I don't actually know. I left German more than 20 years ago after my PhD; I've never been in a position to make these decisions.

I used to be a pure math enthusiast. Back in my school days, I was a competitive mathematician (qualified Japan MO) and programmer which got me interested in the subject initially. I eventually decided to join a local university that didn't require me to gamble away a lot of money on rent, food and some tuition by moving abroad (to Cambridge, in my case). However, in the process, I gambled away my career - I graduated with extremely poor academic performance and I want to restart my career again.

Have you considered applying to some PhD programs directly, while explaining this situation?
I cannot speak to your specific chances, but to me, your situation seems to show some promise such that some programs might be willing to overlook your academic record.
If you can complete some self-study in the meantime (for example, on-line courses, going through textbook exercises, writing reports on some topics of your interest), that could go along way to showing that you are a serious, but non-traditional, student.
You may not have to do yet more formal coursework (in a masters program) to show that you are interested in research.
However, you will want to talk to a trusted advisor, if possible, about your chances given your specific university, location, and coursework background. Good luck!


text:
Citing the results of other peoples experiment in my own work
I'm doing a research for my bachelor degree final project and it contains no experiments.
I found a paper which has published results of an experiment and their data and images/diagrams are so relevant to the subject of my work.
Is it kind of plagiarism if I use their data and images even with referencing to their paper?

If you cite the papers and explicitly mention that this result is obtained by XYZ et al [*] then it is not plagiarism. However, I don't think it is good for your thesis from a quality perspective.

If you cite their work, then it isn't plagiarism. You just make clear what things, especially ideas, came from them and which are your own. Plagiarism isn't about reuse, but about misattribution.
However, you may have to deal with copyright as well which will limit how much of what they say can be part of your paper. But quoting brief passages (with citation) is fine, as is pointing readers of your work to theirs.
Images, however, are a special copyright problem, since an image can be considered a "work" in its own right separate from the paper in which it occurs. To copy such images you may need to get permission from the copyright holder (as well as cite). You can create your own images from the original data, but not so similar as to be considered infringing.


text:
How to get out of the situation where one needs better grades to enter a degree program and to get better grades, one needs to enter a degree program?
Does anyone know how and where to apply for a Master's degree in the European/North-American regions as someone with poor UG grades? For a number of reasons, I was able to score only a meagre 2.5/4.0 GPA at a Japanese university which is extremely below-average. Currently, I work as a banking (risk) analyst with JP Morgan and I'm planning to switch back to academia.
I'm interested in applied math and I figured, while applying to universities, that I do not meet the eligibility requirements for most universities.

How do I get out of this chicken-and-egg situation where I need better grades to enter a degree program and to get better grades, I need to enter a degree program? What can I do to be eligible for a Master's degree (or perhaps directly a PhD or a pre-doc)? The eventual goal is to enter graduate school for a PhD.
Which countries/universities are more lenient in this regard? (I personally felt that the US/Canada are much more lenient in this regard, and view candidates more holistically. However, the amount of money required will bleed me dry.) I would appreciate if someone explains how universities in different countries stress on the GPA, research experience, internships/job experience, extra-curriculars and other things.

I suggest doing a master's in your home country first. And re-applying.

Roughly speaking, most German and Austrian universities don't care as much about your undergraduate GPA. For example, TU München, KIT or UniVie offer English-language M.Sc. degrees in Mathematics and do not have any GPA requirement. Once you have a Masters degree, that - especially the research experience/thesis component - will be weighted much more heavily in PhD admissions than long-ago B.Sc. grades.

This is exactly what I was searching for. :) There are universities that do not have a criteria mentioned but (still) focus on it heavily. Are you sure that is not the case? I'll do my research after this, but you helped me immensely by showing me the starting point.

"There are universities that do not have a criteria mentioned but (still) focus on it heavily." I would be very surprised if this were the case in Germany: while I don't think it's illegal (as would be the case for a job advert), it would be uncharacteristic.

Do you by any chance know universities in Netherlands and Switzerland that do not stress on the GPA and are affordable (or at least have options to get loans)? I don't mind learning their language up to a certain level if needed.

I don't know much about the Netherlands, although Switzerland is known for its high cost of living. The universities I named about were also mostly examples at random- there should be many more options.

We would usually refer to this as a Catch-22 rather than a "chicken-and-egg" situation, but in any case, it's actually not the unsolvable situation you think it is.  If you cannot gain entry to a Masters program, a reasonable approach would be to first gain entry to a lower-level postgraduate program (e.g., a graduate certificate or graduate diploma) and demonstrate good grades in this program to gain entry into the Masters program.  The lower-level postgraduate degrees generally have lower entry standards and are more suitable for someone with a poor undergraduate record.
Some universities will allow you to do a lower-level postgraduate program and then transfer into a Masters program with course credit if you get sufficiently good results in your courses.  Some will even allow you entry into a low-level postgraduate program without an undergraduate degree in that field (perhaps only having done a few courses in the field), which allows a pathway into postgraduate study for someone coming in from another field.  I would recommend you look for a university that allows this approach so that you reduce the total number of courses required for completion.  As to the entry standards for particular universities, this varies greatly on a case-by-case basis, so consider casting a wide net to gain initial offers of entry.

Yes, you're right. It is indeed referred to as a 'Catch-22' situation. Thank you for the correction.


text:
Will a low PhD GPA be a problem for industry R&D positions?
I am pursuing my Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering (controls) in India. My undergraduate GPA in mechanical engineering was good, but my PhD GPA has been low (6.8/10). Will this bad GPA affect my prospects for getting into robotics organisations like Kuka, Mitsubishi, etc in US/Europe location? If so, what can I do in the upcoming 3.5 years to mitigate this low GPA?

I am surprised that I cannot find a previous question of the form "Does PhD GPA matter when applying to subsequent industry positions?" I think that's a good question that would get you an answer. As your question's written now, though, it asks nearly 3 separate questions and has some unnecessarily specific information about your GPA. We have answers to the academic question: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/173/how-important-are-my-grades-to-the-rest-of-my-phd-career https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/107685/why-is-phd-gpa-considered-irrelevant.

Agree with user176372 -- I edited the question to focus it on the part that hasn't been answered before. I also specified that you're asking about R&D positions -- if that's not the case, we can't really help you, you might want to check out Workplace.SE. Finally, I recommend specifying the country or part of the world -- more specifically than "not US".

(U.S. based answer, may be different for other places)
I have never had anyone at any robotics company ask me about my Ph.D. GPA. In the U.S. people care much more about the subject of your research, your impact, and where your articles are published. I don't actually even remember my Ph.D. GPA but it was considered fairly mediocre. It has never once come up. In the U.S. it's seen as a minimum barrier to graduation.

In my case, my PhD was research only as was normal in Australia when I did it. When US places asked for my transcript, I got it but it just says "Enrolled in PhD, Enrolled in PhD, .... Enrolled in PhD, Awarded PhD". And no GPA at all because I took no formal classes during it.

In the countries whose PhD systems I'm most familiar with there are no grades for a PhD degree. So when applying in those I don't think you would stand out just not mentioning a GPA and it will probably never be asked. It sounds like this will depend highly on the country you are applying for jobs though (and to a lesser extend the country where you obtained your PhD). Might be worth including that information to get a better answer.

It will likely be worst for applying in countries where there is the expectation that a PhD degree comes with a grade and worse still if you have a PhD from there as they will actually be able to judge your grade as mediocre. People are more likely to judge based on things they (think they) understand.


text:
Is it possible to submit to an IEEE journal a modified paper after getting an “Immediate Reject”?
I submitted a paper to one of the IEEE transaction journals and got an “Immediate Reject” (how it is stated in ScholarOne system) from the EiC. The motivation behind this decision included language issues (unfixed typos) and serious concerns about the level of novelty in the research (for illustration I’ve included numerous examples of how my proposed methodology passes into known cases).
Since then, I’ve majorly edited the paper broadening and expending the novelty part and deprecating the known cases.
But the thing is that most of the descriptive (introductory) part remains almost the same, includng the title.
If I am correct IEEE has a policy of two possible situations (when rejected): “Resubmission allowed” and “Resubmission is not allowed”.
But in this situation, I got no further guidance. Thus the questions are:

Can I submit a new version of the research to the same journal with the same title?
Does it make any sense to submit there again after having such a track record or I will be definitely rejected?

First, don't submit a poorly prepared paper to an IEEE Trans. hoping to get expert reviews.   You are wasting reviewers' time.   Second, once your paper is up to 'standard', resubmit it and provide a cover letter that outlines major changes.  It is up to the EiC to decide whether your paper is now of interest.    As an aside, I've resubmitted a paper with 'Resubmission.. not allowed' after revising 60% of its contents.  The EiC allowed it to enter the review process.

If they aren't clear about "resubmission not allowed" then you can do it, but make sure that you address the novelty issue primarily. They definitely won't publish things they don't find "interesting". The language issue can probably be resolved if not too severe and the novelty is good.
If you get immediately rejected again, try somewhere else. It shouldn't cost too much time.

Not sure about what Immediate Reject actually means
but I can share a datapoint.
I once submitted to one of IEEE journals and,
after an eternity of waiting, the editor wrote back,
saying that there are serious blah blah issues
so he decided not to assign any reviewer and reject it right away.
The editor, however, included a note that once we fix the blah blah issues,
we can resubmit and assign the same editor in the cover letter.
I wouldn't assume that (the absence of) this note is
the absolute judgement regarding whether you can resubmit or not.
After all, how are they going to punish you if you insist?
It's not like you plagiarize or use improper words in the manuscript.
What you should do, given that you really want to resubmit,
is to address every single issue in the editor's feedback.
From your username/profile I assume you came from math department.
In IEEE world, IMO, people care more about if your things are new
(novel in their language) more than how your things relate to old things.
They care so much about novelty that some authors tend to inflate that
and include salesman languages in title/abstract/introduction.
(E.g. Pigeonhole Principle: a Novel Tool for Mathematical Counting.)
The fact that you chose to emphasis the relation to past works is most
likely interpreted as the lack of novelty, which you really need to fix.
(Funny enough, my advisor was more upset than i was because
he'd never heard that an editor can reject without reviewers,
given that we are doing some serious stuff, not claiming P = NP.)

i think a lot of people would find your hypothetical P=NP paper serious. (Not to mention "novel"...)

I would be very very grateful if people know me well enough they won't assume I am seeking attention but have something to offer.

"...heard that an editor..without reviewers' -> it's a concern if your supervisor hasn't heard of desk reject!

So it's called desk reject, TIL. Maybe my language/memory is not precise, but the concern is that he had to review much worse papers that should have been desk-rejected; but he reviewed. Yet his volunteer karma does not pay off. Something like that; not speaking for my advisor. Maybe he was trying to comfort me.

he'd never heard that an editor can reject without reviewers, given that we are doing some serious stuff It happens all the time, just try submitting to Nature.

Nature, Science, Cells. As much as I want to publish in prestigious journals, I wouldn't speedrun to the final boss. Do people really think that they are not risking anything submitting to high-reward journals?

If they haven't said you can't resubmit, then you can. Be sure to explain in your cover letter what has changed and why they should consider your paper now. Don't play dumb - the editorial management system is sure to flag your paper as a resubmission, and without such an explanation their default reaction is going to be "desk reject".
I'm kind of surprised you write that you "majorly edited the paper [by] broadening and expending the novelty part and deprecating the known cases" and yet "most of the descriptive (introductory) part remains almost the same". They desk rejected, which is a higher bar to fix than major revision. Submitting mostly the same paper will lead to another desk rejection.


text:
Mentioning location of paper submission while under review
I just submitted my first paper to a rather prestigious conference/journal (“XYZ”) as an undergrad. I’m currently applying to jobs, so I’d like to mention “the paper is under review for XYZ”. However, a friend told me that it’s considered bad form to mention where one submitted a paper while it’s under review as someone can break the “blindness” of the review. This doesn’t seem right because if they want, they can just look up the title and my name is on the arxiv copy of the paper. Is he correct?

Unless the review is double blind, the reviewers already know the authors. Even in double blind reviewing, giving the paper's title & authors can break the blind.

It can be considered "bad form" because it can be pretentious. I've submitted the following three papers to Nature.

@Buffy My favorite is the news article written about the next new miracle cure, the definite proof of some long-suffering problem in mathematics, the standard medical care that's actually killing everyone off...all based on real important science that's been submitted for peer review! What higher recognition could such work ever hope to achieve?

I wouldn't mention it; it doesn't mean anything.
You could have 30 papers under review in Science or Nature tomorrow (or substitute any favorite journal or conference in your field) if you wanted to spend a bunch of time with their manuscript submission software, and depending on venue a bunch of money on submission fees. What does that say about the quality of any of those submissions? Nothing.
I think that's a better reason to just leave such things as vaguely "submitted" or "in review"; it gives someone reading your CV information about the state of projects you've worked on, without attempting to make unearned claims about the prestige or value of the work.

Yes, just "submitted"  is a small token of your seriousness, without being toooo pretentious or presumptive.