text:
How to concentrate during conference talks where the quality of the presentation is poor?
I have read a lot of tips on how to give a good conference talk: know your audience, give context, don't talk too fast, give your talk a clear structure or story, minimize text on slides, etc.
However, more often than not, presentations I've been to break most of these tips (quickly flipping through walls of text and equations while droning on in monotone), and I find it very difficult to concentrate on the talks.
Any tips on how to pay better attention and be able to learn something from these types of presentations?

Don't. Take a break, have a coffee, and wait for the proceedings to be issued.

Even though it is good of you to want to pay better attention, it's worth explicitly pointing out that if a presenter ignores good practice and thereby gives a poor presentation, then it's definitely their failing, not yours.

Related

Talks like that are a great opportunity to let your mind wander about unrelated problems that you've always wanted to think about but never found the time.

If you are interested in the topic but don't like the talk, just read the paper. If you read the paper beforehand you might be able to follow the talk or ask questions at the end. If you aren't interested in the talk, there's nothing to worry about. If it is a boundary-case you can ingest dopaminergic substances such as caffeine to concentrate, or search for another talk.

Isn't this what some lectures prepare you for?

While I agree with many of the comments along the lines of "just read the paper", not all conferences have full papers in their proceedings - eg some only publish the abstracts.

For me the best approach depends on whether you can actively pay attention to the speaker’s voice or not. There are two very different methods to get the most out of those two scenarios:
Problems with the speaker
This is the case where the speaker is monotone, has nothing interesting to say, or at the very worst, just has absolutely no clue about public speaking (fills sentences with awkward "um"s, stutters, or loses focus and goes off on tangents).
In this case, it's probably best to get as much as you can from the presentation. Focus specifically on that and tone out the speaker, which if monotone shouldn't be all that difficult.
While doing this, take notes and work out some of the problems or exercises, if any, for yourself. Make up an exercise if none are given, or otherwise start trying to make sense of the material and put it to use in any way you can. This way you will have something to do and stay engaged, while still learning the material.
And there's always caffeine.
Problems with the presentation/content
Maybe you have a great speaker, but nothing being spoken goes with the slides, or (my personal pet peeve) the font on the slides is too tiny or poorly formatted to get anything from anyway. In this case, just ignore the slides altogether as they will only serve as a distraction.
Focus on the speaker, take good notes on what is being said, and really think about the concepts in your mind. Mull them over and write down questions you might have, even if it's not an open format where you can ask them during the lecture. This way your mind stays engaged. Take on thought experiments with the material – if this happened, what would the result be? Or: if I used this idea here, how might it help? Find ways to immediately apply what you are learning, and if that's not possible (if it's more theory-based stuff) just follow along the best you can.
If chewing gum helps you to think, do that. Grab an energy drink or whatever helps you stay focused. I find it's a lot harder to pay attention when the speaker is boring than when the presentation is boring.
Problems with both
In your worst case scenario, the speaker is lackluster and the content is dull and dry, with a presentation that is difficult to follow. You can try the following tips:

Use an actual pen and paper for notes. The act of writing can help you remember things better.
Try to remember earlier parts of the presentation, especially any bits that you found interesting or wanted to go back to later. The act of remembering solidifies concepts in your mind. If you go a week without using a password, that's when you forget it. The same applies to anything you learn.
If it's a Q&A format, ask questions. Don't make up nonsense if you can't think of any, but it will help you concentrate just by trying to come up with some.
Act as if you are the official meeting notes taker. Record any dialog that goes on if questions are asked. This can help you organize your notes, and will also serve to jog your memory when going over it later.
Put away your phone or anything that might provide a distraction. Turn your laptop or other device on airplane mode to keep it from buzzing or blinking unexpectedly.
Close your eyes. This is a known technique for helping your other senses get more information. Sure you might be lulled to sleep, but depending on the situation, it might help you concentrate on the speaker better. Listen to the speaker's exact tone and phrasing.
Breathe deeply, through your nose. If you are feeling sleepy, this can help you stay awake. Make sure when you breathe, your stomach expands and not your chest. When you take good, deep breaths through your nose from your diaphragm, you get much better breaths and feed your brain with oxygen.
Other answers mentioned taking a break. Go grab a bottle of water or energy drink, or take a short walk. Read some of your notes aloud while on your break.

I think this is the most detailed answer.

When I attend talks where the quality of the presentation is poor, I like to use it as an opportunity to learn about what not to do in a presentation.
I have an ongoing list of "things not to do in a presentation", with examples from talks I've attended. I just take out the list and add to it whenever I attend one of these presentations. I find it helpful for improving the quality of my own presentations - more helpful than just reading tips others have written about presenting, because when I refer to my list I am reminded of exactly why and how a presentation is made worse by [insert bad thing here], from personal experience.
Usually as a result of taking notes on the presentation technique, I end up also paying attention to the content of the presentation, which is a nice side benefit.
P.S. I also have a list of "effective presentation techniques" and I add to it whenever I attend a talk where the quality of presentation is very good.

Quite nice suggestions. I love it. I just used to observe these things. But, never thought of recording them somewhere.

"I end up also paying attention to the content of the presentation, which is a nice side benefit". That is an interesting psychological trick. I think it is worth trying.

+1, but I don't think I would create such a list without protecting it with encryption.

I'm tempted to ask you to post these lists -- especially the "things not to do in a presentation." I'm sure some of them are quite inventive :-)

This is an interesting idea. So far I have usually taken it as an opportunity to get some work done (by bringing either some stuff I need to go through for revisions or something to read), but I think I will start doing this instead.

I like to use it as an opportunity to learn about what not to do in a presentation, i.e. you play seminar bingo? http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=847

When I'm bored and I don't find the content terribly interesting either, I tend to try to guess what tools they used to make their plots.  In my experience, people who underprepare their presentation often deviate very little from the default visualisation settings of their tool of choice.

Oh come on, now you got to share that list for the rest of us

Just a couple of tips that have been useful to me:

Take notes, even if you aren't going to keep them. Taking notes helps me to keep concentrated. In fact, if the presentation is boring or I'm very tired, taking notes helps to keep me awake.
If the speaker is failing at communicating his knowledge but his knowledge is actually interesting to you, then you can try to ask questions to get as much as possible of that knowledge. Doing it in a way that also benefits the audience - as Coder's answer says - is great, but often difficult.

You can probably look at following possible ways to concentrate and keep yourself motivated:

Ask questions: Let see you see a text/equation where you may not be interested in getting a top class answer. Just ask it. For example, you may ask what is the use of that parameter in this context? Does it have an effect on the underlying problem? -- You may also get an awesome answer.
Write ideas in a paper: When someone of other field is giving a talk, although you find something uninteresting, you may sometimes relate your research problem with the presenting one. Keep notes, try to formulate new ideas. And, possibly at last, during break you can open scope of collaboration with the presenter.
Take a short break: Although people around you may not feel so formal about it, but still you can go for a small break or a walk. Then come back for the presentation.

Remember the following talks:

Many authors think that the presentation in the conference is just a formality. Anyway, the paper is going to be published in the conf. proceedings (I am talking here about Comp. Sc.)
Talks in conferences should not be storytelling conferences. Because you are there to share ideas and findings with other experts. Sometimes, it is okay. However, some serious people just ignore these small things and just get moving with the flow like teaching in classroom.

On point 1: In less formal settings, if you know the audience better than the speaker, you can often drive the presenter in a more relevant direction by asking a few good questions. It's a bit passive aggressive (you have to break the flow of their presentation and get them turned on to the aspect you're interested in), but by the end, the audience will be more engaged, and the speaker will feel they've made a valuable contribution. It's a win-win.

@LShaver yes. That is quite right.

"presentation in the conference is just a formality". Yes, I get that impression in these situations, and reading the paper after the conference is much easier to understand in that format. During the conference itself, I am trying to come up with a mental algorithm I can follow to process the verbal and slide information in order to gleam something useful during the 15 minutes. Maybe one step, as you suggested, is to think of small questions. It is usually the rule to keep questions until the end.

I consider myself a "serious person" and a good speaker, and I consciously decide to tell stories in my talks rather than spew a stream of details. The point of giving a talk is for the audience to get something out of it. Telling a story (with an appropriate level of detail) lets them do that; putting up an impenetrable wall of details does not. If they want the details, that's what the paper is for. (And if our vision of "teaching in classroom" is that it's supposed to resemble poor talks, then we should rethink that too.)

Your question really resonates with me.
I have a terrible time at conferences. Maybe I'm highly distractible, but id rather recall that scientists are experts at science, not communication. Echoing colleagues above, learn what not to do.
Aside from that, when a talk is unintelligible or boring to tears, keep in mind that it's their fault, not yours. There are many TED talks on trivial topics that hit home due to eloquent presentation, and vice versa.
When you find yourself disengaging, make it an effort to jot down one important fact. At least you'll have that.
If it seems relevant to you but you are just 'done' (last day of conference? Late dinner with colleagues?) write down their info and request their talk after the fact. You can review on your own time.
It's not just you. We're all battling an assault on the senses. Some people just don't want to admit it.

You can:

Take notes, related to the talk or not;
Translate what the speaker is talking to a foreign language. This is a very good exercise and helps your concentration;
Pay attention on the delivery, not on the content of the speaker. How is the posture, rhythm and the voice of the speaker? If they are also poor, at least you can learn about what not to do for public speaking.
Chew some gum, for staying awake.

First I've heard of chewing gum to stay awake.  That might just result in drooling while you sleep!

My daughter was in the army for a while; when class got too long or too boring, it was permitted/expected/encouraged that you stood up, walked around, did knee bends; anything that would keep you from dozing off.  You were there to learn; and you did what it takes to do that.

This would definitely strike people as very odd, unless you explicitly make a culture of it (and for the presenter it can be very distracting seeing people doing knee bends around the room).

I find it hard to believe that students at e.g. West Point are encouraged to "walk around" when class gets "too long or too boring."  It would be interesting to see some independent confirmation of this.

@Pete I have no idea about students specifically, but this wad also what we were suggested to do when I was in the army (in Denmark, back when they still drafted people for basic training).


text:
Can I measure the quality of a literature review chapter of a thesis by whether its arguments are consistent or not?
Can I measure the quality of literature review by analyzing the argument created in the literature review chapter of a masters thesis to see whether the arguments are consistent or inconsistent?

The title and the body of this question are completely different.

It would help answer your question if you gave more context. Specifically, what is your role (the master's student, advisor, committee member, unrelated reader, etc.)? What is your goal for the evaluation (approve the thesis, depend on the literature review for your own work, etc.)?

An inconsistent argument is bad, but an consistent argument alone is not enough for a good literature review. The primary purpose of a literature review is to give an overview of the state of the art in a specific field. A chapter that fails to adequately cover the field is a bad literature review, even if the argument is consistent.

thanks for the answer, but how can I measure the arguments whether it a good argument or not, in case literature review of masters theses

@Rey This is not something you measure. It is something you evaluate based on your expertise and experience with the topic.

measure and evaluate is quite different (cultural reasons)

@Tobias  so can i evaluate the Arguments?

@ReySakti what stops you?

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is first authorship a big deal (in terms of highlighting it on CV, etc.)?
From August 2015 through August 2016 I was on a Nuclear/Radiation Physics based work placement in a scientific research institute, between my second and third years of my university Maths degree. I am now back at university, half way through my third year.
About half way through my work placement (which I thoroughly enjoyed), my supervisor suggested that the work I was doing could be considered publishable. Being an undergraduate this was (and is) obviously a very exciting prospect. It turned out that we did decide to write a paper, and my supervisor said to be that I would get to be the first author. I don't understand much, but I'm under the impression that's something to be excited about too.
I finished with all the analysis and wrote a draft of the paper. It was then time for me to leave my placement and my (now ex-)supervisor are still in correspondence, whilst he finalizes the paper. There have been various (unrelated) issues which have held him back from spending time on it - but he suspects (as it stands) that he will possibly finish it and submit it to a journal by the end of February. He's basically completely reformatting a lot of the paper, and probably rewriting a whole bunch of it, because being an undergraduate I have no idea how to write a paper. Of course this means that if I do turn out to be first author, my supervisor has probably been very generous.
Long story short - if things go well and the paper is accepted in whichever journal, is this a big deal or nothing to be so bothered about? I ask basically to figure out where this ranks in terms of putting it on a C.V. (or something). Is this something to simply add on as an achievement, or something to really highlight?
I understand my question is really rather ambiguous. Essentially I'm really not sure what to expect under the circumstances that the paper is published - if anything.

See What does first authorship really mean?

As mentioned here this is field dependent. Given your former advisor offered you the first authorship and assuming that if ordered alphabetically he would be the one to be the first author, then yes, it is something to be excited about.
In my opinion better than highlighting in a CV that you were the first author it would be better to describe what you did in that paper yourself and what was done by the other author(s). And maybe even better that putting this to CV would be to put in to a motivation letter (or any other text accompanying your CV in an application somewhere).

This depends. When I applied for my PhD and had only 1 publication I included a very short abstract (2 lines) of my publication. And I said that it would be better for motivational letter or some other accompanying text as such.

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


text:
Out of school for ten years and letters of recommendation for PhD programs
I graduated with a BS in physics in 2009, so it's coming up on ten years since I've been in academia. I have a great relationship with one professor, with whom I'm still in contact, and my old advisor would most likely also help me.
The problem is that most places I see want three letters, and I don't know of any other professors that'd likely remember me. I do, however, have about half a dozen former class mates. I have a friend doing a postdoc at Yale and another at Lawrence Livermore. I also have another friend who just finished her dissertation at Berkley.
I have a wide range of research experience, am published (I helped an experimentalist and got tacked on to the groups paper in phys rev), and have fair grades from a very challenging curriculum (e.g. general relativity, qft of a scalar field, theoretical techniques, intro to string theory), and am not worried about the subject GRE hell (I've done it before and scored in the 80%s once and 90%s the second time).
My problem is that usually one needs 3 letters. I currently work in tech, and could get a great letter from my department's boss, but the only time I do math there is when I make corrections to complex integrals an EE's whiteboard. Or when I'm bored and start calculating connecction coefficients for a metric or dervice generators for SU(n) n>2.
Any advice would be most appreciated!

Your situation isn't clear. You say you have a professor you are still in touch with and a boss who is also ready to write you a letter---what about that experimentalist, with whom you published? Won't he/she give you a letter?
And of course, you can take a letter from your current boss. What graduate course are you applying to? If it is analytical, your current boss could comment on your analytical skills.
It is important too to remember that graduate departments are not just looking at your letters for evidence of your math/physics skills. They can get that information from your grades too. They are also interested in learning about your work ethic, work habits, your ability to communicate with peers, your ability to work in a team. I am sure your current boss can provide great commentary on these other very important skills.

Yes, I have two professors who will definitely write me letters. Most of the programs I'm looking at requires 3 (high energy theory, PhD programs). My work is largely unrelated to physics, although you have valid points about the skills. I haven't had to use a tensor in almost a decade (although I have practiced my skills and read text books on my own in the interim).

You should also ask letters from profs, whose classes you took and got excellent grades. since you have a BS, I am sure you have many profs. from the many classes you took.

From what you say it is not clear how your current job is related to the PhD you plan to study. But in general, excellent recommendation letter from your working place might be a good complement to two academic letters. At the end, your work did require technical / analytical skills, and those are the skills that will be useful in academia. Had you been a soccer player or dancer, this would have been a different story. Also, probably you can ask your boss to focus on some aspects that you think are important to emphasize (e.g., technical skills).

Having at least one recent letter is also important because admissions committees want to understand why you've decided to go to graduate school now.  If the reason that you're applying is that you just got laid off, that would look bad.  On the other hand, if you've got a letter from a supervisor saying that you're a hard worker but the job just isn't enough of an intellectual challenge for you, that could be helpful.

I wouldn't say that being laid off would look bad. It's the economic situation, not an individual flaw. And I don't think any letter would say, such and such person is getting laid off and is therefore applying for grad. school. -:)

Two ideas that might help:

Do what you can to find out about what the institution you are applying to might expect. You might be able to correspond with some prof there whose interests align with yours. In fact, this might be a good thing to do in any case - expressing interest. You should learn something about the prof's interests first, of course.
In addition to your letters, I assume you make a statement yourself. There, you can and if space permits, include a short section saying that you have been working in the field for a while and so have included both prior academic letters and more current professional letters of recommendation. Have the latter letters stress your brilliance, of course.

Thank you. The first is almost a given; a PhD program is really hinges on the advisors. And yes, there is absolutely a statement, and I would most definitely be able to address the gap.


text:
team authoring question
I (a grad student) wrote a paper and sent it off to a journal for review as first author, with my coworkers as the other authors. A professor on the team says that another student wrote much the same paper, using possibly some or all of the same data (it's mostly secondary data), and, I suspect, the same or very much related theory. I am not on paper 2, which I haven't read. This seems a little weird to me. Is it? I wonder if it will impact my chances of getting my paper published if, say, the paper gets rejected where it's been sent.
Both of those individuals are on my paper. Also, I don't think they could not know this was happening since the team has a formal paper proposal process related to publication that has to be followed to prevent problems . Who knows, though?
If anyone has suggestions about how to broach this topic with my professor that would be great.

Seems as though you should coordinate a bit better in your group. Parallel work in a small field is very common, but if it happens within a small group something bad happened with communication. Why not work to fix that problem? I blame the professor, though, who should know better.

Thanks, Buffy! Response to this comment added to the original post.

Yes, the situation is weird. Yes, it could cause you problems with your paper and also with the other paper. But it is pretty hard to say how it would play out as it depends on who sees the paper (editors, reviewers, ...) and the minute-by-minute timing of things.
But the problem goes deeper than that. Two nearly identical papers out of the same lab at the same time is what is weird here. It should not have happened. There is some mis-communication within the lab that should be fixed. I can't say whether it is a general problem or not, but that should be investigated.
My suggestion isn't very satisfying, however. If you want to maximize your future collaborative opportunities beyond your degree then a way should be found so that this doesn't become a zero-sum game.
One way to do that is to put a hold on publication of both papers and a short period of discussion about going forward. One possibility is to merge the papers (along with the authorship). If your field isn't overly anal about who is "first" author then it should be easy to work out authorship.

I know of one case in CS, and know both parties, where two students at different universities did essentially the same work at the same time and submitted their theses simultaneously, both for graduation and for publication. It was really good work that answered a fundamentally important outstanding question. However, the graduation of both students was held up for a year while people at both universities investigated the situation. It was determined that the work was truly independent and so both graduated and have gone on to great careers. I think that both theses were published though they overlapped considerably. But the determination was not only that the work was independent, but that it was not the case that either should have known about the work of the other. That is to say, it was neither malfeasance nor negligence that caused the issue. But still, it took a year.

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


text:
Co-author illegitimately using results?
Alice, Bob and Carlos are coauthors on two papers, based at different institutions. They are listed in that order, with Alice the corresponding author. Both papers have been published as preprints, and are at different stages of the review process at journals.
Alice had most of the main ideas for one paper, Bob had most of them for the other. Alice has done the majority of the write ups. Carlos has helped with the write ups, has contributed few of the main ideas, but has significantly streamlined the proofs of the main results.
Because of their relatively high mathematical content, the papers are being targeted for publication in journals outside the "home discipline" of the authors. The intention all along, discussed, but not at much level of detail, between the co-authors, was to publish more accessible versions of the results in the home discipline of the authors.
Carlos has announced in passing that he is about to submit a single authored paper to a journal in the home discipline that presents a fairly obvious application of the results, one that the coauthors had briefly discussed.
Alice and Bob are shocked, and feel that this is unfair use of the results, and contrary to at least the spirit of the collaboration. But they do not know what to do, especially as collaborative work is not the norm in their home discipline.
The questions we have are: (1) Is Carlos's behavior inappropriate? and (2) What action, if any, should Alice and Bob take?

Alice and Bob should not worry about it.  Collaboration with Alice and Bob does not prevent Carlos from working on closely related research independently.  Maybe Carlos will even succeed in bringing additional attention to the collaboration with Alice and Bob.
There are two ways this could become a problem:

Alice and Bob insist on coauthorship of Carlos's paper, even though their only contribution was a brief discussion.  They very probably have not earned it.
Carlos does not attribute results from the coauthored papers correctly in his sole-authored work.  Since Alice and Bob apparently have not seen Carlos's paper, it's not time to think about this yet.

A lot hangs on what counts as independent research. The agreed motivation for one of the coauthored papers was that its central result has applications to problems in the home discipline that were obvious to all the coauthors, hence discussion of that particular point was brief. Writing up one of those applications is similar to writing up an agreed proof sketch that is clearly going to work. All the hard work has been done in the collaboration. In this sense, Alice and Bob's contribution is substantial. I don't see this as independent research.

The distinction between home and non-home discipline is important in this case, because proving an abstract theorem will attract little credit in the home discipline, whereas a simplified application will attract significant credit. It's not analogous to publishing a major theorem and a more minor corollary within the same discipline.

@emilia that sounds like a problem with the values of your discipline, not a problem with Carlos.

I disagree with this answer and the implicit insistence that this sort of behavior is perfectly fine.

I also tend to think this answer goes a bit far. Collaboration and co-authorships are apparently more valued by Alice and Bob than citations alone. Given this, in the future they should take care not to share ideas with Carlos unless there is an agreement to collaborate on them.

@AndrésE.Caicedo I am curious to see your answer explaining why.

@ASimpleAlgorithm I do not believe ideas alone have any value.  I give them away all the time.  It is high-quality implementation that has value.

@Anonymous I thought about this for a while throughout the day, and I don't have a satisfying answer. I think that what constitutes the boundaries of collaboration is a serious problem. In the specific unfortunate case at hand, I believe that Carlos acted naively but in his mind there was no ethical conflict. Cases like this are even harder than those where someone is clearly doing something widely understood as ethically inappropriate.

@AnonymousPhysicist I imagine you'd still prefer to be the one to decide which of your ideas you give away and which you don't. Even in a world without "intellectual property", people keep ideas as secret as they can. More so in fact.

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


text:
How to begin a class with humor
I am a PhD student from central Europe and I am teaching an introductory class on programming at my university.
I know that in the US, humour or a joke is often used at the beginning of a presentation. My first 2-3 sentences are right to the point, but I would like to include also a small joke or humour at the beginning.
But what would be a good joke in this situation? A friend of mine suggested to start with "welcome to bird watching 101", just some ridiculous wrong title, or starting with a fun fact about myself.
Any suggestions on how to start with humour?
Background info: Last semester my class received a nice award as among the top 5 classes of my rather big university. To some part it was due to the tips I got at stackexchange.com :-) But I would like to constantly improve my teaching.

PS: I searched on meta.academia if its okay to ask questions regarding teaching and it seems okay. See also question "How to teach a class that I've never taken?".

Any suggestions on how to start with humour? — Be actually funny (great help, eh?), avoid all possibly sensitive topic. Alternative advice: if you have to think about it, don’t do it… you can’t plan wit!

I think professional comedians would disagree with "you can't plan wit"

Any joke that not especially tailored to your course, character and background will surely be old and overused by now. You really have to go with something subject-specific, or teacher-specific. Try to build your own character in front of the blackboard - in the end teaching is speaking in front of an audience, so it is not too different from acting.

@Suresh yeah, but they are professionals… my point was: unless your delivery is very good, don't use a rehearsed joke

Don't tell this one:  Q: Why do programmers think trees have roots at the top and leaves at the bottom?  A: They've never been outside.

It also depends a lot on how many students are attending the course. I think that it is extremely difficult to throw a joke at a 200 undergrad class, or you would have to be really good. Much easier to engage a 30-40 ppl class. Humor it is really important in my opinion because it engages the audience, and keeps students more attentive as they are waiting for your next joke. I wish I was better at it.

The class size is about 20 Students. I once started with a tiny rehearsed joke. The class started at 12:15 p.m. and I said "good morning everyone!" and then "yes, 12:15 p.m. is still morning for a computer scientists". I fit my person and everyone smiled so it was good, I guess.

Sometimes choosing a suitable metaphor, e.g. "computer programs ARE magical spells" or "culinary recipes" and following it helps.

A funny one right on this topic, heard from Michael Saunders: "Your slides should always contain a theorem and a joke. And they'd better be distinct."

Telling theoretical computer science jokes is hard.  How hard?  NP-hard.

If you have to ask, don't do it

I use humor extensively in class. I do not try to get off topic though. I think it is important that the students see the teacher as 'serious.' I do believe that a teacher can use humor but still be serious.
I don't think I ever start a class with a joke. I'm much more likely to start quite directly, giving an overview and stating the importance of the course.
Remember to target your choices to your audience. For example, if your audience is 18-21 then relating something to dating is usually fun for them. For example, if you're discussing for-loops, then you might want to talk about what happens when trying to get someone to go on a date with you.
For counter = 1 to 100 (or if you are a girl, perhaps just 1 to 3)
    if prospect(counter).AcceptsDate then
        exit for
Loop

Keeping on topic is important but there is no reason why you can't keep it fun.

By the way, I'd be careful about dating humor, since not everyone will agree on what's funny and dating can be a sensitive subject.  However, it can be a great way to get a young audience's attention.

Personally, I avoid humor for the sake of humor; therefore, I think starting with a joke many times feels forced. However, humor many times serves a pedagogical function. For example, it is easy for students to remember a funny example, introducing the odd joke in your lecture keeps people awake. Basically, think of making the class interesting rather than focusing on humor per se.

@AnonymousMathematician: I agree. Dating jokes will easily be perceived as politically incorrect in some departments. They usually do just well in engineering classes though.

This question seems long answered but here are two things I've done:
1)  I've given out an impossible syllabus, requiring students to be fluent in at least two languages, adding deliberately indecipherable requirements, etc., etc.  When invariably someone protests "This is not at all what we were expecting!" I say "Well then what were you expecting?"  When they answer I say, "Oh!  Well then I guess I'll just teach that instead!" and then tear up the syllabus with a flourish.
2)  I started teaching at graduate level when I was 28 (can't really get away with it any more) and I would sit in the back of the class on the first day.  Students would come in and do their usual first day things.  I'd wait until I was maybe five or ten minutes late and let some comments drop along the line of "Where IS this teacher?!" rolling my eyes.  Finally I would jump and say "Screw this, I'll teach the class myself!" before launching into the lecture.
In both cases the goal was to let the students know that I'm on their side, one of them, approachable, and not to take things too seriously.  Got pretty good results every time.

I like the use of self-deprecating humor to this end as well. It works well in the flow of things when I have made a mistake in a lecture, or in particular I've used it when I have a hard time pronouncing particular words.

Andy, exactly.  And in what I teach (computer programming) making REPEATED mistakes is part of the process so if I can't laugh when I'm doing it what chance do my student have?

Memes are funny, and popular, and students these days tend to identify with them. You can easily create course-related memes and stick them in your lecture slides, or on a handout or the syllabus, etc.
Here is a good place to go make a meme and then download it. Like this:

Two tricks
A couple of years ago I attended the PhD defense of a fellow student. That was in the overly stern math department of a fairly stern university. Therefore, any venture into making jokes had to be carefully pondered.
Although his defense talk was projected as attendees were entering the room, the PDF viewer’s window wasn’t maximized so that one could openly see other elements from his desktop.
I thought to myself: “Weird, why would he go through the trouble of plugging his computer and beaming his screen but not having his talk fill the screen?”
As I and many others had arrived early to get a good spot, I started exploring his screen that he had skillfully filled with many small Easter eggs, key among which was the PDF file name that you could read in the window title bar. It read something like:

Rocky_VI_the_Return_of_the_golden_Uppercut.pdf

When time came for him to get started, he just maximized the window and gave his talk. I hardly remember any other talk I attended but this one struck me.

Another one, which I did myself when giving a seminar talk, was the introduction a blue slide in the middle of my talk. I just knew that my talk would be boring as hell to those uninitiated attendees (> 99 %) and I hated it when, as a speaker, you see the audience’s attention drifting away. So I carefully reproduced the blue image shown when the projector has no input signal. When I hit the slide, I could see everyone happy at the idea that the talk would be shortened. Yet the next slide said (still on a blue background):

This is the projector speaking:
Your talk is easily the most boring one I’ve ever projected, please wrap it up soon.

Of course everyone laughed and bore with me until the end.

Though the second one does sound like a good gag, I would think twice about doing anything openly self-deprecating in a talk.  Some speakers get into the habit of constantly undercutting themselves and their work...and to a distressing extent the audience semiconsciously buys into it.  But: if the "mistake" or the self-deprecation has a clear payoff in an otherwise spotless talk, this can be very effective and entertaining: essentially you're making the idea that you could have done something wrong the premise of the joke, with the clear moral being that they were wrong to buy into it.

Think about what's the purpose of starting with humor: a useful rule in teaching is that you need to pick up students where they are now. You have to engage them by attaching to something that is already on their mind or that they already know about, and then you can gently lead them towards what you want to teach. Also, if you manage to create emotions in students during a lecture, they are more likely to remember also the academic content.
So humor in a class can serve two ways: To link the content of your lecture to students' everyday lives, and to engage them emotionally. To achieve this, you should pick jokes that in fact link everyday things to the content of your lecture. For example, in a class on research methods I once taught, I started each lecture with a strip of PhD comics that fitted to the topic of the lecture. Also earthling's answer has a nice example how to relate students' everyday live to a programming topic.
Also, if you can't come up with a suitable joke, don't worry: there are a lot of other ways to achieve the same purpose. For example, you could link to a recent story in the news, local events on campus, or in fact anything that most students are aware of and that you can somehow link to the content of your class. For example, already some years ago, Mercedes had problems with cars falling over in zigzag driving tests. That would make a nice start for a lecture about vehicle dynamics: "Today we are going to learn how to avoid this..."
Concerning the emotions, humor creates fun, which is a good emotion to help remember things. Think of other emotions, and how you could create them in a class.

And there are many strips of http://xkcd.com/ you can directly link to some algorithms or IT issues, e.g. Hamiltonian path, Traveling Salesman Problem, Array Indices and so on...

I did what @Piotr did quite often in my intro physics sections, namely start the class by showing an XKCD comic (relevant to the day's topic, when I could find one) while students were walking in. Most of them didn't get it :-(

I'm not particularly funny, so I don't try to push jokes that I know are not going to come across as witty or well done, and instead will just make an awkward situation.
Instead, I just tell stories that try to relate a disengaged audience with the topic I have at hand.
For example, if you are going to talk about -for- loops, you might try and start talking about the necessity of having a guy doing the same work over and over, but with the capability of counting up or down.
If you are introducing pointers (man I hate pointers), you might try giving a real life example of how a pointer would work in a city for example.
I've learned that if you try and be funny the results can be bad, but these short stories will allow your students to have a better idea of why the topic is relevant.

(to an extent, this echoing one of the advice by silvado)
What I always liked on those better ones of my teacher and what I found myself doing as well (though not preparing for it really) was to cast examples connecting the discussed matter to real world and then twist it in a humorous way. This definitely doesn't mean opening with a joke. I do not find it necessary to capturing the audience with a joke already at the beginning. I need their focus and attention later on, when the discourse becomes rather dense. I am sure in any field it is possible to come up with examples for discussed matter which relate by a metaphor, or in a hyperbole to everyday situations in family, among friends, or in recent news.


text:
Is it compulsory to have a master's degree in computer science for research jobs?
I hold a bachelor's in computer applications. I have got my bachelor's degree from India. Now I want to get a job in research institutes or labs at Europe, USA or India. Will I need higher education like master's or PhD? Money does not matter to me.

You could aim at technical universities (in Germany and Switzerland, they are called "Fachhochschulen", Universities of Applied Sciences). Their focus is more on applied research and teaching. I worked 2 years there as a researcher without a MS in CS.

It is highly unlikely that you'd get a permanent research position in CS with a bachelor's degree. It's also unlikely (though not impossible) that you'd get one with an MS degree (for example, it might be possible to enter an organization after an MS, and then move internally into their research wing). The most common path to getting a research job at an institute is after a Ph.D.

I would propose to target a PhD student position. As a rule, this requires master degree.
PhD is not required and will actually decrease your chances significantly, as  (following unwritten or written rules) you cannot become a PhD student second time, if you already have one degree. You must then aim to the post doctoral position that has much more requirements.
It is not very difficult to get a PhD student position in Europe, and it is not complex to get a few post doctoral positions afterwards, but getting a permanent position in science later is much more problematic.

i didnt even done my masters because i find it not useful ... but i got good job

because i was too lazy in my graduation and scored just 76% i dont think it will get me admission in any good university


text:
Should I work an the advisor I "click with" or an advisor at a higher-ranked institution?
I am currently deciding where to do my next Postdoc. I have had many Interviews, and have two solid offers on the table.
The first offer is in a highly ranked private University (not Ivy League nor MIT), with a professor who seems real nice.
The second offer is from a somewhat lower ranked institution (State University) but I clicked way better with the professor.
Both opportunities seem really appealing for me but I'm wondering whether later hiring committees will look at which institution I worked rather to with whom I worked, both professors are rather young and are just starting shop, so is not a matter of a renowned professor either.
I'm probably just looking to see what you would do if this were your situation.

There's a lot to be said for working in a supportive, co-operative workplace. You may find you're more productive, collaborate more, more keen to do the actual work, etc if you like the people you work with.

It's worth double-checking that you're right about which school is higher "ranked."  It's common for state universities to have departments that are very highly ranked, even if their undergraduates are ranked somewhat lower than top private schools.

at which institution I worked rather to with whom I worked — Neither of these is the most significant bit.  What matters most is what you publish.

I'm not in the US system, so take that with a grain of salt, but I'm with JeffE. Go to where you think you will do best research. From your sparse info this sounds like Prof. 2, but you'll have to decide for yourself.

I'd like to chime in and point out the possibility that what you publish, or more specifically where you publish your findings, might not be entirely independent of with whom you work. That being said, I'd personally go with the person I have a better chemistry with, all in all better communication, leads to better collaboration, which in turn hopefully leads to better publication.

I agree with @posdef: All of these variables are highly interdependent.  See my answer to a related question.

There is no definitive answer.

I'm probably just looking to see what would you do if this were your situation.

My own personal experience (coming from the other side of the question): I recently accepted a tenure track position at a university. I'm very happy with the position.
During my visa application process for the new position, the consulate gave me a letter that the university had sent them as proof of employment. The letter contained details of the hiring process. There I learned that they had offered the position to someone from Oxford before me; someone older with half the publications and one-sixth the citations I had. The letter stated that he was first choice because he had a strong research profile and he was coming from a reputable university. I was coming from a strong department in a "provincial university" in a small country. The other person turned down the position. I accepted.
I was a bit stung by the letter because I read it as an implicit rejection of my background (over which I had little control).
Someone also told me later that in the board meetings, during the hiring process, there was a professor who raised concerns about where I was coming from ... a "provincial university". Apparently the more bureaucratic members of the board were my most fervent supporters: I had a lot of highly-cited publications, I was sure to bring a lot more, who cares where I came from? I wasn't told the full details, but I inferred that some of the more senior professors seemed to be more attracted to the Oxford thing than raw research metrics.
(Of course the hiring process was much more complicated than that; but this was the gist of the letter and the bits and pieces I heard afterwards.)

I'm not sure if that anecdote is useful to you but again there is no universal answer. It depends entirely on your situation.
I would say that yes, in many situations, the university you do your PostDoc in makes a difference for your future career. I don't know the US system well, but I guess it would be even stronger the case there.
But you and your personal publication record are far more important.
My general advise would simply be to pick the university where you feel you would be most productive (in a "healthy" way).

+1 "pick the university where you feel you would be the most productive". In other words, the answer to this question depends on how you see "a good working relationship" as affecting your productivity vs "a high-ranked university". Different people might come up with different answers.

That story is rather disturbing :(

I usually say that the name of the university counts for less in Europe than in the US, but maybe I need to revisit that thought (I assume you accepted a position in Europe?).

@xLeitix, I came from Europe to Latin America. It all worked out well in the end. :)

Overall, you should go where you will be happiest.  Don't be afraid to go to a school with a lower reputation if you think it is better for you.
That said, there is more to being happy than "clicking" with the professor.  I would just say that you should be cautious about overvaluing "clicking" relative to other things.  There are a couple details I would consider.
Does (or will, if he's new) the professor have a notable research profile?  If he is new as you say, do you think he will build a sizable research profile quickly?  When you apply for later jobs, you'll need letters of recommendation.  A strong letter of rec from a prof whose research everyone knows, even if he is at a low-profile school, will serve you better than a rec from a prof whose research is not read or valued, even if that prof is at a prestigious school.
What is the department as a whole like?  And, if it's a postdoc where you'll be working on a particular project, what is that project like?  Are the other people working on it good people in both a personal and professional sense?  Where did they come from?  If you see that the project/department attracts high-caliber people, it is a good sign.  Also there is always the small chance that the professor is nice and clickable-with but has problems with practical/logistical matters that make working with him difficult.
Of course there are many other factors, but these are ones related to the professor-vs-school issue that I think are particularly relevant. No one is going to hire you because you clicked with a professor; the reasing clicking with a professor is important that it suggests you will be productive in that environment.  So, I'd say you should scope out other info that may give you an idea of how productive you would be in that environment.
Also, my impression is that hiring committees are likely to give more weight to the person you worked with, and gradually less to the project, department, and school.  This is especially true because of letters of rec.

I'd say it really depends on the person you want to work with and also the difference between the reputation of both universities.
However, I personally think that going to a person who you "click" with and perhaps can establish a deeper academic relationship with would be more important than just a name of a university or the risk of being in a non-productive environment.
Don't forget that you are building your future collaborators and that can help you alot when you are applying for tenure, etc.
I know of a couple of people who recently did a post doc in highly reputable universities in North america and Europe but are extremely unhappy with their progresses and publication records.


text:
Why do so few universities offer OpenCourseWare videos of their lessons?
OpenCourseWare has become more and more popular over the years, and quite a good number of universities make their lessons available in the form of online videos. However, compared to the total number of universities found in the US or rest of the world, the offerings are quite small. It seems to me that OpenCourseWare is a great way for schools to draw attention to themselves, so why is the percentage of schools offering OCW courses small?

Making an OpenCourseWare course isn't as simple as getting a team of kids with videocameras and uploading the course onto YouTube. There is a surprisingly high standard that the Professor and the University attempts to meet when they prepare a course to be deposited onto OpenCourseWare.
Stanford had built entire classrooms for the purpose of sharing online classes. Many of them have 3-4 cameras controlled by two operators while another is entirely responsible for the sound. Classes that require a balance between boardwork, slides, and discussion require a very well-trained team of videographers to recognize what they are supposed to be looking at without breaking the rhythm of the course and capturing the intent of the lecturer.
Ask any Professor how prepared their lectures are. Despite how absent-minded most professors seem, there is a large amount of practice and slidology behind each lecture. OCW adds a whole other layer to preparation since the course actually has to run on schedule and conclude with the course completed. The materials used require additional thought since OCW is limited to only a single camera. Look at some of Yale's early OTC courses; the professor will make references to a figure and the camera will be focused on his gestures rather than the actual information that they are trying to portray.
Lastly online courses are extremely expensive and don't truly make the return on investment as one would imagine. For instance, Utah State was forced to end their OpenCourseWare initiative.

Along with @bobthejoe's excellent answer, I've heard a few other reasons not to post certain types of courses online:

The notion of "supporting" the course. If you put your course online, are you obligated to answer questions, provide student support, etc.? I'm not talking about a contractual obligation as much as "If I put my lecture up there, how do I feel about 'Good luck with this material, you're on your own'?
Based on your answer to the above, you may have to actually redesign your course so it can "stand alone" as a series of videos, rather than how you prefer to teach face-to-face.
Some professors who run heavily student-interaction based classes are reluctant to post those lectures, because they want their students to be free to ask questions freely, make mistakes, etc. without those errors being archived on the internet for all time.

But I think the technical one is the biggest hurdle. OpenCourseWare needs to actually have production values in order to be worthwhile, as anyone whose remotely participated in a course where the lecture is in a room with poor acoustics and a single camera in the back will tell you.


text:
When and how do I start writing a conference paper?
In some areas, like Computer Science, peer reviewed conference are as important as Journal Papers.
Unlike most Journals, Conferences have hard deadlines to submit the papers as well as page limits.
So I have a few questions:

How early should I start writing a paper for a conference?
Is it reasonable to write and do experiments at the same time?
How many references should you check? one professor told me: check 200 use 30.

Start writing now.  No, really, now.

Also: Check ALL the references.

Generally areas like CS have plenty of good conferences all round the year, so missing a particular deadline is unlikely to hurt you much. But in case you are targeting a specific conference whose deadline is say, September 1st, then you need to have solid results which you think might fit in well as a paper at least a month before.
It could take several rounds of copy-editing before a draft can become a neat paper. By experiments, I guess you mean simulations that validate the results in your paper. You could plan to use one section of your paper to present all your simulation results.
The task essentially involves planning your presentation, loads of typing and copy-editing and some coding for simulations. Earlier is better, and all these procedures could be totally different for a different field.


text:
Publishing my first article, as the only author?
I just finished my master's thesis and my supervisor agrees that my work could be suitable for a publication. He suggested to:

write the article independently, and as the only author
have him correct and review my article, he will be a co-author in this case

What are pros and cons of each venue?
For instance, could it be that in the second case, it might be more difficult to have the article published? I imagine that he will not want to have the article published in a less prestigious journal/conference, should it not work out for the ones he usually targets.
At the same time this would be my first publication, so that I definitely could use the advice from an expert.

What field are you in?

@BryanKrause mathematics

"I imagine that he will not want to have the article published in a less prestigious journal/conference, should it not work out for the ones he usually targets." Why?

@AdamPřenosil I am not sure. Is it better no article, or an article in a bad (or not top) venue? For the credibility/prestige of a professor and his research institution?

Publishing one's research in a journal that is not among the most prestigious ones in a given subfield does not in any way detract from one's scientific credibility. I mean, it's conceivable that your advisor would disagree with this perspective, but I'm just saying, you are engaging in pure speculation that seems to be based more on your conjectures about how academic publishing works than on anything tangible.

@AdamPřenosil that's why I am asking to the community :)

Sure. My underlying point is that if this is something that worries you, then you should simply ask him.

If you will be first author on a joint publication there are few downsides and a minor upside. Your advisor's reputation might ease the review process somewhat and if they have a high reputation it might get you a few more readers.
Note that in some fields, there is no real notion of "first author". I don't know about yours. In pure math, authors are normally listed alphabetically. But even when there isn't any such notion, there is sometimes a "contributions" paragraph in the paper that provides details. That is somewhat analogous.  In some fields, all authors are assumed to contribute equally. That may be your case, or not.
Getting their advice also counts for something for your first (or any early) publication.
A sole author publication carries a bit more weight long term, but, collaboration is more and more accepted as a valuable thing.
However, if your advisor insists on being "first" author then it is being unfair to you if you have actually done the work in the thesis. I suspect he is being ethical here, however, having given you the choice.
Remember, though, that no single publication is likely to make or break your career. There are exceptions, of course.
But, you can write it up as best you can and then make the decision. Submitting it is likely to get you valuable feedback unless it is immediately rejected.

In my field, being the first author means that alphabetically my name comes first. The first paragraph is very field dependent.

@NickS, no, Buffy comes before Nick. But see the edit.

@Buffy thanks for your answer. I want to specify that my field is mathematics, if that helps further refining the answer

In pure math, multiple authors are normally listed alphabetically and the assumption is equal contributions unless otherwise indicated. People make their own assumptions, of course, when one is a student. I don't think either option is bad for you.

Thank you again. I also raised a concern in my original post, would you have any lead on that? (He might not accept to have his name featured e.g. a conference paper)

A reputable journal won't make decisions on who the authors are but on what (and how) is said. An unknown might get more scrutiny, but it shouldn't be a concern. No reputable journal should accept a paper based solely on authorship. As a first-timer, extra scrutiny might be an advantage if you get more complete feedback. But trust that the reviewers are professionals as long as the journal is reputable.

@Buffy I see. What I rather meant is: is it common that a professor wil not accept to lower the target prestige, should the paper be rejected at a prestigious journal?  This is in the case we write the paper together
If this is common, then this would be an argument for not writing the paper with his co-autorship.

"Common" doesn't matter to you. What matters is what your advisors reaction would be. You can ask him what happens if a joint paper is rejected by your first choice of journal.

@Buffy thank you again for your valuable feedback, I'm sorry I don't have the reputation to upvote your answer.

I wanted to mention that from my perspective as a professor and thesis advisor in theoretical mathematics, I don't really agree with or understand what the OP's thesis advisor is telling him.
To explain: I and most other theoretical mathematicians I know don't view "correcting and reviewing" the work of someone else to be sufficient for coauthorship...unless the corrections were highly significant, of course.  But moreover this work came from the OP's master's thesis, which I would have expected his thesis advisor to have "corrected and reviewed" already.  The impression I get is that the advisor seems to be willing to put in the work expected of a thesis advisor only in exchange for a coauthorship credit, which I find strange.
Also in my experience: a lot of mathematician advisors do not really want publication credit on the thesis work of their students for reasons similar to those that the OP mentions -- although the work may be publishable, nevertheless it may not be up to the standard of the advisor's work in the field, with the outcome that such a publication might help the student and might not really help the advisor.  In fact, I honestly believe that the most typical state of affairs is that the thesis advisor gives somewhat more intellectual aid to their student than just "correcting and reviewing" and still chooses not to be a coauthor for the same reason.
The way I can interpret the question that squares best with my experience is: the advisor knows that the student's work was essentially mathematically valid and it was written up well enough to make for an acceptable master's thesis, but it was not written in such a way as to make an acceptable submission for a journal or conference.  Moreover the advisor knows that this rewriting process would take the student significant time whereas they themselves would handle it more quickly, but you can only rewrite someone else's paper so much if you are not a coauthor.
Anyway, I think the situation lacks clarity. Another answer suggests that the advisor knows that the solo publication would be better for the OP while the joint publication would be better for them and that is why they are offering the choice.  But as a thesis advisor myself, this sounds like a strange game to play: why not just advise the OP to do what is better for them?  In my view, one need not deal with a thesis advisor like a Delphic oracle where you ask everyone else you know what they think was meant: you should be able to go back and get more clarification from the advisor themself!  I advise that the OP does so.

Let me add some further information. The first choice was presented to me since I "worked on my thesis independently", without significant input from him. Otherwise, the help he offered to me is to check for correctness, give feedback and recommendations from a draft of paper I should write alone. No writing from his side is mentioned. This amount of time he would spend, he says it needs to be exchanged for co-autorship. Moreover, he was the one who suggested to get advice from former PhD students of him regarding the two choices. Extending the question to the community seemed natural.

He agreed that he would anytime confirm I'm the key author. And that, although the target would be chosen at the end, he usually goes with A* journals, and said the work would be suitable for a particular one (not sure if this means there is a chance to publish there, or if this was just a hint/an example of an A* journal whose topics are in line with my work). Does this input help in further understanding the situation, based on your experience? In case, it would be very valuable for me to know. Thank you again

You worked on your thesis "independently"?  And he's hinting that the paper could be targeted at an A* journal...but he approved the thesis without checking it for correctness?  I'm sorry to hear all this.  Honestly, your thesis advisor doesn't sound very helpful.  Do you plan to continue in academia?  (If not, it's a very light matter whether you publish your thesis or not.)  If so, I strongly recommend that you continue with an advisor who will help you full stop, not just as a quid pro quo.

I think that finding a better academic environment is much more important than what happens to this paper. For what it's worth, I actually advise against spending too much time and energy working on the paper without having your academic future straightened out. (Also, I wasn't saying that you shouldn't have asked your question to this community. Even more: based on the latest information you've provided, I'm not sure how helpful further conversations with your advisor will be, unfortunately.)

The right combination is "quite independently". He did provide some support during my thesis (a few discussions, some hints), but the main research decisions I took autonomously. I worked quite independently, so much that he is okay with not being a co-author. He also has reviewed my thesis, once not in detail before submission, and another time for grading (not sure how much he went into the details there, I assume much more than the prescreening). He offered to help checking a draft of paper based on the thesis, not checking the thesis itself. That has already been done for grading it.

Therefore, I would be for assuming that he knows that what I got out of my thesis is correct, and that he checked that. But that he doesn't want to spend a significant amount of time on helping me without something in exchange.

Think of the choice you are being given in these terms:

You can go it alone, doing all the work, even that part of the work you don't yet have experience (let alone expertise) in, in exchange for all of the credit.
Or you can obtain expert help in checking things over, writing and editing the results in ways that your chosen venue will accept, in exchange for a co-author credit.

I myself would take the deal and give the co-author credit in a heartbeat, even though I have a number of first-author credits already.  (No 'only author' credits.)  I would do it because it means less work for me and more expertise in the publication in exchange for something that costs (in my field) essentially zero.  (And when I was a grad student, there were exactly zero papers where my advisor's advice did not merit a co-author, so it is also morally correct.)
This applies also to your question about venue quality.  No one can really answer that question except your advisor.  But if you have a good relationship with this person, I would strongly advise you to stop thinking of it in terms of your advisor causing venue-related problems.  Instead I would think of it in terms of helping you avoid bad venues and elevating your publication to the highest venue it can reside.

I think there is a significant (and permanent) advantage to writing a solo paper, in that it will be clear that it is all your own work. If you write a joint paper with your supervisor, it will not be clear how much they contributed. People evaluating your CV may imagine that the paper would not have been possible without your supervisor's contribution. Note that in math there is no concept of "first author", and even if there is a space to specify "contributions" this is not going to help unless someone actually reads the paper.
On the other hand, the experience of writing a paper together with your supervisor may be very valuable. (I think you would be wise to look at the writing in some of their recent papers before upgrading "may" to "will"!) I don't think you should worry about journals. Your supervisor will have a good idea of how high to aim, and presumably have enough papers that they don't need to worry about the odd one being somewhere lower-ranking, especially if it is co-written with a masters student - papers that come out of student projects are always a plus for the supervisor. There are even journals that specialise in such papers. Perhaps your supervisor will want to avoid really dubious journals/publishers, but then you would be wise to do that too.
Your supervisor will probably be happy to advise on choice of journal even for a solo paper, of course. I suspect that the fact that they give you an option of a solo paper is an indication that they think that would be better for you, since the co-authorship would clearly be better for them.


text:
Second email to professor or secretary?
Professor X says on his page that to apply for a PhD position, one should send (unspecified) application documents to his secretary.
After 7 days of doing so I have received no answer. The professor's email is publicly available on his group's website.
I am about to write a follow up email, to the secretary, repeating my interest and asking if I need to provide additional documents. Do you think it is not welcome that I CC the professor?

7 days isn't long, People can be travelling and may have all kinds of other things to do. I'd give them three weeks minimum. In the middle of summer maybe more.

@ChristianHennig I am in a situation where I wish to have an answer soon, and I just want to eliminate the possibility that it is the secretary that is on holiday for whatever number of weeks... Do you think it is inappropriate to write the follow up email, and put the professor in cc ?

I think it won't hurt much if you try, however it may not help either.

Where in the world are you?  In the US, it is the middle of summer.  Many faculty disappear over the summer.  Moreover, in the US, it is very late to be applying for positions which start in the fall of this year, and a bit early to start putting out feelers which will lead to applications to for programs which start next fall.

@XanderHenderson I'm in Germany, I think it is a bit random how late/early it is to apply. In my uni there is no such thing as doctoral schools

Just FYI on how business English has evolved over the years--many people would now be offended at the use of the word "secretary".  It's more likely to be replaced with words like coordinator, administrator, assistant, etc.  "Secretary" evokes memories that people feel are laced with misogyny.  As an administrator (in the US though), I get so much email, I can only respond to about 1/3 in a day.  If I haven't responded within a week, I am definitely not going to find your email later.  Following up is part of administrative life.

Seven days is nothing. Give it at least another week and then follow up with a polite e-mail to both the professor and the secretary. Re-attach your materials, put yourself in the Bcc so you can be sure that the e-mail arrives.
Make sure that the e-mail sounds like "I want to make sure that you got my application materials since I didn't hear from you yet so I am resending it in case something went wrong on my end and I am very interested in your lab and look forward to hearing from you" and not like "why didn't you reply yet it's been 7 days".
Professors get a lot of the later follow up e-mails and they don't help.


text:
In-text quotation capitalization?
When directly citing a heading of a source - such as "Nature of services" - do you keep the capitalization (as just presented) or do it as the following with squared brackets, stating "[n]ature of services"?
PS: Original source is -> Nature of services

Does this answer your question? Should titles in the references be in title case?

No. I am talking about in-text referencing.

"[n]ature of services" is a suitable direct citation.
The [] indicate that you are repurposing the original to suit the flow of your sentence/paragraph.
AFAIK, it's not overly frowned at in law, humanities, information systems. However, some universities or journals might request you do otherwise.

Generally, a quote should be exact, but for a snippet, as in your example, a modification is probably ok, especially since it is specifically noted that it has been modified.
Clarity is the most important thing.

So you recommend doing "[nature] of services"?

Not really. "[n]ature..." makes it clearer what the edit was, actually. [nature] is ambiguous.


text:
Switching fields from Theoretical Physics to Linguistics
Background: I obtained a PhD in Theoretical Physics/Mathematical Physics in 2015 and have been working as a post-doctoral researcher in various institutions since. In the past few years, I developed a strong interest in Linguistics which I have been self-studying in my free time for about a year (mostly syntax, semantics and pragmatics), including delivering introductory talks to a study group about what I learned. However, I feel limited in my self-studying by my research work in Physics-which doesn't satisfy me as much as it used to-and so I have been thinking in quitting Physics to start study Linguistics full-time, with the goal of getting a PhD in Linguistics.
Question: My question is, is it possible for me to "capitalize" on having a PhD degree in Physics to somehow get faster to my goal (PhD position in Linguistics) or should I start from scratch?
I guess there are two sub-questions:

At the study level: To what extent is it possible to transfer competency from Physics to Linguistics?
(I tend to feel that having a strong mathematical background is beneficial when studying the most formal aspects, like formal languages, formal semantics, etc. but probably would be of no help whatsoever for more applied subfields).

At the pragmatic/academic level: Very concretely, would it be possible to join e.g. a Master program/graduate school in a Linguistics topic without producing a Bachelor degree/License in the same field? Are there some specific formations that accept students with wider backgrounds such as mine?

It seems like you are talking about Europe, but better make that explicit. In Europe there is no general rule requiring that you must have done a Bachelor's in a given field before applying for a Master's, but of course you need to convince the admissions committee that you have the necessary background. Anecdotally, I studied both a Bachelor's in Physics and a Bachelor's in Linguistics and there was no transfer of knowledge or competency whatsoever at that level (or it was so slight that it's not worth mentioning). Of course, in specific subfields it might be a different story.

You are switching fields, not majors…

@JonCuster Thank you, you're right. I edited the title.

@AdamPřenosil Thank you for your input. About Europe vs US (presumably), I haven't made a decision yet so I would be open to input for both situations.

Related, partial duplicate: (How) Can I switch from field X to field Y after getting my PhD?

You are proposing a big jump. I'll suggest that taking a long journey should probably be undertaken in small steps rather than one gigantic one that might fail, leaving you nowhere.
Suppose that you could find yourself in a position in a physics department (long term) at a place that also has a good department of linguistics. You could use the existing position to make gradual moves toward the other field by first speaking to people there and working toward some collaboration as you learn.
While the two fields are very different, both can be quite theoretical, implying that your thought processes already attained might be helpful in a new field.
But, I'll guess that it would be very hard to make a single jump and also that it would take a long time to try to get some credential in linguistics before you jump, leaving you in a kind of limbo that might not be necessary.
Neither of these is my field, but I'm also guessing that interdisciplinary work isn't very likely with these. You are in a better place to judge that, but if it is possible then it might be a good path to follow.


text:
Can I use plagiarism checker to check the similarity index of my manuscipt?
My university provides access to Turnitin for every student. I have prepared a manuscript ready for submission to a double-blind review conference for September 2023. Is it OK to use the plagiarism checker to assess the similarity index of my manuscript before submission? Would that be judged as plagiarised work since the review is double-blind?

Why would you want to do this if you honestly wrote the paper yourself?

The same page has "iThenticate ... plagiarism checking tool" (close to the "Similarity" product). Though the title of the Similarity page starts with "Plagiarism prevention trusted by educators worldwide". Very confusing.

What tool exactly? "Similarity"? "iThenticate"? "Originality"? Something else?

I would consider whether Turnitin will store the manuscript, and when a publisher uses Turnitin to check for plagiarism it will find a document that was submitted at your institution that is a 100% match.

The students at my University also seem to struggle with this concept, and we need to repeatedly explain that plagiarism is not defined by Turnitin score. Case in point: a bewildered student could not understand why they were accused of plagiarism, and as their defence kept on repeating "but my Turnitin score was only 4%!". However, they have lifted every single figure (without attribution) from a published and peer-reviewed piece of work. Since they have tried representing other people's work as their own, this was considered plagiarism despite the low Turnitin score.

@VitaminE if that were the case, wouldn't issues occur when an article rejected by one publisher is submitted to another journal?

@VitaminE and you really want to publish at a place where the publisher then draws the conclusion that the document must be a fake, copied submission instead of realizing what happened?

@DonQuiKong Not sure what you are asking.  As an editor,  I get a plagiarism report provided by a publisher.   As an editor, it's easier to reject than chasing up to see whether the plagiarised report belongs to an author.

Turnitin is not a tool for checking plagiarism, but for similarity. They are not the same. High similarity does not imply plagiarism. Low similarity does not imply no plagiarism.
Also, if you honestly did all the work yourself, there isn’t any reason to use Turnitin.

While I agree with what you say, this does not answer the question.

This is exactly the answer. If you didn't plagiarize you don't need a similarity checker. If you did use it and one of the referees wrongly uses it, you get accused of plagiarism as the text is now in the database. Only texts for which the author has given permission can be submitted, and as noted elsewhere only for classwork.

Is it OK to use the plagiarism checker to assess the similarity index of my manuscript before submission?

You can do whatever you want with texts you have written yourself. So yes, you may use Turnitin, no problem at all. As others have pointed out, you should know how to interpret the result, of course, and think about the difference between similarity and plagiarism.

Would that be judged as plagiarised work since the review is double-blind?

I do not get the logic behind this question. Using a tool such as Turnitin does not automatically imply that you plagiarised. And the type of the review process has nothing to do with it, either.

I suppose the logic is that the tool might remember the paper and then, if the peers check it again, the work will be recognized as something 100% similar to the one stored in the previous check (that was done by the author).

"you may use Turnitin, no problem at all." according to one of the other answers, this may be a violation of the Turnitin terms of service.

As per Wikipedia:

Plagiarism is the fraudulent representation of another person's ... as one's own original work.

So no, "assessing the similarity index of your manuscript" is most certainly not plagiarism.
However, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnitin:

The essays submitted by students are stored in a database used to check for plagiarism

I'm not sure what exactly Turnitin does with the stored materials, e.g. who can access them. Since your work will be stored there, it can potentially violate the copyright required by your conference. I would check with the conference whether using Turnitin is allowed (and, as others already mentioned, I wouldn't use any such tool in the first place).


text:
How can I point the reader of my report to another source for background information?
In my report I introduce a topic that is good background information for my report but not crucial. To try and shorten the length of my report, rather than summarizing another paper I'd like to leave a statement that says "if you'd like to know more, read this paper", like: "For a more in-depth explanation of these strategies, read [paper] by [author] or visit [website]."
Perhaps this is bad practice? The sentence in quotes doesn't look right to me and I'd like to know if there's a better way to do it.
The report is very informal but I can see myself having this question later on with a more formal piece of writing. Bonus: does the answer change if I will be referring someone to a website/online pdf?

This is exactly one of the uses of a citation.

To me a citation is an attribution of a source to a statement made in the paper. What I'm trying to do is bypass making the statement and simply tell the reader where the information could be found. Perhaps I'm seeing a difference where there isn't any. Would a statement like "For a more in-depth explanation of these strategies, read  by  or visit ." be considered a citation? If so then I'm wrong and this question is about citations. In essence though my issue is that the sentence in quotes doesn't look right to me and I'd like to know if there's a better way to do it.

Write something like "XYZ provides an overview of ABC." For web sources, you should use a footnote rather than a citation (in many styles). (Note that websites disappear frequently.)

If I were to be as as succinct as "XYZ provides an overview of ABC" is it ok to assume my readers are smart enough to search my citation list for something written by XYZ? Some of my dissonance is coming from wanting to include some sort of direct link in the paper to where they can find the information (hyperlink/url, publisher) but also have the sentence be readable. A footnote with author, paper and url might be a good option?

This is a fairly common kind of citation. Here are some examples, so you can choose one that sounds good to you:
In Baker, Mona. "Corpora in translation studies: An overview and some suggestions for future research." Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 7.2 (1995): 223-243. -

(For a more detailed overview of text processing operations, see Sinclair 1991a.)

In Sederberg, Thomas W., and Scott R. Parry. "Free-form deformation of solid geometric models." ACM SIGGRAPH computer graphics 20.4 (1986): 151-160. -

This paper assumes that the reader is familiar with Bezier curves and surface patches. Necessary background can be found in [Boehm '84]. Basic understanding of solid modeling is also presumed, such as discussed in [Requicha '82].

In Vese, Luminita A., and Tony F. Chan. "A multiphase level set framework for image segmentation using the Mumford and Shah model." International journal of computer vision 50.3 (2002): 271-293. -

For more recent and general expositions on the level set method and applications, we refer the reader to Sethian (1999), Osher and Fedkiw (2001, to appear).

In Rothlauf, Franz. "Representations for genetic and evolutionary algorithms." Representations for Genetic and Evolutionary Algorithms. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006. 9-32. -

For a more detailed overview about different types of representations see Bäck et al. (1997, Sect. C1).

In Abraham, Farid F., et al. "Instability dynamics of fracture: a computer simulation investigation." Physical Review Letters 73.2 (1994): 272. -

We refer the reader to Allen and Tildesley [10], Hoover [11], or Abraham [12] for a treatment of the molecular dynamics (MD) simulation technique, including the many procedures for implementing it.

In Kak, Avinash C., and Malcolm Slaney. Principles of computerized tomographic imaging. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2001. -

Interested readers should also consult the paper by Crawford and King [Cra90] and the special issue of Transactions on Medical Imaging [Wan00] for an overview of current approaches.

It can even be a brief parenthetical. See for example Brown, Judy, and Michael Fraser. "Approaches and perspectives in social and environmental accounting: an overview of the conceptual landscape." Business Strategy and the Environment 15.2 (2006): 103-117. -

Indeed, legitimacy theory is one of the most widely used frameworks in explaining why organizations voluntarily engage in SEA (see Deegan, 2002, for an overview of this literature).

Note that in all of these examples, the reference is treated as a normal citation, using the same citation style as all the others in the paper and referring to a source that is included in the list of references.


text:
Changing research interests as an undergrad?
I knew I that I wanted to get involved in research since my second year as an undergrad.
I contacted a few of the staff whose work I thought was interesting at my institution and managed to acquire experience with two groups at my institution (through summer work), based on what I was interested in at the time.
However, now in my final year I have settled on a topic that is quite different and will have to go somewhere else to undertake a PhD. This topic is experiments with ultra cold atoms in optical lattices. It sort of combines a few different areas of interesting physics.
Is this a viable option to go for? Is it ethical for me to now just go somewhere else, after staff have been kind enough to let me work for them over the summer? Also this topic is quite different to my dissertation topic? Does this mean its not advisable I choose projects of this kind? I think I am for sure interested in this, but I am a little ignorant about this topic.

Your undergrad career is actually the best time to explore different research interests. It is much easier now, when you are an undergrad, than it would be at any later stage.
There is no ethical problem with changing your research interests after working for a lab over the summer - working for a lab as an undergrad is absolutely not a commitment to stay in that lab for a PhD.
Similarly, you are absolutely allowed to have research interests that are different from your undergrad dissertation. Many, many students change subfields in between their undergrad (or MS) and PhD.

Moreover, professors hiring undergrads are aware that the undergrads may not like the research and pursue other options later, and that most won't stick around for graduate school. (In fact, many programs don't let their undergrads stick around for a Ph.D.!)


text:
Can an applicant with undergrad degree from a school that is poorly regarded be seriously considered for admission to PhD at a top business school?
Background:
I did not go to college after high school straight away.  When I was finally ready (at 26), I enrolled at the infamous University of Phoenix and got to it.  This was during the time when their accreditation was in question and it was uncovered that their recruiting practices on military bases was in contravention of stated guidelines.  Thankfully, I picked my programs well and wound up with some terrific teachers who absolutely made me understand that I am not the name of the institution who conferred my undergraduate diploma.  I got excellent grades while working full-time, participated in extra curricular activities, and made some connections that have already paid dividends.
I decided that I wanted to capitalize on the momentum and parlayed into an MBA (from an AACSB accredited school this time) program and have not regretted a moment of it.
Today (this evening), I write while packing for my first academic conference, the Southern Management Association's Annual Meeting at St. Pete Beach (look me up if you'll be there!).  I'm pretty darn sure I'll be getting a PhD in a discipline related to Management or Public Policy in the near future; however, I am overflowing with ideas about many subjects that people seem to find interesting about and am super excited to put pen to paper regardless of the specific topic.
With all that, I would be straight-up lying to you fine folks if I said that I didn't want to get a PhD from Harvard, Columbia, or London Business School (my dream school); however, I would prefer for someone below to say "yes, don't bother sending them the fee" if that is how they truly feel.
I have some very strong letters of recommendation, one from a burgeoning leader in his research field, and another who would be able to attest to my ability to wrangle large data sets with sophisticated statistical and data analysis tools, among others.
So my questions are:
(Assuming that I have GPA/GRE in excess of minimum requirements for all targets - generally the case)

Does my University of Phoenix undergrad degree make my application an instant rejection at elite Tier 1 Research Universities, ceteris paribus?
If so, should I really even care?
2.a. I don't think anything will dampen my enthusiasm or creativity; however, I would like an enriching of an environment as possible, and I assume that the institutions featured in the Worldwide - UTD Top 100 Research Rankings are more substance than flash, if you get my meaning.

If you don't try, you'll never know.

In many business schools, each department enrolls a tiny number of PhD students (think 2, 3 students) every year. For example, at NYU Stern, across all (8) departments: "In the past five years, we have received anywhere from 900-1300 applications a year, across all areas combined. We admit approximately 40-50 applicants, and, on average, enroll 20-24 new students each year."

Given how highly competitive these programs are, and how difficult it is to stand out as an applicant, I encourage you to seek personalized advice from someone experienced in this (e.g. the professors writing your recommendation letters) if you really want to know about the strength of your application.

For clarity, assume I have thoroughly investigated all programs of interest and have familiarized myself with acceptance rates, generally.  Stern is a pretty nasty example in my opinion, it wasn't on my list anyway.

Columbia and Harvard business school PhD programs have similar or lower acceptance rates to NYU Stern. I'm not suggesting they are totally out of reach for you (I don't know enough about the strength of your application), I'm just bringing this up to say that you should really get personal expert advice (from someone who knows you AND who knows what these highly competitive programs are looking for) on where to apply.

Again, I didn't mention acceptance rates!  Do admission committees take the application packet as a whole... really...  Or does the University of Phoenix degree get the application thrown out?  That is my question.

Meet people. Talk to them. Become a person that they know. And also, similar to your school, it is not necessarily the rank that determines how good your PhD will be.

If Howard Schmidt had applied to a doctoral program at Harvard Business School, his application would have been seriously considered. But certainly the (perceived) degree of rigor of previous coursework matters to admissions committee.


text:
Couple applying faculty position to the same department/university
Let say a couple is applying the tenure-track positions in the same university. Question:

What would be the difference from normal faculty application?

a. Should they submit the application individually and mention this fact?
b. Should they contact the department head/search committee to discuss first?
c. Should they mention they only accept when both have offer, if they decided this?

For couple application, what would be the difference if applying the same or different department within a university?

Any other difference that should be considered? Any comments and suggestions are appreciated.

Your question will benefit from proofreading.

@Aruralreader I edited please let me know if anything in unclear.

Not quite a duplicate, but: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/161667/two-body-problem-tenure-track-and-phd (and many other questions that can be found by searching for "two body problem" or "spousal hire").

Is there only a single position they are competing for, or are there multiple?

Multiple positions. They are in separate job abs.

You should apply individually, but make sure that someone in the department (the chair, if you don't already know someone personally) knows that the two of you are married. There is no need to say that you will only accept offers if you both get one -- that is something that can be brought up once the department has decided that it wants to hire at least one of you, and it will be on the mind of the department members when thinking about your applications.
If you are applying to different departments, the same procedure applies: Apply individually, but let someone know that the two of you are married and both applying to positions at the university .

Yes, withhold conditions until it is time to make decisions.

Just married or the fact that the couple is also applying?

Let them know that your partner is also applying (and provide their name). It is clear to everyone that each of you will likely only accept an offer if you both get one. This is not an unusual situation.