text:
What if my professor writes me a negative LOR, in order to keep me working with him?
I am a undergrad student, and I am currently conducting summer research under a professor.
During our last meeting, I have revealed that I wish to go to school A for my graduate study. But my prof rather wanted me to stay at my current school for master/phd; i.e., stay and work for him.
Well, I have already spent 3 years in my current undergrad school and I know it too well it is not where I want to go.
The problem is that, this prof is the only person who can comment on my research experience/potential.  (Because I have been working 2 years with him; this year is the second year).
Right now, I can sense something not right in the relationship between my prof and I. At the end, if I go ahead and ask him to write me a recommendation letter, I am sure he would write one. But the question is, there can be a chance that he writes negatively, such that I would get rejected everywhere, and have nowhere to go except staying at my current school and do graduate study with him.
What should I do?

More detail info:
There used to be a PhD student who published quality paper and taking care of things in the lab. The Prof is almost always away so he definely need someone to do this kind of lab managing job. As far as I know, none of his graduate students publish paper for 3 years in a row except for that Phd student. Currently, that PhD student is graduated this year so I guess he was looking for a candidate as a replacement.

the "can" part is vague for me. Can you give some detail how do you smell a rat?

Is this a hypothetical question?

Writing a negative letter for this reason (i.e. because your prof wants to keep you, not because your work is actually bad) is outright unethical. Enough so that, if he actually does it, I'd strongly suggest that you not stay and work for him at all, because who knows what other ethical violations he would make you deal with.

The fact that your advisor wants to work with you, does not necessarily mean that he wants to destroy your career if you go somewhere else. It is like assuming that if you break up with your girlfriend / boyfriend he / she will kill your cat and burn your house. It is still possible but it is not the most common scenario. So, talk things with your advisor and see where he stands, before assuming the worst.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that the professor might write a negative letter just to destroy your chances of going anywhere else? Or are you (sorry to be blunt, but it needs to be said) just being paranoid? It would reflect extremely badly on your professor if he wrote letters to people in his own field saying "This student is bad" and then took you on as his own student.

To add to the dating analogy: when you "broke up" with your advisor, did you make sure to say "it's not you, it's me?" If you somehow gave off the vibe that your current advisor/school is not good enough for you, of course your professor will be a bit unhappy. But you shouldn't assume that this means your professor will write a bad letter; cases of advisors "dissing" their advisees, are few and far in between. (From the point of view of a vengeful professor, it is much simpler to refuse letter requests which will often accomplish largely the same.)

@DavidZ It happens more than you think. Not outright negative letters, but lukewarm ones with basically no effort put into them. Someone I know had one professor admit he didn't even bother translating his letter even though this professor speaks very good English. It also depends largely on the surrounding culture. Some schools retain the large majority of their undergrads willing to do grad studies, so when some leave it comes off as a shock, and some view it as a treason.

@user8001 I was talking about outright negative letters, and specifically about letters that misrepresent the candidate's abilities in a negative light.

@DavidZ Sorry, I made a mistake; my comment was directed at the other David. But when applying to top graduate schools, a letter with no effort put into it often means the same thing as a negative letter as far as your application is concerned.

The worst type of recommendation letter is no letter at all. Very few people will waste their time writing a negative recommendation, seeing as no recommendation is easier and absolves them of any actual work.

I've had worse: a Prof committing to writing a LOR and lying to me and telling me that she did it when she didn't send the letter on purpose in order to get me rejected from the school I tried to transfer to. Luckily I got accepted somewhere else and was out of there.

How about ASKING if the prof can write you a strong letter, and believing the answer?

This is the thing I'm also afraid of. I don't think it's a hypothetical scenario.

It's always good to anticipate possible outcomes. However, you have a relationship problem here. This is something you need to get used to dealing with. Welcome to the real world! Take your professor out to lunch, have a beer with him, explain your situation, gauge his response. Right now you're just guessing / worrying because you aren't connecting with your prof in a way that is helpful in this situation. The personal approach works in this case. It works in the real world when you get there, it works in academia as well.

This doesn't make much sense: writing a bad letter "so you will stay" will obviously make you run away anyway, even if you fail the first application… there would be no point at all.

Writing bad letters of recommendation because of personal disappointment about a student leaving is so disproportionately unethical that I cannot believe that it happens with any significant frequency. It is not what I would be worried about.
In the end, most professors take pride in their students growing up, going out into the world, and being successful. Students are a bit our kids too -- sure, it would be nice if the kids stayed in the neighborhood, could continue to mow the lawn, and come over for dinner twice a week; but if they move out and are successful, we're proud nonetheless and hope they stay in contact. And if there's something we can help for them to be successful (like writing letters of recommendation), then that's what we do!

From workplace stackexchange: What's worse then giving a reference to an employee who leaves for a better job, keeping employees who aren't capable of finding a better job.

Having only worked with one research supervisor, if he/she wants to screw you over you are basically screwed and there is not much you can do. If your CV lists research experience and you do not have a letter of recommendation from the supervisor, that is essentially the same as, and possibly worse than, having a negative letter.
I find it hard to believe that a supervisor would hold an undergraduate student "hostage" since there is no upside to the supervisor. A supervisor might stop investing time in an undergraduate student that he/she knows is leaving, but that does not mean the supervisor will write a bad letter. I would suggest talking to him/her and try and figure out what is going on.

A friend of mine in a similar situation got a completely trashing letter, saying she was incompetent, unreliable, lazy... When she discovered it, she stop sending that letter and got accepted to every place she applied to. It is not common practice, but sadly it does happen.

@Davidmh while I do not doubt that it happens, I find it hard to believe that someone would write such a letter. That said, even a bad letter like that, which makes it clear that there is an issue with the supervisor, might be better than no letter.

@Davidmh can you tell how did she find out?

@Ooker for one of the applications she had to send the documents herself.

@Davidmh the prof gave her the LOR that they wrote baly about her?

@Ooker yes. She was not supposed to read it, though.

@Davidmh: Wow, that adds ineptitude to malice on the side of the professor :-(

@WolfgangBangerth maybe the professor gets tired of being asked many times to send her LOR, so they wants to show their hand?

@Davidmh This is basically defamation!

Preamble: If you are in the US there is something that is legal and built into the system that you can use as a last recourse. It is generally frowned upon and you should certainly try the other avenues first (cf. the other answers). I'm including the option here not to advocate it, but to make sure you are fully informed of your options.

Are you based in the United States and applying to graduate schools based in the United States? The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act stipulates the applicants have the right to inspect the letters of recommendation written on their behalf, unless said right was explicitly waived by the student. During the application process you will almost always encounter a question "Do you waive your right to review the letters of reference?" while entering the list of your referees. If you feel you have a real cause for concern, you can leave that box un-ticked. If someone actually wrote you a negative letter for the reason you described, it would be highly unethical; if you have the evidence (not just the letter written, but also proof of intent behind the letter) you can get him or her in big trouble.

Typically when a writer is asked to submit reference letters for applicants to graduate programs which fall under such a disclosure/waiver rule, the writer is informed at the time of submission whether the applicant has or has not waived the the right to view the letter. Hence not waiving your rights can have the desired effect as a deterrent.
On the other hand, some people view not waiving your right as indicating your own lack of trust in the letter writer (which in your case will be true) and will hence believe that the letter writers may not have been as candid in their evaluation as they otherwise would have. So this may, in some situations, adversely affect the perception of your application.

Many profs won't  write recs unless the right to inspect  is waived.  I won't, and many of my colleages won't.  If I can't write a particularly strong letter, I tell the student this, and ask if they still want my letter.  If I can't write anything positive at all, I won't write the letter.

@ScottSeidman: everything you say is true. But the OP is specifically worried about the case when a professor will deliberately write a negative letter, and from his or her point of view it is exactly when your comment does not apply.

If the student doesn't intend to waive, don't surprise the recommended with this.  A likely scenario is that the letter, even if it was going to be strong, won't be submitted.

The better action is to ask if the letter will be strong,  and then just trust the prof

The better question is: if the OP doesn't trust the prof, why is the OP asking for a letter? And the OP answered in the question already: "The problem is that, this prof is the only person who can comment on my research experience/potential."

@ScottSeidman (from outside US) what is the point of having the right to inspect if you have to pre-waive before the letter is even written?

@Mindwin -- that IS the point.  Many people will not write letters without the guarantee of confidentiality, and that is not consistent with the right to inspect, so most people waive that right.

@Mindwin The reason is that the right to inspect all records came from Congress, while the unofficial confidentiality requirement came from academia (with some support from Congress, by making it possible to waive the right to review recommendations -- you can't waive it for other educational records). Also, if someone is being really unethical and sending a letter behind your back, the waiver wouldn't apply to it, nor does it apply to a recommendation used for other purposes.

@cpast: the last sentence of yours requires some clarification. Let me try to provide it:  Generally you have no expectation to be able to view recommendation letters written on your behalf; that is frequently the case for job applications. The US Congress made it so that recommendation letters in the context of admission to educational institutions must be allowed to be inspected by the applicant, provided that the applicant has not explicitly waived this right. So the waiver doesn't apply in the last sentence of cpast's comment because they don't fall under the law to start with.

@ScottSeidman What is the purpose of the confidentiality?

@Calchas, among other things, it facilitates frank communication between admissions committees and the recommender.  It's simply a facilitator for ho esty.

Do you have some other reason to want to move? eg, proximity to family, climate, wanting a change of scene? Even if your professor is scheming in the way you are suggesting, there would be no incentive for him to write a negative letter if he knows you will be leaving your current university regardless.

It's very rare to stay at the same place for undergrad and graduate school. Staying put would look suspicious on your CV. So moving just for grad school should be a legitimate reason in itself.

@user137 I wouldn't say it's very rare, nor would it look suspicious.  If you do your PhD and postdoc at the same place, that's a bit more suspicious, but not necessarily bad.

@Kimball We might be doing different research. In biology type work I barely hear about it.

@user137 I don't know about biology, but I know many  math students (but still a minority) who went to the same grad school as undergrad for largely geographical reasons.  Also, I think this practice may be more common in some countries/universities than others.

This seems a tricky situation. What you could do is try to write your motivation letter in a way that the people reading it alongside the recommendation would

find it a classical (good) motivation letter if the recommendation of your professor is sincere and positive and
understand that the recommendation letter is not sincere if you prof does write a bad letter for the sake of keeping you at you current place.

This is not easy, but you could explain that you prof asked you to stay and state why you think the place you apply to would be a better fit for you (but do not despise you current place openly, it would reflect bad on you).
This answer is not completely satisfactory to me, but I do not see anything best right now.

This is actually a brilliant chess move. If the Prof is really antagonistic (he may not like the idea of the student leaving, but he needn't be actually antagonistic) that leaves you all options open. Furthermore, if you speak well and and positively about your current place and constructively and professionally about your work (if that's justified), then a negative reference letter by the Prof may actually reflect bad on himself. However, note that, while the Prof is disappointed and shows his emotion, this does not mean that he would actually give an unprofessional reference.

Since it sounds like you have at least a year left at your current institution, I would suggest building a few relationships with other professors who can write for you -- diversification is almost always a good strategy.
The other thing to remember is that although recommendations help, graduate schools are most interested in your ability to add value to their program through tuition and/or your skills as a researcher/scholar.
So, if you are in interested in g-school, I would think about your overall CV and demonstrating you can add value to a given program. One way to get a head start is to contact programs and professors you are interested in working with and ask about their plans and how you can help push their research agenda forward.

My advice: 'run....'.  A professor who only cares about him/herself is a bad sign.  If I know a student of mine can get into a top school, I'll do all my best to help him/her get in.  Then before he/she leaves, I'll say, do remember me when you're famous!
Hopefully in a few years time he/she will give me his/her first born :)

Just bring things out into the open.  Here's an example of how to do this.
Over coffee, tell the prof something about your motivation to spread your wings and seek a challenge at another university (it should be something true, but it could be exaggerated -- for example, I want to go to New Orleans because it's the birthplace of jazz, or I want to go to the U of Mich because that's where my parents met, or I want to go to Cornell because I love waterfalls).
Next, say that you have really appreciated the opportunity he has given you to get involved in research; you realize that not all undergrads get an opportunity like what you had.
Let him sing your praises at this point, if he is so inclined.
Interrupt when he's mostly done and say that you realize that when a professor spends a lot of time mentoring a student, it's generally an investment in the future, and you feel bad about leaving him high and dry.
Let him talk about his regrets about you leaving if he wants to.
Remind him about the waterfalls or the jazz or whatever from step one.
See if he shows some understanding and support.  If not, confess your fear that he will want you to stay so badly that his feelings might color his letter of recommendation.
Then listen.
(By the way, I would leave alcohol out of it.)

In my opinion, so far in here there is no satisfied answer for this situation. As StrongBad says, "if he/she wants to screw you over you are basically screwed and there is not much you can do". I think if you really want to actively do something, so that you can have the feeling of controlling the situation, you will need a plan...
People tend to react with an event with the emotion they are carrying. For example, if a person just have a meeting and you can't ask them directly because it's confidential, you can offer them a cup of coffee right after they has a meet. If they answers in a positive way, you can conclude that the meeting has positive results. If they answers in a negative way, the results might be negative.
> Make a good plan before applying this in your situation. I propose this: try to know the time he is free, and the drink he likes. After he finishes writing your LOR, meet him in person, invite him to have a drink in his free time. Or you can bring the drink to him directly as thank. Don't focus on the word he answers, focus on how comfortable he is when answering you.
There are higher techniques to figure out what others are hiding. If you want to know more, I recommend you the book You Can Read Anyone, but you can also google them easily. Note that when you trying to figure out what his altitude is, your plan is also what you hide to him. If he has some experience in psychology, be careful but at the same time be natural.

But, don't get me wrong. I really try to avoid using these techniques as best as I can. If he doesn't know the plan, good for you, but if he finds something unnatural in your action, the least bad thing is now he sees you as a problem, to the worst thing that you have a cold war to your advisor. Learning martial arts isn't for using, but for avoiding to be hurt.
While there's life, there's hope. Try to reconcile to your advisor if you can. Try to ask, with honestly (and with some techniques  if you need), why he needs you to stay with him. Propose other candidate that can meet his expectation. This will be the best for both world.
As others have said, the best for you is the best for him. So the best for him, is the best for you.

Wow, there is some solid pseudo-science hard at work in this answer :-)

you mean the plan? I'm not an expert in this field, but so far it works to me...

Come on, subliminally manipulating others to tell the truth without them knowing it? I'm sure the CIA would love to know about your technique.

It's not about knowing the truth, it's about extract as much information as you can. You won't (and maybe never) know the truth with this. I don't think this is called "manipulation", although it can also be hard to refuse it completely.

authors: علي الجعباوي


text:
confused after accepting PhD offer
I have recently accepted a PhD offer. The subject is very close to what I was working on during my Master's years. I really worked hard back then and fortunately managed to publish high-quality papers.
I had several offers at the time and it was really difficult for me to choose between them since they were all good universities. I finally chose the university that I felt better about it and I was happy by my choice at that time. The factors that I liked about the place I chose were that:

Their field is very close to what I have done during my Master's years and therefore I can easily proceed during my PhD.

The supervisor is a well-known person with a good resume and lots of connections in academia.

The chemistry seemed right and the supervisor seemed supportive and was very eager to have me as a PhD student.

The problem is, after some time passed, I started to develop lots of negative thoughts and now, some issues that were not important to me back then, are freaking me out right now.
I am thinking I decided too quickly and I should have applied to some better universities that I didn’t consider at that time.
First of all, the PhD offer that I have accepted is in a non-English speaking country. Although at first I was very eager and excited to learn a new language, it now freaks me out to live in a place where people don't speak my language.
Also, now I am thinking maybe my current field of research is not something worth pursuing. I was really passionate about this topic during my Master's years but now I am thinking maybe it is not a worthy topic and it will be too restricting when applying for a postdoc.
I don’t know what to do. I don’t want to decline my offer since I think it would really annoy the professor. And considering the fact that she has lots of connections in academia and that academia is a very small world, I think it would be very bad for my reputation. But I just can't get rid of these negative thoughts.
I was wondering if anyone has been in this situation before and if this is common between students.
UPDATE:
Thanks for all the answers. It has been 6 months from when I posted this and I just wanted to share my experience, I hope it might help someone.
I talked to the professor and asked for some extra time to decide. I was really lucky since the professor understood my situation and didn't pressure me. I ended up finding a much better offer and accepted the new one and I am totally happy about it.
Here is my advice to help others not to make the same mistake:
Never ever accept a PhD offer too quickly. Even if it sounds very good. Take as much time as you can and consider every option you have. Do talk to your classmates and previous professors. Their opinions might be very helpful to you when choosing an offer.

Some doubts are pretty natural. While the bird in the hand may be worth two in the bush, those others look pretty sweet from a distance. I don't think any of the issues you raise should cause you to really want to switch except, possibly, the language issue. However, you should note that academics nearly everywhere are English speakers even if imperfectly. If the other country is, for example, in Western Europe, you will find that nearly every working age adult (and all kids) speak English very well. The issue will be in group situations in which they might prefer their native language over English. Then it would depend on their willingness to accommodate. If you are in a field in which large groups of people much interact it might be an issue. For daily life you can get along pretty well nearly everywhere.
I've not been in your situation but have colleagues all over the world and language has seldom been an issue.
For everything else, I'd just suggest you relax.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Book with comprehensive description of (history and operation of) Harvard university
I really am not sure if my question falls under this Stack Exchange forum, but I am going to try.
A friend of mine asked me if there is a book with some sort of comprehensive description of Harvard university. For example a book covering the history of the university, the schools and departments, fraternities/sororities, services available to the students, as well as potentially other useful general-purpose information regarding the operation of Harvard university. Personally, I have never been to Harvard (or MIT), so I have next to zero knowledge about answering the question immediately.
One educated guess was to try to figure out if there is a relevant book by Arcadia Publishing. However, searching for harvard university did not return very relevant results.
Another idea for searching for a relevant book, was through the bookstore that is usually found on big universities. For instance, UVA bookstore has an entire collection with books about UVA. Of course I believe that this can not be the norm in general, but Harvard has a longer history than UVA so I would expect for someone to be able to find a few general purpose books regarding the history, the structure, and the relationship of the university with its students (with elements from modern time as well). Unfortunately, I am not entirely sure which bookstore is the official one for Harvard university - assuming that there is one.
Finally, from what I understand, there is also scattered information available in electronic brochures that is created by schools or departments and is potentially related to admissions for new students. However, there is no such information gathered in a printed book - at least nothing that I could find. Perhaps you know something related for a specific school, e.g. Engineering and Applied Sciences, Arts, etc?
Are there any people out there who have graduated from Harvard and can potentially point me to the right direction? In which bookstores would you search around Harvard so that you can potentially find a book (or books, where different books specialize on different aspects of what I am looking for) with this kind of information? Can you also provide me with some online references?

You are aware of the Handbook for Students?  Pretty much every university has something like this (it might be part of the university catalog), but these days they are mostly distributed online, and in some cases are never printed on paper, since there will be changes from year to year.

Thank you very much @NateEldredge . This is a good suggestion that I momentarily forgot to check! Indeed, there is lots of useful information along the lines that I am looking for. And you are also right that this kind of book is usually not printed on paper as there are changes from year to year. Nevertheless, it is a valuable resource in the direction that I am looking for.

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


text:
Is it necessarily an advantage of a mathematical work to find connection between two different fields?
EDIT: My question in the title was motivated by the following situation.
A mathematician from my field has solved a problem in this field which was considered to be important. In fact he even was awarded an international prize for this work. To solve this problem he has used methods from a completely different field of math which are not known to experts in his original field.
He managed to use these methods to solve few other open problems in the field, although less known than the first one. However he has failed to get other people to be interested in these tools since they require a really different education. For the same reason he cannot suggest such kind of problems to his students since they also would need to spend a lot of time to master the background from different fields, but even if they do, they would probably feel isolated.
Thus I am wondering to what extend this situation is typical, and whether there are other examples of mathematical works whose interdisciplinary character played a negative role in one's career.

I think it played an extremely positive role in the career you describe - at first. After all, it resulted in an international prize. However, things probably derailed a bit when he expected other people to want to learn his ultra-niche technique. The narrow applicability of the technique is demonstrated by the mathematician's own inability to apply it to other significant problems. It's great to do something interdisciplinary, but not great to try and shove it down other people's throats, who might not be interested in all of the involved disciplines.

Your question doesn't add up to me. First:  "In fact he was even awarded an international prize for this work." And then: "However he has failed to get other people to be interested in these tools[.]" I don't get it: receiving an international prize is close to the highest possible level of interest.  Are you saying that the international mathematical community is very excited about his solution to the problem but no one cares about the tools he developed to solve it?  Doesn't sound like the international mathematical community that I know.

@DepressedDaniel: That guy found few other applications of the method. I did not say they are not significant, but the first problem was quite famous in the field and was open for a long time. Every single person has limited abilities. And at some point some new look by other people, e.g. students, might be necessary.

@PeteL.Clark: You are right. The solved problem was considered to be important. The tools are known to be powerful. But they belong to a completely different field and require completely different background. Normally it would take years to learn them for people from a different field.

@PeteL.Clark: Let me add that the guy did not really develop new tools from a different field, he just applied them in a very new context.

@PeteL.Clark: I think that now, more than 10 years after publication of the first work, nobody in the field understands all the details of the proof. As far as I know that paper was refereed by at least two experts representing different fields.

That helps, but I still don't quite understand.  For instance, you suggest that he cannot suggest problems to his students, but I don't understand why.  Most math students have to spend years learning background necessary to work on the problems posed to them by their advisor.  So your colleague seems to be in a wonderful position: almost singlehandedly, he has expertise in multiple fields, which has already led to the solution of multiple problems, one of them very important, for which he won an international prize.  I would expect him to be beating away potential students with a stick.

Well, this is what I heard from one of the colleagues. "I prefer not to learn these methods because it will take me several years, and during this period of time I will not have publications." My feeling is that other people in the field think similarly.  Students would also need to learn several areas.

When a mathematical subfield experiences an influx of ideas and techniques from a different subfield, your colleague's reaction is the most standard short-term reaction of researchers in the field.  Students have the advantage here precisely because they can afford to spend several years learning the areas without publications.

Also, in my experience, most areas of mathematics require students to "learn several areas": e.g. in order to do number theory (my field) a student must learn some amounts of: real analysis, complex analysis, finite group theory, Lie theory, commutative algebra, noncommutative algebra, homological algebra, algebraic geometry, differential geometry, algebraic topology....Most students spend five or six years in a PhD program taking several courses a semester.  That's a lot of time to learn a lot of things.

It sounds like you might enjoy learning more about the history of math and science.  Gregor Mendel might be a fun figure to start with. // If this question is more than just intellectual curiosity, in other words, if an assessment of the applicability of the prize-winner's story to some choice you need to make... then it would help if you would lay that out for us.

@PeteL.Clark: I'm guessing a combination of a mid-tier department in England, where PhD students are subject to a hard limit of 3 years, and a fairly insular field.  I wonder why this person doesn't move to some large department in the US where the culture would appreciate this sort of work more.

@PeteL.Clark: The example of number theory is an interesting one. As far as I know one needs a very broad background in order to work there. However there is an essential difference with what I am telling. By now that sort of a broad background is standard in number theory, so lots of people speak the same mathematical language.  But in my field that guy is the only person who knows the relevant background. He should have really many students in order that they did not feel isolated.

@AlexanderWoo: There might be many reasons, including the personal ones, why a person does not move to another department in a different country. In the case of my colleague, I do not know what are his chances to find a position in a large department in the US. While his field is represented in the US, but not on large departments. May be I do not well understand how the US system works, but it is not clear to me whether a large department would be really interested to develop this direction.

It is clear that knowledge in other fields can be helpful, especially if one has an unusual combination of expertise such that one can see things others would miss even on well-studied problems. In fact, the variety of thoughts between colleagues of different background makes collaboration in math-related fields so much exciting.
It is hard to find examples where interdisciplinarity played a negative role in one's career, just for the same reason we don't learn about most of the useless approaches in mathematics (definitions that turned out to be useless, in particular not well-defined, propositions that turned out not to help for the problem they were thought for, etc.).
But from common sense I think that interdisciplinarity can never be negative unless you "cross paradigms", for example by mixing different contradicting systems of axioms to solve the same problem. Fortunately, in mathematics it's (today) quite clear what is not allowed.

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


text:
How to supervise and support a smart but rebellious student?
Last term I was supervising a very good student for his B.Sc. graduation project. Upon his request, I suggested the topic and gave a clear reading list, tasks, and a roadmap for the entire project. I know that had he followed it we would've ended up with a paper (or at least achieve some preliminary results that could become a paper later on), and he would've acquired many new skills (I've already supervised other students and done the same). But this one was very unorganized and rebellious. For example, he would repeatedly read something that is totally outside the scope of the project and wants me to discuss/explain it to him (he's interested in the field of research I'm working on), he would skip some of the weekly meetings and not write his reports with the excuse that he wanted to read more.. etc.
He's a smart student and can learn on his own, but he does not have any experience in research and he does not understand why I am managing the project like that, even though I explained it several times. Eventually, he dropped out of the term for personal reasons. Now he's contacting me to see if he can work with me again.
The student is smart as I said and I can see he is keen to do post-graduate studies in the field I work in, but I find his personality very unstable and my experience with him is very unpleasant.
How do you support such a student? Or should I do it? Or do you think it's better to avoid him?

Are you over-managing  him? Treating him like a boss and not a teacher? See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Will_Hunting.

@Buffy Well, I say: read this section from that book or that book, write some paragraphs about what you've learned, and let's discuss it next week. Instead of this taking place, I find an email from him asking me about something irrelevant to the project. Is that over-managing?

You describe an important part of this story only briefly: There seem to have been some "confrontation moments" where you explained to him why you do things the way you do. How did he respond to this (during the meeting)? Was there any hint that he understood your explanations? Was there any reason to assume that things would improve from there?

@lighthousekeeper Not confrontation. For example, I would say "come to every meeting even if you're not done with the task of that week because we can alter the project depending on your progress (i.e. no need to go too advanced if you're not ready for this stuff), and that I want to make sure that you understand this part and are able to derive this formula because the rest of the project builds on it... again with the possibility to simplify things based on me checking on your progress and having actual discussions.."

I'm just trying to diagnose the problem from the standpoint of the student. Maybe the project wasn't hard enough and he is bored. Maybe he sees you as a very valuable resource and wants to discuss everything he finds interesting with you. Some bored-but-bright students do poorly. Some are disruptive.

He/she seems to have some preconceived idea of what research is, his/her own learning style or is simply a fish out of water.  Our job as a supervisor is some times simply to sketch out a boundary in which they can thrash around a bit.  If a material is out of scope, just say so, and say to the student that he/she can learn the materials in his/her own time.   Emphasize that you have time only for relevant materials.  Lastly, be patient.   Their lack of research skills will come together sooner or later.

For some students it might be possible to "go meta" giving them some resource on process. But successful researchers often have messy process.

OK, it doesn't sound like you gave him actual feedback then. Without feedback, it's always hard to improve.

What is the time frame for this project? Are their concerns with budget (i.e. are experiments expensive in your field)

What's wrong with the student's reading something outside the scope of the project and asking for help with it? That's part of supervising, or generally being a professor (at least, one dealing with students) rather than just teaching a class.

Have you discussed with him what the progression from undergraduate to master's level to PhD level to professional research looks like, and the skills he will need to obtain to move between the levels? And is there any chance that he misunderstands what research is? When I was working on my PhD-that-wasn't, I unfortunately thought research was finding something no one had worked on at all, and coming up with everything fully on my own (a series of light-bulb moments), rather than building on the work of others. I could have used a recalibration. Any chance this describes him too?

It kinda sounds like this student wants to skip the "boring" undergraduate level research and jump right to the fun "creative" graduate/post-graduate level stuff, which again makes me think he might have some fundamental misunderstandings about what research is? Sounds like he could use some more guidance. And if he's not understanding what you're saying, there's a chance that you may need to change your communication approach (or he could just be stubborn; but it's best to try a different approach first since communication is a two-way street).

@anomaly Nothing, apart from the obvious - no project report, no credit. It's no different from a student who ignores a course syllabus, reads a lot of interesting but irrelevant stuff, never turns in any homework assignments, and fails the final exam.

Sounds like every student I ever had (except, perhaps for the dropping-out). They are adults. If they want to learn on their own and explore sidelines just out of curiosity, who am I to tell them not to? They may need longer, but that's not my responsibility.

Suggestion: You have your style and the student has theirs. Not all teachers are a good match for all students. You certainly have the right to decide this isn't a good match for you, or if the "stretch" to meet the student (as some answers suggest) is not worth it for you.

Read up on the INTP personality type. I'm guessing this student is close to this.

I really want to draw your attention to the less upvoted posts that highlight that this student is facing personal issues, and went as far as to withdraw from the term. This is not something that you do if you just have mild problems. I really identify with the student you describe, and I truly think that a) You should not judge their character based on their behaviour during a difficult time and b) If you continue working with them, expect gradual attitude change.

The style you offer is a style that works for certain types of methodical students. You impose a quite rigid learning style on the student. For creative, fast, curious students, this may be quite a tedious process and demotivating. They need something where they can roam freely, at least at the beginning - the tricky part is to get them to converge on a concrete topic and outcome towards the end.
My recommendation is to develop a topic area with the student, brainstorm, direct them to resources, and let them define (with guidance) possible outcomes of the work. Let them run with it and be available for feedback and guidance, but do not force it. Only if the project does not go well after, say a third or half the time, you start constraining the search and impose a more constrained approach.
I would also state this upfront so the student understands that the freedom to roam freely comes at the cost that it needs to show results, the alternative being a guided project, so that the conditions of the collaboration (this is how I would treat it) are known upfront and they can decide whether or not they wish to work this way.
Smart students going off on their own can spectacularly fail (that's why you need to catch it mid-project in case you need to invoke a Plan B) or they can spectacularly succeed.

I like this idea, though I'd make sure the student understands the basics of what research is first. Because if that's the problem, this approach will likely fail very spectacularly.

@bob Some people intuitively understand it. It may profit from guidance, but one needs to be careful not to be too overmeticulous.

Its also possible that this student has, say, 8 weeks to produce a finished piece of research that could be worth upto 25% of their degree. In those situations, especially if its a subject where an experiment might take, say a week, and cost a substantial amount of money  - students need clearly defined projects, and they don't have time to wander off the beaten track much.

@IanSudbery Of course, if there is a tight timeline, all my suggestions are up to debate.

The critical thing that any "disorganized" student needs to learn is time management. The first priority of the supervision should be that, and the second priority defining the actual work content. It doesn't matter much how the student gets from A to B, so long has he/she actually arrives at B in a timely manner. (I assume a "B.Sc. graduation project" has a deadline that is for practical purposes immutable.)

@alephzero I am not sure OP's student is "disorganized". He may just operate in a different way from OP's expectations. Disclosure: I have been often asked to help with/deal with so-called "difficult cases" and have a track record of getting (sometimes very) successful outcomes.

@CaptainEmacs OP says,"But this one was very unorganized and rebellious."

@FreePawn And then he gives an example that I would not consider rebellious at all, just disorganized or overenthusiastic without direction. Interestingly, one can get even "rebellious" students to exceed their own and everybody's expectations, when one does not treat them as a "wild animal" that needs to be tamed and subdued but shows them how to hone their enthusiasm and channel their powers to achieve what they feel gives them a sense of success and "self-actualization" (boy, I hate this word, but, for a change, it actually fits here).

@CaptainEmacs Thanks for your answer which I find very helpful. Just want to clarify what I meant by rebellious (I checked its meaning after reading your comment to make sure as I am not a native English speaker, but I find that it matches exactly what I meant). Students are required by my Uni regulations to attend the meeting and write reports for their B.Sc. graduation project. The system requires me to mark him absent if he didn't attend and their reports are considered just like HW for regualr courses. By breaking these rules and not listening to my requests he's being rebellious.

@Fizicklyn I understand now. Well, to be honest, I find it depressing that university increasingly becomes like school, treating its students like immature children who have to be led by the hand. Coming from the pre-Bologna German system, I still have this picture of students being adults; once you are in the later stages of your studies, and certainly at project stage, you do what you want, as long as you get your stuff done, and have accumulated enough passed courses. It seems there is no space for people anymore who do not conform to a rigid way of doing stuff. Not your fault.

@Fizicklyn That could be disorganised rather than rebellious (forgetting about a meeting, not having time to write a report or knowing if there is anything useful to include, ect). Furthermore if you have a smart student they may find some of the things you are expecting them to do to be just busywork if they can't see a point to them (particularly the reports). You might have more success if you change from thinking: "you must do this to do research" to "you must do this to pass the course, since you have to do this time waster lets at least teach you some useful tools".

Similarly with the meetings, say that because of the rules you must attend, but if there is nothing to discuss then we can finish in under 5 minutes, if the rules say you must have a hour meeting a week, then if they have no questions you could get them to try to give an impromptu 5-15 minute talk on their project and use that to find any weaknesses the student has and address them. In both cases be open with the student about what is happening and you'll be a lot more likely to get a positive response and may be able to get feedback with how to supervise the student.

Finally to address the tangents, you may want to change to saying that when doing research: 80% of the time you follow my outline, 20% can be for these tangents, but I want you to tell me at our meetings (after my outlined stuff is covered) why you thought was relevant, and if it wasn't then why. This will help to train them so they can self regulate their tangents and ultimately keep on track. Its also worth me mentioning that because of my ADD I can't just follow a strict plan without getting demotivated, so what you think of as rebellion may be them making sure they finish the project.

@NAMcMahon Thanks for your helpful comments.

My answer: Set clear expectations for the working relationship, and move on if the student's expectations do not match what you can or want to provide.
I would recommend meeting with this student to discuss their goals and expectations. Why do they want to work with you? What do they expect to get out of this experience? In their opinion, what can you do to help them achieve their goals?
During this conversation, you should also express your expectations. What do you expect the student to learn? How can you help the student achieve the goals they have expressed? What are you expecting to get out of this working relationship?
If it becomes apparent that the student's expectations do not match up with yours, you can try to work towards a compromise. However, if there is no suitable compromise that you can both agree on, it is okay to move on from the relationship (provided you are not contractually obligated to keep mentoring the student for some reason).
It is important to be flexible with your mentees, because every individual has their own goals and working methods. On the other hand, mentorship is not a one-way street, and you do not have to bend to the whims of your student if they're asking for something you cannot provide.

I'm going to interpret the unpleasantness you are experiencing as something that comes only out of the factors you list, so I will assume that there is no unstated cause of unpleasantness in regard to the personality of the student.  If that is correct, I agree with other commentators who suggest that the style of instruction you are using might not suit this student, and you might therefore have a more pleasant experience (and get better results in the long-term) if you use an alternative style.
I speak here as someone who recognises myself in this student.  I was a bright student, but ever since high school I was always reading/learning something different than what I was supposed to be reading/learning, and merely treading water in my formal classes and projects.  I was definitely also "rebellious" in the sense you describe, and I was not the easiest student to supervise.  The self-directed learning style I used had pros and cons: it came at the expense of difficulties in formal courses and projects (and lower grades than peers with similar ability), but it also meant that over time I found that I had developed much broader knowledge and skills than most of my student peers, even the ones who got better grades than me.
I recall that in the early days of my PhD candidature I got a bit frustrated with my supervisor giving me lots of regular homework on a topic which I had only mild interest in, which was making it difficult for me to find time to read and learn things of interest to me.  He was a good supervisor and was doing roughly what you are doing --- trying to drill me with work that he saw would lead to a particular outcome.  We had a nice chat and he agreed to drop down the homework and give me "more rope" in my explorations.  As to whether this was good for me, well, I led myself down plenty of blind alleys (see e.g., here), but I probably couldn't have survived my candidature any other way.
In this case, I would recommend you consider whether you can "work with" a student like this in a way where you do not feel a personal stake in the outcome.  Your obligation is to be clear about the course requirements (i.e., what the student needs to produce in order to pass the course and graduate), to assist the student, and to apprise the student of their progress relative to expectations.  If a student wants to pursue work with you, and be largely self-driven in his direction and progress, you can give him "enough rope" to do this, but warn him if he is falling behind on the material that is necessary for the course.  Intelligent but rebellious students are usually intelligent enough to knuckle down with non-preferred work when it becomes necessary to jump a formal hurdle, and if they fail to do this, the resulting failure is also a valuable learning experience.

If your experience with the student has been very unpleasant in the past, then maybe you should discuss the problems and expectations directly with him this time.
The student is smart that's a good thing, but I think personality, manners, discipline, etc. are also very important. Just by being smart you won't be able go very far in academia if you can't respect others and their opinions, don't know how to work or collaborate with others or be on the same page as other people in your team (with regard to research).
If the student is unstable, then maybe some counseling may help, but there's no guarantee that he won't continue to defy your "orders" or instructions in the future.
Despite your unpleasant experience in the past, if you're still willing to work with him, then maybe you should talk to him first before hiring him as your student and clearly get to know his intentions and future plans and establish a clear protocols as to how both of you would be working. Maybe being a little strict this time might work. Also, if you're not really comfortable with the student then chances are it's gonna make your life difficult and build-up some unnecessary pressure on you.
By your description of the student, it seems to me that he gets distracted by other things easily and that might be a bit problematic in completing the project and meeting the deadline.

At the end of the day, it is the student's project, rather than yours.  It is their opportunity to show what they can do, so being overly prescriptive in what they are supposed to do each week is limiting their ability to demonstrate their capabilities.  If a student seems able to direct their own study, then it is often worth letting them have more control.  I tend to view myself more as a project advisor rather than project supervisor/manager.  I think it is fine to give students advice and guidance, but it is their choice whether they follow it or not (especially if the marking criteria have been clearly communicated).  However, the real problem is that students often are not good judges of their own capabilities.  Unfortunately some people are only able to learn by error and trial, and they do need the opportunity to fail every now and again, so they can learn the lessons they need to learn, but with a safety net of an adviser that can drag them back to safety if they are heading for complete failure.
On the other hand, the student does need to show that they are capable of engaging properly and allowing the people they work with to work with them.  That means that it is not O.K. for them to skip meetings, he does have to write the reports that are required of him, and his communications with you need to be polite and professional.

The fact that this student left mid-term for personal reasons suggests to me that he is under strain. I don't know the details, obviously; it could be depression, anxiety, insecurity, family troubles... But suffering of this nature can have a dramatic effect on focus, concentration, enjoyment and motivation, mental stamina, and other cognitive attributes. Perhaps the fact that he's back means he's recovered somewhat, but these issues generally do not disappear overnight, and you can expect a resurgence if he finds himself under stress again.
I wish more people understood that that the academic mindset — the way of thinking that we cultivate in ourselves and others — is unavoidably cold, clinical, ambition-oriented, and alienating. We tend to objectify everything, and process everything either as a teleological system to be worked through or an analytical problem to be dissected and resolved. That mindset is something separate from intelligence; it's more a matter of socialization than aptitude. Some students take to it like ducks to water, others (often the more sensitive, intuitive students) can find it brutal and hostile. The project you reference was a fairly typical move in the inculcation of that mindset. You gave him a topic, a structure, a set of short-term goals to meet, and a potential reward in the possibility of a publication, and then sent him off to meet them on his own: to 'prove his metal', as it were. He couldn't rise to the task (unfortunately), so you've chalked him off as 'rebellious' and are wondering publicly whether you should bother investing any more effort in him.
As I said: a cold, clinical, ambition-oriented, and alienating way of looking at it.
If you decide to put more effort into this student, you should recognize that what he needs at this stage of his career is to build confidence and a sense of intellectual security. If he feels like a task is strictly performative — something he feels he has to do merely because it's expected of him — he'll likely feel judged/evaluated and lose self-confidence. The fact that he's asking questions and doing reading outside the assigned work means that he's looking for a way to connect to the project on an emotional level — to make it meaningful — and that urge needs to be accommodated and encouraged as much as it needs to be reined into the task at hand. I'm not suggesting you should be his counselor or best friend, but he needs a bit more personal, human guidance and interaction than most students, at least until he internalizes the academic worldview.
Not every professor is inclined to do this. Some are too busy, some don't like that kind of personal interactions with their students, some are such consummate academics that they've lost touch with that supportive, personal, non-analytical way of being. No worries... If you decide not to work further with this student, the best course for him would be if you explained directly that you and he are not a good fit emotionally, and recommend some other professor in your department who has a knack for mentoring or supportive guidance. Maybe even set up an introduction; that would be a kindness. Ultimately this student is going to have to sink or swim on his own, sure. But making the water a little warmer in the short term might help him out.

"I wish more people understood that that the academic mindset — the way of thinking that we cultivate in ourselves and others — is unavoidably cold, clinical, ambition-oriented, and alienating." Couldn't agree more. +1

I have no idea how you reached this conclusion when you say: "He couldn't rise to the task (unfortunately), so you've chalked him off as 'rebellious' and are wondering publicly whether you should bother investing any more effort in him." That is not true at all. If I didn't care about him on a personal level, I wouldn't have raised this issue here to seek opinions of other professors (remember I don't have to supervise him, I could just say please find someone else and still support him indirectly). You are missing the point.

@Fizicklyn: That statement is merely factual. You called him rebellious in the title and body of your question; you stated that you find working with him unpleasant; you asked specifically whether you should avoid him. No offense intended; I have no doubts you care about the student. I'm merely examining this question with the academic mindset, and these are (cold, clinical, presumptive) details that bear on the issue. I mean, if the student senses that you believe he's rebellious, unorganized, and unpleasant to work with, that's likely to increase his distress, no?

@TedWrigley I never said to him any of that. I am saying this here. I don't go blaming my students and telling them you're this or that. If I said that to him ("you're rebellious and unorganized" etc.) directly I would not accept to supervise him because then I would have taken a stand. What I say is something like: "I expect this or that from you", "come to the meetings and submit your reports regardless of finishing the task and we can discuss", "I need you to focus on completing the task at hand before asking me about such and such"... etc.

@Fizicklyn: I believe I have a good grasp on how your conversations went, having had and seen a good number of them myself. I also believe you are underestimating how much information people pick up from non-verbal attitudes. People have eyes as well as ears, and the body has a language all its own. But I didn't mean to cause any stress; I mainly wanted to suggest that this is an emotional issue more than an intellectual one, and it may require something more personal than the typical academic approach. I hope you can see it in that light.

OP doesn't need to be told that (some) "people have eyes", and that body language is a thing.

@user1271772: Are you suggesting that no one anywhere needs to be told that? This isn't exactly a private conversation we're having... Look, I was aware that this answer was going to be challenging when I wrote it. Everyone likes social theory about other people, but not so much when it's applied to them and theirs. However, I found it necessary to raise the issue of emotional dynamics here, because no one else was.

@TedWrigley I was suggesting that you might be undermining other people's intelligence a bit too much.

@user1271772: perhaps. I'll be more cautious on that in the future.

This answer is well-written, well-thought and shows some genuine points on how to improve the situation.. Honestly, I understood myself better after reading this post

It sounds like the issue may be his own personal discipline, not necessarily a bad attitude.  Here's the most useful advice I ever got from a professor in college:

You're bright.  You're capable.  You have great ideas.  But right now you aren't the one who decides how it works.  I would like to see you get to that point.  I would like to help you get to that point, but here's what you need to understand:
You've gotta join the union before you can strike.

Apparently it is a quote by someone famous-ish.  I didn't recognize the quote.  But I thought about it a lot:  I had to "pay my dues," "earn my chops," or whatever other euphemism.
So, I did.  I didn't need really need help having a good attitude, but I needed help seeing the value in conformity and submission.  Sometimes it felt stifling--even oppressive.  But I saw that I needed it and just did my best to get my wilder inward bits under control.
So, my advice has two parts:

If you're willing, welcome him back.  Make it clear that you want to help him, but it's conditional.  "I want to help you succeed in this field.  I'm older and wiser than you are about it-- I've done it.  So you need to make a choice:  either take me on as your academic advocate, which comes with doing what I say without quarrel, or go find a different advocate, if you can."

Resolve yourself to either choice.

If he wants to work under you, take him on.  Let him know he has to get his work done.  Give him three strikes per semester or something (missing a third report and he's out of the group/class/program).  Set the boundary and hold it.  He'll be the better for it. Don't give him a fourth chance.  If he makes it through, give him two strikes the next semster.
If he isn't up for it, let it go.  Don't think about him again.  Be willing to give him a new opportunity if he asks again in a couple of semesters.

Although its a tricky area to explore, be alert to the possibility the student has undiagnosed issus and this isnt just "acting out".
What you describe is very close to a student friend of mine - very smart, but constantly asked unconnected questions, missed meetings or work or reading and made excuses, extremely disorganised, appeared to be a rebel.....
6 years later he was diagnosed with severe ADHD with appropriate meds, and now says if he'd been aware at the time,it would have made a hell of a difference.
So just be aware, not every acting out student is doing so because of a problem they can control.

Thanks for pointing this out. I will take this into consideration.

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


text:
Can I work as a software engineer and be a PhD student?
I'm a master student, my master's background is about IT, signal processing, and Telecommunications. It's a "research master", which means that we're trained more to do research than be an IT engineers/specialists.
I've made my choice because I want to do research, but It is also important for me to work after my masters graduation, some of my professors always say that it's very difficult, even impossible to do those two things together. So I'd like some more advice. Here are my questions:

Is it practically possible to do research and work?
Is it a good idea to work for a year or two after my masters, and start a PhD after that?
What kind of internships can I do, and how long should they be, so I can apply to IT companies?

PS: I've some background ans skills in Java technologies, software design, web development, and basic knowledge in networks.

I would look for a research position at some telecommunications company. If both your school and the company you work for are flexible enough, your work may be what you research. Most importantly think of some research projects you would be interested in and pitch them to your adviser and companies you apply to.

@CharlesMorisset I've already seen it, it is useful but I was hoping for something more specific to my situation

The first two questions are already answered elsewhere on this board, and the third question you've asked is outside the scope of this forum (non-academic internships preparing for jobs in industry is off-topic). So I'm not sure what extra "specific" advice you're looking for.

Research is work.

This may depend on your citizenship.  I know in the US there are limitations on how much international students are allowed to work while completing their degrees.

I have exactly the same question

How many hours of sleep and recreation are you willing to give up? That's equivalent to two fulltime jobs...

Excellent question.

I did combine PhD and work for 4 years, so, theoretically - yes, it's possible. But I didn't like the process because I wasn't fully invested in either activity. It also significantly delayed my defense. It depends on how productive you are. At times you will be facing certain deadlines and will be feeling torn between two major activities.
I think you should go ahead with PhD if you are serious about it. It will take some 3-6 years of your time, so why to postpone it? I think it's totally possible to get internships at summer time and you may have to develop software as a part of your research, so you'll be practicing your skills.
You can also consider free-lance work so that you have more control over your time.

Is it practically possible to do research and work?

Yes it is. In fact, once I met one amazing girl that was working as a software engineer, getting a Master Degree in AI and getting a bachelor degree in Fine Arts at the same time. However, as the proverb says, the more you hold, the less you squeeze (does that even make sense in english?). She had to do all of these things half time, and of course that means less money from the job, and more time to finish the degrees. Also it requires an incredible amount of willpower and basically all your free time, so is up to you.
However, there are two more reasonable alternatives here.
The first one, less likely, is to actually get your Ph.D. in a private company. It is rare, but not impossible. I met one guy that was getting is Ph.D. in computer science in a private company. If you are that lucky, you can work and get a Ph.D. at the same time.
The second one is to get your Ph.D. in a university, but getting involved in a research project. Some so called "researchers" in university actually do as much development work as any folk in a private company. That was actually my case. My Ph.D. involved some research, but also a good deal of development. I had to create this application from scratch and deal with the whole development cycle by myself. After I was done with that, they assigned me as a developer in a different project.
The bad thing on this case is that, although you are actually doing development work, most companies don't count your time in university as "working experience". But you will get the experience nevertheless.

Is it a good idea to work for a year or two after my masters, and
  start a PhD after that?

It is possible? Definitely. Advisable? not so sure.
One of my friends was exactly in that situation. She worked for several years after her master, and then started a Ph.D. pretty late (on her late 20s).
Her experience was fine because she managed to get her Ph.D. But it didn't came without obstacles.
To begin with, it is rare to find older people doing a Ph.D. Depending on who works with you, they may ask questions, and sometimes it can be unpleasant. But I wouldn't say this is a big issue.
More important is "getting out of touch" with research. Academia is like a bubble of its own outside the "real world" of companies. When you finish you Master degree you are "on fire" and on your prime to tackle a Ph.D. If you go to work for a few years, you may "cool off" and it can be harder to pick up.
On the flip side, working in a company may give you very valuable skills to deal with the Ph.D. And I'm not talking about technical skills, but about soft skills such as time management or dealing with people.

What kind of internships can I do, and how long should they be, so I
  can apply to IT companies?

Sorry but I have no idea and I can't help you here. You should ask your university as they will be able to fill you in with all your available options.
My only advice from personal experience is that having a Ph.D. can be a big plus when looking for a job, even with no previous experience.

Yes, its completely possible, at least in Indian universities.

Is it practically possible to do research and work?

yes, but it will be difficult. see the related link by Charles

Is it a good idea to work for a year or two after my masters, and
  start a PhD after that?

Depends on you. If you need money, pay loan etc, job may help you.

What kind of internships can I do, and how long should they be, so I
  can apply to IT companies?

not sure how do I answer this.
If you really interested in PhD, then join after masters. All the best :)

In short, yes it is most certainly possible to work and complete your PhD at the same time. I am a permanently employed senior software developer and I have just finished my PhD in April 2015.
The key to finishing is as simple as with any task in life. Planning and sticking to a routine until it is completed. Even full time students drop out due to a lack of routine and I found that work actually helped ensure that I stick to a rigorous routine. Up early, to bed late. :) Best of all, now that I am done, I already have three years experience and can apply to a number of more senior positions. It's hard cracking the job market, and in my opinion experience counts way more than a PhD presently.
I can honestly say that it was a pretty rough three years, but I actually enjoyed both work and study. Might be a good idea to find a job that at least partially aligns with the research that you want to undertake and then start from there.
Good luck, wish you all the best!

You can combine Ph.D. and a full time job. However, from what I have seen people who do that generally take a few more years to complete their Ph.D. In some cases, I have seen some people completete their Ph.D. in 6 years instead of 3.
It is a good idea to work for a few years if you need money or some time off. However, personnally, I would advise to directly go to the Ph.D. because the more time off you take, the less likely that you will want to go back studying after that. Besides,  if you go back to do a Ph.D. after working a few years, it can be difficult for you to live again with a lower income, as a student. Or perhaps, that you would even have children in the meantime and that would also make it more difficult to get back to study. Also, if you stop for a few years, you may lose some momentum in your research field.
For the question about internship, I don't know. But you can always try to do applied research with a company during your Ph.D. or to do some internships during the summer.


text:
Is using uncited references in master thesis a good idea?
Do you think uncited references can add extra value to a master thesis?
If yes, what is the best way to include it in the master thesis? Maybe it can be mixed with the main references or can be listed in the appendix.

I would suggest avoiding adding references to your list of cited works if you do not cite those works. It may be appropriate to have a "Further Reading" section but this section may not be helpful in a master's thesis. Your thesis should ideally have a single, primary focus and therefore any additional content essentially serves as a distraction.
If you must include the references, cite them briefly.

Moreover, your department may have rules on how to cite. In mine you would loose points for doing that.


text:
Find article link by bibtex citation key
I have a list of citation keys (entry names in bib file) but I don't have the name of article. How can I find the article link?
For example, according to bib file of this article, the citation key is JagadeeshChandraBose2010. Suppose I only have JagadeeshChandraBose2010 and I need to find the link to article. How can I do it?
I tried Google and all search engines listed here, but I didn't find a solution.

Why would you have only the citation keys? It's quite unusual, unless somebody forgot to share the bibfile and to compile the source

exactly, somebody shared some resources and he is not availble now. In mean while I was thinking maybe there is a standard that he followed so I can search for it without asking him...

Bibtex citation keys are in no-way unique, nor do they have to be meaningful. The sole purpose of the key is to use it as a reference link when citing the work. In latex you would do something like \cite{foobar} where foobar is a perfectly valid key. To add to the confusion, there is no unique convention on naming bibtex entries, and whether there should be one is up for discussion. Some people name their own keys, others let their citation manager do the job for them. I use Mendeley which uses a FirstAuthorSurname_Year schematic. If I have more than one paper by that same author published in that same year, Menedeley appends lower-caps letters after the main key. Zotero and Google seem to do something similar.
What this means is that reverse searching an article from the bibtex key you have in your .bib file is a hard task, which might even be impossible if the keys used follow a random/meaningless scheme. If however, the key contains some data on the publication - Author, year, publication type, etc. - you can try entering those details in your favourite publication search engine in the hope of finding the paper.

Hope some day everybody start to follow the same scheme!

@Woeitg Why would everyone do that when the identifier is not supposed to have any meaning outside the specific bibtex file anyway?

This is the reason I try to add a source URL/DOI for every paper I cite to my .bib files.

Hope some day everybody start to follow the same scheme — https://xkcd.com/927/

@TobiasKildetoft In case you want to share or expand your work or cooperate with someone else, it will make sense.

@Woeitg Up to the point where each of you have a collection of papers by the same author from the same year, but not the same collection, so your naming is not consistent.

If you are still not convinced (grrrrrrrrrr!), you can see It is a matter of being tidy with proper naming.

The citation key in bibtex can be anything you want. What you call JagadeeshChandraBose2010, I can call 1234567 or abcdefg, as long as I call it the same thing in the tex file as in the bib file.
Since that key can be any string you want, there is obviously no way to map between that arbitrary string and the article.
Now, if the string follows a particular format - like JagadeeshChandraBose2010, which seems to be a name or names, followed by a year - then you can search for that article using that information. For example: Google Scholar search finds two papers authored by Jagadeesh Chandra Bose in 2010.

Thanks. I supposed everybody should follow the exact citation key used in bib file of publication link.

Ach beat me to it!

@Woeitg I've seen publishers serving up keys with spaces in them and other daft things.  But as publishers often give a key that looks like a primary database key from their internal systems, most people will change it (or their software will) to something more helpful.

Additionally, global identification is what DOIs are for, but BibTeX identifiers are meant for internal use only. Totally different beasts.

For completeness, if the bibtex item originated from the inspire database (http://inspirehep.net), you could search

find texkey JagadeeshChandraBose2010

in the inspire database and find the article. Alas, in this case, it does not.

Can you add the link to inspire database?

Sure, it was already linked, now it's even clearer


text:
Is social media helpful for research dissemination?
Is there any quantitative evidence that using social media helps academics disseminate their research results?  What about the cost-effectiveness of social media?
My guess is that search engines are much more important than social media, and take less effort?

Does the term "social media" include stackexchange.com ?

http://phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1737

An article from 2014 "Do highly cited researchers successfully use the web?" suggests that most of the most prolifically cited researchers do not have extensive social presences.
At the same time, studies also show that using the social web can improve hit counts somewhat, which suggests overall that using social media can influence research, but may not have an enormous impact.
Now you'll have to excuse me while I go create a Twitter account for my research group. . . .

I'm still wondering if I should have a Twitter account. Currently my only presence in the web is my website (and SE, but I'm anonymous here). From what I've read, the Twitter is only worthy if you have a high number of followers, so you need to make your account interesting day-to-day. Seems too many trouble for a few more hits in my articles, that probably will not affect the number of citations.

This citation in your reference addresses Facebook/Twitter      https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0064841

I think social media would influence awareness of public to your research rather than citation but I don't know any article about it. from What I experience researchers use social media to reach crowd to find participants, to disseminate knowledge etc. However, I would say it won't hurt your sitations and you might just help public understand your research wich is very important and not researchers do as much as I think necessary. Of course time constrain is big problem.

I initially left this partial answer as a comment on aeismail's great answer, but it didn't actually fit very well. To compliment his evidence-based answer, I wanted to provide a "use case" for social media.
Why might social media be better than a search engine? Because it provides opportunities for discovery outside of time frames when one is explicitly looking. (In this way, social media functions like alerts from ArXiv that a new paper has been posted to X topic.) Because I have a Zotero (bibliographic manager) plug-in for each browser, any time I come across an interesting article, it is extremely easy to file it away for later if it is a high-quality work that fits into my broad set of interests. When I am putting together a syllabus or literature review, the papers already in my reference manager can be a good starting point for further search.
In an interdisciplinary field, it can be hard to learn about all the relevant new publications. Anecdotally, I follow people (grad school acquaintances, colleagues, researchers I admire) on social media, and I often discover references to research that is germane to me, even if it does not appear in journals or conferences I see regularly. (While some of the relevant work would be posted on ArXiv, many of the papers would not be.) Thus, through social media I'm often helping the hit count, sometimes the citation count.
A search is also tough if the terms one is interested in are broad or vary by field. In those cases, setting up a saved search to look for them may not be useful because many of the results will be false positives, and they will not be filtered for quality. (Plus when I set up automatic searches for anything that produces a large number of results regularly, I usually end up just ignoring them rather than sifting through them.) Thus if I can follow several prolific academics who regularly tweet about their own work and what they're currently reading, this helps me discover interesting work with very low effort.
Also note that most quantitative study designs wouldn't disentangle the effects of social media versus search engines. That is, one of the advantages of a social media post is that many of them are included in web search results. (Analysis of social media's effect on citations will actually under-count social media's impact to the extent that private announcements--like friends-only Facebook posts--are not included.)

"That is, one of the advantages of a social media post is that many of them are included in web search results."  I always assumed that social media did not influence the results of Google Scholar, Web of Science, etc. but now I am not sure?

@AnonymousPhysicist I took "search engines" to mean a more general web search, but database searches will probably not be affected. I doubt that Web of Science would be influenced; Google Scholar is broad enough that it might pick things up that were posted to social media, and potentially it might use some of that info to consider relevance.

I can't offer quantitative evidence, beyond "take a look at altmetrics". I can offer anecdote, like most of the other answers ;-) I'll take Twitter as an example here, but I think the same applies to any social media that are viewable by the public, rather than invited people (e.g. "friends").
For journal articles and the like: In my experience Twitter can be a speedy way of letting people know about your latest publication. But would a significant proportion of those people have read it anyway, once their Google Scholar alerts picked it up? Maybe. No way to tell.
For more less specialised outputs (e.g. blog articles) Twitter is a very effective - perhaps the most effective - way of getting readers.
For events such as talks, outreach/knowledge transfer events, some types of workshop, etc., Twitter is effective at getting the information in front of people immediately.
HOWEVER: All this depends on your having followers. And for you to have followers, your account needs to be interesting, useful, entertaining, or a combination of the above. Accounts that are run purely as marketing exercises, especially by individuals rather than institutions, don't really work.
So the summary of all this, again just anecdotally in my experience, is that if you have social media accounts that you use regularly - and hence have followers on - then they can be effective channels for dissemination  of research. If you do not, then creating an account soley for this purpose is unlikely to work.


text:
Which are the most relevant sources on the goals of university and their relation to its origins and evolution?
During my university student life here in Brazil, I've heard and read different opinions about the goals of modern university, from "provide social justice" to "form an intellectual elite". That's why I'm looking for books or articles about the goals of present universities and the relation between those goals and the history of universities.
That's even more relevant now that I am a professor, because students commonly complain about having to study things that they consider irrelevant to themselves. I've been teaching "Physics for Agrarian Sciences", and that problem is bigger there because some students think they will not use that much Physics during their professional lives.
I tend to answer that some may not use it but others will, and that university is supposed to provide more knowledge than that directly applicable, due to its "high education" character. Otherwise, they could get some non-university technician degrees available at technical schools.
On the other hand, I'm not sure that my view of what a university is or should be is consistent with its origins and evolution.

I think that is not goal of modern universities, I spent my life ( student and academic) in EU and Asia, and never encounter or read in any statute of university that they have mission to provide social justice or to form "intellectual elite" rather to create and help job market positions and to form research based or research capable individuals. So to educate people for future jobs positions or to expand human knowledge. try wikipedia or  International Journal of Educational Research

The stated goals of the university system may well depend on the country, or some umbrella organization (i.e, the Catholic Church for Pontifical Universities).

@SSimon It's a good idea to look at the universities' statutes, although I was looking for historical continuity. I cited "provide social justice" and "form an intellectual elite" as two extrem opinions that I've read and heard from leftists an rightists respectively. Many leftists here accuse university of perpetuating inequality, since the son of a doctor (for instance) would have more chances of frequenting university and becoming a doctor too.

@SSimon To those leftists, university should rather transform society than prepare people for the market. To that, rightist journalist Paulo Francis answered: "The function of university is forming elites, not giving diplomas to poor people." Actually, he used a Portuguese-language derogatory slang for poor people (pé-rapado).

dont get me wrong, I am strongly against that universities should serve job market, @LeonardoCastro, I am disgusted by ideas that PhD should be more "professionalized" and doing job outside of research based career for me is missing entire point of higher education

"The Metaphysical Club" by Louis Menand answers some of these questions at least from the point of view of the US, and there have been writings by Charles Sanders Pierce and others on the role universities should play in American life. But even so, I have to agree that there is no one answer.  A for-profit school in California will certainly have a different view on the role of the university than a state school in New York, for instance.

And also your own university has a charter and most likely also a mission statement.  I've never taught in a school that even offers a course in physics (or anything else) for agrarian sciences so nowhere I've been can share your university's vision.

Germany has had the model of the Humboldt ideals. Unfortunately, it has now become slowly eroded through the Bologna process of educational reform and unification in Europe. If you want details, these topics are important and influential and you should look up the terms Humboldt ideal and Bologna on the web.
However, in a nutshell, the Humboldt ideal is about educating enlightened citizens, both in terms of expanding one's personal horizon as well as contributing to society. It is a highly influential and (in my opinion) beneficial way of looking at university education.
Developing the personality of the students is the foremost goal of this way of thinking; for which, of course, the development of a skill set is an important, but not the only or ultimate component. Responsibility for the society at large is part of it, as well. Enlightenment means here that, of course, the individual can and should identify as an individual how to balance the different components.
The "elite" may be implied here, but should not be understood as a privilege rather than a responsibility and duty. Ultimately, the ideal would be that every single member of the society would belong to this elite in their individual responsibility for the world around them. Of course, this is illusory in reality, but it is clear that this is the goal to aspire to.
In short, being educated in the Humboldtian sense means that you understand the world around you, and you can meaningfully interact on things outside your immediate reach.
For people who are not interested in anything but their immediate agenda, my question would be why they are considering themselves at all "students" at "university". After all, "student" means "the zealous"; and "university" is not by chance related to "universal".

Very nice answer about the education side of what universities are for. Here (still Germany) universities are also to perform basic research. I point this out because I think it a bearing for the "Physics for Agrarian Sciences" question: the education therefore needs to be on the level that after finishing the studies, the former students can take a job (e.g. PhD research) at the level of performing basic research. And not only in their specific subject, we've routinely had people from "neighbour" subjects as well. (Also, our educational system has more applied/practical alternatives)

@cbeleites add it as an answer.

authors: Людмила Волкова


text:
How do I keep my tenure track job search confidential?
I work as a research scientist for a tech company. I publish frequently in top venues in my area and, at the same time, I've been adjuncting at well-known universities to teach classes.
I don't feel I've ever left academia, as I keep collaborating and publishing with people from academic institutions, but I want to apply to a few (e.g., 10) tenure track positions in computer science, for a number of reasons that are not relevant to this question.
How do I ensure that my search/applications stay private?
My manager is well connected with the academic world (despite not being a researcher), and I do not want them to know that I applied and where I applied. Note that I do not need a recommendation letter from them, as I have multiple well-known researchers (faculty members in different universities) who will write one for me.

You should tell your references that you would like to keep your application confidential. The problem is that while the job search process is nominally confidential, leaks happen all over the place. For example, people call colleagues asking for informal assessments of applicants. They may not say the person is applying, but when you get a phone call like that, it is pretty obvious. Another example is that sometimes applicants give job talks during a normally scheduled departmental seminar. These are often "advertised" on the web. Again, even if it doesn't say job talk, it can be pretty obvious. At some point you are going to visit the school (if you make it that far) and meet tons of people. Asking/expecting the search committee to keep things quiet is one thing, expecting the entire faculty is another, expecting grad students and post docs is another.

Thanks @strongbad . Shall I mention it on my cover letters?

@MarkoRamius - Sure.


text:
How to correct citations in Google Scholar?
Some of the publications have cited my work. But Google scholar is unable to identify those citations and link with my account. I think it is because my name in the references of article has been written differently. Is there a way I can change that?

It might be helpful to have more detail about what exactly you mean by "my name in the references of article has been written differently" - is there a mismatch between your surname as written in the official details of your paper as published versus how they spell in the citation? What's the difference - is it a typo, is it an accented character or alphabet issue, is it a name-change or dual name issue, or something else?

Your problem is known to Google and they offer the following fix via https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/citations.html#citations:

...
  To fix this, you'll need to identify the specific citing articles with
  indexing problems and work with the publisher of these articles to
  make the necessary changes (see our inclusion guidelines for details). ...

In short, Google claims it's always reflecting the state of the internet right now. Misspellings may be part of that, but Google doesn't want to play the corrector.

please accept this answer

You think

Google scholar is unable to identify [some citations to my work] because my name in the references of article has been written differently

But, I doubt Google works this way, because numerous mistakes appear in references throughout the literature. Perhaps this issue will resolve itself over time as Google has more time to crawl.

When your publications are cited, the full reference is the name of the journal/publication, date, volume and maybe even page number, on top of your own name. There is also the DOI.
So if they have misspelled your name when they cite your work, it should not matter, if they actually cited your work. Google Scholar or Pubmed or Web of Knowledge etc should be able to discern that.
What might be the case, I suspect, is that your own name is not the same between your google scholar page and the name you used in your publications.
That might be the case if you have multiple middle names (and/or initials). Or if you have changed names, due to marriage or some other reason. If you have non-standard latin letters in your name, how they are "latinified" into English might be an issue as well.
Hard to say without a concrete example

It is possible that citations to your work are not recognized by Google Scholar because of errors in (or incompleteness of) the reference string. Such 'stray' citations can be corrected, see Anne-Wil Harzing's guide to correcting stray citations in Google Scholar.
Note that the same problem occurs in all citation databases to some extent. Most of them have some mechanism for reporting and correcting (besides Google Scholar, at least Web of Science and Scopus do).

The link you're providing doesn't explain how to correct stray citation on Google Scholar. It shows how a stray citation can be correct using the Publish or Perish software.


text:
Asking my advisor about our lab’s funding situation
It seems like funding in the lab in which I am working is getting tight. Since I usually end up spending a fair amount of said funding to buy supplies for the lab and my coworkers, it’d be nice to have an accurate picture of the lab’s financial situation so that I can make more informed decisions.
I’ve pretty directly indicated to my adviser that I’m interested in more details about how the funding situation in the lab is, but it seems my adviser doesn’t want to talk about it. On the couple cases I’ve mentioned it, they’ve avoided directly talking about it or have given me very vague and not very useful responses. I'm sure there's always a great deal of uncertainty in the future of the funding situation, but it would feel helpful to know where we stand at the present moment if nothing else.
I’m currently self-funded, so I’m not particularly concerned about losing my job or anything. I’m sure my adviser would tell me before things got too crazy bad, but I’d just rather not be so in the dark about these things. How unusual is it for advisers to hide this info from their students? Would it be appropriate / inappropriate for me to push further? I realize that funding is probably a somewhat sore and frustrating subject for many professors.

Possibly the responses have been vague because they themselves are not sure what the near future holds. In some fields, funding can be... terrifyingly unpredictable.

While some rare cases are quite open (which means they trust their group members significantly), in most cases group leaders will be discrete about financial situations. Note that if this response reads like a horoscope, it is because these situations are as varied as personalities of group leaders.

The cultures differ on this point. In some countries, a PI's lab is a bit like his "private" business, or an extension of his/her house. The success of the lab fully depends on the PI's recognition, achievements, and sheer luck with the funding bodies. Naturally, PIs can be over-protective about what happens in "their kingdom", particularly if things are not going well (do they ever?)
In other places the Lab "belongs" to a University, and PI's simply inhabit it, just like postdocs, PhD students and technicians. They have some academic powers and are still responsible for finding the money to keep the place running, but the management powers are to a large extent taken away by HRs, Finance's, Senior Management, etc. It is often, but not always, lead to a better transparency, because University acts in the best interests of all employers, or at least tries to make it look like this. However, in this case PIs may not be fully aware what the situation with their funding is, particularly if University is not doing well.
In theory, as someone working in the Lab, you are a stakeholder and have all the rights to know what's going on and how long the place will run. In practice, the situation can be terribly unpredictable, and even you PI may not know what is going to happen.

I am not sure why you would have to know too many details about the budget of the whole lab. Unless you are in charge of every single project, it is probably not of your concern. If you manage one or more projects than I think you should be entitled to know more details about the budget of said projects, if you are in charge of purchases or managing people. One indirect way of asking would be when you have to make some significant purchase and you have different options, than at that point you could argue with your advisor that to better manage the budget you need more info. Otherwise I don't see why you should know or worry too much about it.

I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean to imply that I want to know the finances of all of all of my adviser's projects, just my own.  My lab = 1 project which I am in charge of.

@aquirdturtle my answer is a general answer and still applies to your case.