text:
How is employment experience considered in PhD funding decisions in the United Kingdom?
My question is about the extent to which one's employment experience can enhance or detract from a PhD application.
I received a BSc in Biochem in 2010, worked for 3 years in software sales and just now received an MSc in Synthetic Biology.
My BSc score was not great, but my MSc grade was the highest possible (distinction).
A professor has agreed to supervise me for a PhD in the area of synthetic biology - we are going to apply for funding together. I may not win funding when applying with that professor, so I am also applying for other funded PhDs. If I succeed in winning a funded PhD, it will start roughly one year from now.
In the meantime, I have been offered two jobs: junior software developer, and software salesperson. The developer job will provide useful knowledge and experience but has a very low salary. On the other hand, the sales job will offer almost no useful knowledge or experience (over what I already have) but pays a salary three times higher.
The sales role is attractive because I am in a fair amount of debt, having been studying full-time for the past 12 months. The developer job requires skills which are used in a PhD, so might support my application. However, I don't think that it will furnish me with any extra computing knowledge over that which I could learn myself during the PhD.
To what extent do funding bodies and academic departments look at one's employment experience when considering a PhD application?
This is all set in the UK.

Can you clarify what exactly you are applying to, and perhaps what country you are in?  At least in the US, applying to a PhD program is a totally different matter than applying for funding from an external funding agency.

This all takes place in the UK. With regards to what I'm applying to, I'll be applying to research council-funded PhDs and also applying to various funding bodies to get funding for a PhD project of my own design.

This is one programme that I'll be applying for:  http://www.sbcdt.ox.ac.uk/

I help to run admissions for a DPhil (doctoral programme) in the social sciences at Oxford. Professional experience is of very minor importance during the admissions process (except where it has some truly central role in the research project). The three important things we give significant weight to are (1) academic transcript, (2) quality of research proposal/statement, and (3) admissions interview. These will typically also be the main factors for funding allocated by the university (e.g. Clarendon, DTC).

Thank you, that's very helpful and high-quality information!

@Ubiquitous Can you please move your comment to an answer so that I can vote it up?

I help to run admissions for a DPhil (doctoral programme) in the social sciences at Oxford. Professional experience is of very minor importance during the admissions process (except where it has some truly central role in the research project). The four important things we give significant weight to are

academic transcript,
quality of research proposal/statement,
admissions interview.
academic reference letters.

These will typically also be the main factors for funding allocated by the university (e.g. Clarendon, DTC). In particular, the panels that award these scholarships will have access to the same application material as the admissions coordinator, along with notes from the interviewer.
My suspicion is that a more vocational area might give more weight to practical experience. For example, someone with legal practice experience, or work as a laboratory intern might respectively have a bit of an advantage for a law/lab science DPhil. But the general understanding at Oxford is that academic excellent trumps all other considerations.


text:
Is it advisable to use formal citations in a statement of purpose?
In my statement of purpose, I am using certain arguments by scholars of my field (IR). Will it be advisable to use referencing, or might it be to my disadvantage as an unnecessary attempt to boast on my knowledge in that field.

Will it be advisable to use referencing, or might it be to my disadvantage as an unnecessary attempt to boast on my knowledge in that field.

I can hardly imagine an admission committee that would hold it against you that you already have knowledge of the field you would want to get into. You should be fine.
Also - it is an application, a certain amount of (rightful) boasting is certainly required. An SOP is not the right place for understatement.

Well, I am skeptical about the fact that I might just exceed the page limit i.e, around 2 page, if I go for a formal referencing. So, in that case can I just use foot-notes or have an informal citation, in whichever way I would ensure, I do not plagiarize.

@varsha Abbreviated references are normally acceptable in  space-constrained formats. For example, see the successful NSF proposals on this page, which are limited to 2 pages: http://www.alexhunterlang.com/nsf-fellowship

If you're going to use others' ideas or arguments, use citations.
If you use someone else's ideas in any piece of academic writing, always include citations with sufficient detail for your readers to locate the source of the ideas. To do otherwise would be plagiarism.
Correct attribution of ideas is not boastful; it's a basic requirement of writing.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is there a way to get the complete proceedings for an ACM conference?
Do you know any way to get the complete proceedings for ACM conferences? I know that I can go to the ACM digital library and see the table of contents for a conference and then get the pdf for individual papers.
But is there a way to get the whole proceedings for a conference in a single pdf?

As far as I know, NO. In the ACM conferences I have attended, I got one USB stick that has a single html file (page) that links to the individual PDFs of the papers of the conference. It is not like a conference with Springer proceedings, that provides a single PDF with the entire proceedings grouped together as a book.
So, as far as I know, there is not a official book-PDF with the entire conference papers for an ACM conference. I do not know if this applies to all ACM conferences, though.

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


text:
Pursue master's in Cybersecurity if I am not a US Citizen?
I am applying for masters in computer science. Is a Master's at CyberSecurity possible?
Can I pursue a Master's in a field like CyberSecurity if I am not a US Citizen? Most research is sponsored by DARPA or the government(I suppose requires security clearance). It would make it difficult for me to be involved with anything even after been admitted and maybe it will steer the admissions from rejecting my application.

Have you asked this question to universities in the US offering such masters?

yes, I thought it was implied

What did they say?

Most research is sponsored by DARPA or the government (I suppose requires security clearance)

Some specific research projects in cybersecurity may require security clearance, or are restricted to US citizens. The vast majority are not restricted in this way. You can see this for yourself by looking at the author lists of papers published in conferences like S&P. Specifically look at those papers coming from US institutions and note the many papers with at least one author who is an international student.
US graduate programs in cybersecurity routinely admit large numbers of international students, who for the most part have access to the same research opportunities as students that are US citizens. If you want to be sure that the program you are applying to conducts research in which non-citizens may participate, check the authors of publications coming out of that lab - look up the authors online, and see if there are many international students among them. Some labs might also have a web page where they list current graduate students involved in their research.
(You obviously can't determine citizenship of an author accurately with a Google search, but if there are a large number of international students involved, it's almost certain that there are also non-citizens involved.)
One difference is that you will not be eligible for certain federal fellowships specifically for US citizen students involved in cybersecurity research, such as the Scholarship for Service program.

I was at another school that had a cyber security program, and all my attempts to be involved in research in cyber security were met with the "US citizens" only.

Do you speak this from you involvement in the specific field, as a student and teacher or as an observer? Often times US citizens will be unable to notice the big gap there is in opportunities in this field.

@user2789433 Yes, I've collaborated with the cybersecurity research center at my university, and many of my collaborators from that center were international students (not US citizens or permanent residents). I've edited my answer to address your concerns.

@ff524 I noticed the date of this answer was posted before Trump swore in. Since the beginning of this year, I have received from multiple information sources that many Chinese students (even students from Taiwan) were turned down the admission of  cyber security programs. Would you re-confirm this answer based on your close observation? Thanks.

@scaaahu Today we have: Chinese army scientists exploiting Western universities, report says. Are there restrictions on publishing, presenting or discussing your work in situations where security clearance is required? Can some CIA agent say "Sorry, you can't publish the results of years of work."?

You will not be able to obtain a US security clearance, this is reserved for US citizens only.  You will have to find a program that does not require a security clearance, or the ability to obtain a security clearance, as one of the requirements.
As for the research side, this will definitely depend on where the money is coming from and you would have to check with the PI.  Without the clearance, you will definitely have limited access to resources.
If you want to work in industry in the US, you will definitely need to become a citizen.

"If you want to work in this field in the US, you will definitely need to become a citizen." - In industry, perhaps. I don't think this is true in academia, as the NSF supports plenty of basic research in cybersecurity without restrictions on the citizenship of the PI.

@ff524, good point, I will clarify.

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


text:
Tips for publishing draft manuscripts on arxiv
Some of you would probably know  the website http://arxiv.org/.
I am working on some  papers and I was wondering if I can publish a draft of them on airxiv in order to receive some feedback and then submit a final version to a journal.
This could be useful also to publish draft of paper that I am not sure to have the time to finish.
I would like to know some advices on how to use or how don't use this site.
I was also wondering how much does a publication on airxiv matter from a career point of view.

What is your career? That will impact the answers you get fairly substantially.

It's a duplicate especially because of the question about getting feedback.

All of the posts in the arxiv tag serve as "Tips for publishing draft manuscripts on arxiv." If you have a more specific question that isn't already answered, please edit this post and flag for reopening.


text:
How can I navigate my research assistant position when I am performing very poorly and unable to get help from my supervisor
I am currently a research assistant at an american university. I have worked under my current supervisor since my first year of undergrad. I am now working under them in a postbac position. Thus, this is my 5th year working under them. During this time, I have worked on the same project. This is a theoretical physics project, and it is not all that involved.
Working on this project for so long was normal during my undergraduate studies, as I initially knew only high school physics, so I really could not do or understand much up until this past year. Now, I have, in my opinion, done the project to the best of my abilities. I have performed the task asked, but I have not been able to generate the final result proving that it works. I have expressed to my supervisor many times that I feel I am unable to generate this result. I have checked all my work theoretically by hand, and I have checked my code extensively. I do not know what the problem is, and I have been stuck on the same issue for years now. When asking my supervisor about this, I always get generic remarks like "try a dummy example", "debug the code", etc.
I understand fully that research is about debugging these sorts of issues. However, I do not feel I am learning anything in this position or that I will be able to do more than I have on my own. I tried to express these cocerns to him and he said "Why are you so easily discouraged? This situation is quite common in research, and most supervisors are worse than me. If you cannot solve this problem and you push through, this is how people end up in positions they cannot actually fulfill."
I can sense that he is saying "you should be able to do this, and if you cannot, then you will not be a successful physicist". I am suspect of this sentiment because I feel sticking with a research project for 5 years is not being so easily discouraged, but I am not sure if I am indeed being the problem by seeming like a snowflake child.
In any case, this feedback really worries me. I know that this level of independence is expected of graduate students, but I am not a graduate student. I just finished my bachelor's degree in May. I am left feeling disoriented about my capabilities and unsure of how to improve.
In summary, I have two issues. 1) I want to be a researcher desperately. I have already been accepted into 5 PhD programs for this upcoming fall, and I am scared that I do not have what it takes to do them given this experience. I fear that, instead of improving drastically in this position, I am going to waste it by not understanding how what I'm missing. 2) I do not want to waste my time or the money of my supervisor. I am here to learn and grow as a prospective researcher. I feel that I am being cheated out of that experience, and I feel the professor is being cheated out of a full time research assistant.
How can I navigate this situation, learn, and grow the skills I need to in order to perform better in a research setting? I do not want to quit, but I don't want to wander aimlessly everyday either. I want to gain as much as I can out of this experience.

Have you tried doing the specific things your supervisor recommends? (Like trying a "dummy example") If not, why not?

I have tried for years. That is particularly why I’m convinced that I’ve done all I can do on the project. I have worked out kinks via those methods and have some preliminary results to confirm I did each step right. I believe the overall method not working might be something beyond what I can understand at my level right now. @BryanKrause

Congrats on getting into grad school!

How can I navigate this situation, learn, and grow the skills I need to in order to perform better in a research setting?

In answer to the first part - have you had actual sit-down meetings with your supervisor, where you walk them through everything you've done, the code you've written, explained the issue etc.? If not, I strongly recommend doing so. This meeting should include actually writing out a plan of attack for solving the issues and coming up with a timetable to complete this before you leave for grad school (and I STRONGLY recommend you wrap up your involvement in this project before you head off to grad school; you will not have time to be working on this and keep up with grad work.) If your supervisor is unable to give you actionable guidance after this point, it might be time to throw in the towel on this project, and move on to focusing on grad school.
As to how to learn in this situation - think about changing your perspective on what, exactly, you're learning during this project. I will be blunt - I supervised/mentored 15+ undergrads on research projects during my tenure as a postdoc, and I did not ever really expect that they'd be generating useful, novel research on those projects (only two of them ever really did anything major enough that their work was used down the line). In undergrad you are still learning how to learn, and getting the foundation knowledge on how to do the most basic of research skills. Grad school is where you will actually learn how to be a researcher, and it is totally fine that you are unsure of yourself right now; if you went into grad school thinking you knew everything, that's actually a problem because again, you're there to LEARN during grad school.
What you can be learning right now is how to be SUCCESSFUL at doing research in the future. Really think about the work you've done in the past few years - not in the context of the research problem, but in the context of a working environment. Are there things that in retrospect you think you could have done differently? Are there things your supervisor could have done to help you out more? Identify these things, and when you are in grad school doing research, apply those lessons to be more successful then.
I also wouldn't worry about "cheating" them out of a research assistant. Being stuck "on the same issue for years now" isn't really something an undergrad or postbac should be dealing with. That's the kind of thing where the supervisor should have stepped in quite a while ago to figure out what the block is so that the project can move forward, and if they haven't done so at this point they really only have themselves to blame.
From what you've said, it sounds like you may be suffering from a little bit of imposter syndrome from this experience. To give you a little perspective here, it is normal to struggle and fail during the course of research. Five different grad schools have accepted you into their programs. That means five different admission committees have seen something in you that makes them think that you'll be a successful grad student in their programs. Trust their judgement in this area. Treat grad school as a learning experience and clean slate, and you'll be fine.

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


text:
Is it OK to accept that your name be included in the authors list of a paper you have done next to nothing about?
Is it ethically OK to accept that your name be included as an author of a paper you have done almost nothing about when all the parties agree on the matter and there is mutual consent?

What do you mean by "almost nothing"? It can be the case that a contribution with small effort (as giving a significant idea), dramatically improves the paper and authorship is due. In that case, you should start getting involved in the paper in writing and proofreading.

No
This is called "gift authorship" and is generally regarded as unethical.
The widely accepted Vancouver Protocol gives the following conditions for authorship:

The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
Final approval of the version to be published; AND
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

If you have not done those four things, then it is not ethical to be listed as an author.

Isn't that a rather big claim that regardless of field or the journal policies, it is unethical if you don't follow the guidelines laid out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Even putting aside the obvious counterexamples of particle physics collaborations there are a whole number of subjects where authors routinely do not make significant contributions to drafting the paper (although they should be given the option to review and contribute), are they all behaving unethically?

The Association for Computing Machinery--the primary computer science professional organization (at least in the US)--has a similar authorship policy.

I would say there are already some differences, for example if someone made a significant contribution but only gave a cursory review of the manuscript and suggested cosmetic changes, then they may not meet the criteria of the ICMJE but seemingly could meet those of the Association for Computing Machinery. As another example, I can't see anything from the American Physical Society saying that authors must contribute to writing or reviewing the manuscript, merely that they should have the opportunity to do so: https://www.aps.org/policy/statements/02_2.cfm


text:
How long does it take to get a reply to your PhD application email in Germany?
I am applying for PhD positions in Germany. Normally I need to send an email to the professors with a list of references, grades transcript, CV, master's thesis, etc. I want to know how long after sending my email should I assume that I am not getting the position?
Thanks

Usually, in Germany you get an answer even if it says that you don't get the position. I wouldn't worry if it takes a few weeks which (depending on the institute) can be absolutely normal. You also have to consider that there maybe is a deadline (in German often: Bewerbungsschluss). Normally you get notice a few weeks after that.
It is also absolutely acceptable to write a mail asking for the status of the application (after a few weeks). You also have to consider that currently there are semester breaks in Germany so the professor can be on vacation not reading any mails.


text:
How to complain about a Ph.D student to a professor
I am a undergraduate student who also work as the systems administrator in the school. I also do research work under a professor. Recently, I had to work on this professor's lab to upgrade the older machines to newer machines. I literally got no help from any of the fellow lab mates. Though, I did it as part of my systems administrator work, the professor had instructed his Ph.D students to help me. However, I do not complain of this.
I have a very nagging girl who always wants to get her things done and couldn't even figure out some basic stuff from the Internet. She simply blames the installation and this pretty much annoys me. She is not thankful for what I am doing, and so I do not even feel like helping this girl. I want to report it to my professor in such a way that I do not offend him in any way. I never bothered him much so far. But I want to escalate this issue. How should I go about it?
P.S: I am not sure if this question belongs here or on The Workplace.

This looks like an IT workplace issue to me.

@DmitrySavostyanov, thanks. That's why I used the P.S.

It could be OT here. Professors may not behave like standard bosses.

Please keep in mind that "basic stuffs" can have a different meaning for a computer enthusiast like you and someone else. Many people have a very limited knowledge of the meaning of http, ftp, ip, proxy... Also, changing from Windows to Linux or MacOS is a challenge for many people. Some people would even have trouble to handle a new version of Windows, or a new software version. So, maybe, from her point of view, the new installation is really the problem.

To clarify: is the girl a graduate student in your professor's lab?  Most graduate students who are under the age of 18 are extremely bright and capable...

What do you mean by "wants to get her things done"?  You mean she thinks her own work is more important than helping you with your work? The temerity!

There's no benefit to you in antagonizing anyone, so I'd avoid referring to her as a "nagging girl".  ("Nagging" sounds insulting, it's often used specifically for women so it could come across as sexist even if you meant it in a completely gender-neutral way, and if this person is not a child then she may take offense at being called a girl.)

This question seems pretty ranty.

The answer really comes down to whether or not your position as "Systems Administrator" is paid or not. If it is a paid position, then welcome to the professional world, where users will often complain about the resources and facilities that are provided for them. Dealing with their complaints in a professional manner is part of the job that you are being paid for, and it is not appropriate to complain to your manager about that aspect of the job, unless a user is being abusive. You should make it clear to the user concerned that you have installed the software that you were told to install, as you were told to do, and that if the software is inappropriate or does not suit her requirements then she needs to talk to her supervisor, as he/she is the one responsible for ensuring she has the equipment she needs for her research. Do not get angry, be polite and professional; "I would like to help you, but as system administrator I just install the software I am told to install. I have no powers to choose or change what you have been given, so if you need something different you will have to talk to the boss."
If a particular user takes up far more time than than the rest, then you need to ask your manager how to proceed - your employment contract will state how many hours you are to work, and if your manager wants you to cater to the whims of one particular user during those hours, then that is their decision. You should also realise that, since you are the paid "System Administrator", it is not the job of the PhD students to help you carry out this task. They aren't system administrators, they aren't being paid to do the job - you are.
If, on the other hand, your position as "System administrator" is voluntary and unpaid, and the PhD students are part of a "sysadmin" team, then you need to ask them to take a more active role than they are, and to consider whether hours spent on tasks are being allocated in the most efficient fashion.

I would take smaller steps first.
1) If you are doing something that is not part of your job, stop (selectively) doing it. Politely reply that X is not on your responsibility.
Following these two advice alone could change her behaviour. If the problem persists
2) Talk with her first. Say that you are using much of your time to help her, and tell her that you expect a more professional relationship.
If there is still problems, then talk to the professor.
I would also require the lab members to help you if instructed to do so. If you don't, they will see you as someone they can use.

I would not advise following 1), because if a person believes that their work is important, and that you are deliberately obstructing their ability to do their work, then it is highly likely that a multi-day turnaround on simple email queries, which it is your job to respond to, are going to be viewed negatively not only by them, but also by third parties (in particular, the person who is responsible for paying you to reply to her emails).

Your point 1) seems to be advising the OP to engage in stereotypically obnoxious sysadmin behavior, as is lampooned for instance in this SNL skit: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x557tg_nick-burns-your-company-s-computer_fun.  Also, your advice to a worker to artificially wait multiple days before doing what he is paid to do could jeopardize his job.

@PeteL.Clark is probably right. Don't risk your job. I'll edit 1) out.

Be careful about escalation.  Remember that Fort Sumter started the civil war even though there was no loss of life on either side during the battle.  The graduate students outrank you.  They also outnumber you and will fiercely counterattack. Leave them alone as you have to date. If you need help then make friends with one of them.
Apparently you do not work for the girl. That puts you on more equal footing with her, which means that you can speak frankly with her.  Tell her how much time you have to work with her, what you can do for her, and what you cannot do for her. Set up a time to meet with her and tell her that you cannot accept walk-up requests. You and she will have to develop some personal relationship of mutual respect.
The professor may not want to hear about your problems.  If he has a problem then he will tell you. Your primary responsibility is to him.  You fix his problems; he does not fix your problems.

Your answer, although overall good, has an unnecessarily aggressive -- indeed, often explicitly militaristic -- tone.  You don't know the situation and cannot predict that anyone will "fiercely counterattack".  Moreover: "You fix his problems; he does not fix your problems."  Why are you putting such words in this professor's mouth?  In my lifelong career in academia, I've never heard anyone express such an obnoxiously asymmetric view of a working relationship.  I'd like to think that based on this way of expressing things that you are not in fact a professor in charge of a lab.  Am I wrong?

There are a couple of trajectories, depending on how you want to define yourself.

You can get the student to understand that her problems are due to her ignorance of computers.  But try to direct her to resources where she can remedy that rather than blame her.
Talk to your supervisor and ask how they suggest you proceed with it.  This tactic puts the responsibility for failure (or success, <-note) on their shoulders and keeps you from receiving damage.

Hope that helps.


text:
How to deal with multiple supervisors and different expectations?
I'm a 3rd year PhD student in Australia. My primary supervisor did a little supervising during my candidature but now complains that I have not done enough work. He gave one of my aims (which I worked on) to a master's student and I had to finish master's student work as well. My other supervisors don't know that I'm working on the master students' work as well. My primary supervisor asked me not to mention it to my other supervisors. In my supervisory meetings, he is the first to criticize my work. I'm so fed up with my project. I want to finish the project as soon as possible but I'm scared that he will drag my Ph.D. for another 2 years. Please help me how to deal with him.

What is your relationship with your other supervisors? Do you trust any of them enough to bring this up with them? I think it is important, that they are kept up-to-date with what you are doing. The primary supervisor wanting you to stay silent sounds worrying...

I think your question can be broken down to two main issues: 1) how to communicate to your primary supervisor that you plan to finish your PhD soon and want to set a clear goal on how to achieve that; 2) how should you deal with multiple supervisors, especially when one of them is putting you in a difficult situation, such as asking you to hide that you are working on a task he assigned to you. I edited the title to match 2, but I think you should make another question for 1. This is an important question that many people struggles with during the phd.

Your supervisor seems to be exploiting you. He is asking you to support Master's work because he is doing a favor to that student for some reason at your expense. I understand that you are under pressure and for the sake of completing the PhD you are doing things under compulsion. But in life you should never do anything under compulsion, it ends bad and impacts you as a person. Standing up for yourself is a key part of learning. Do you have a PhD research committee which oversees everything? I suggest you change your supervisor to an honest person. I have gone through similar situation.

A supervisor/advisor asking you to hide their (and your) actions from other supervisors/committee members is a HUGE red flag.  There are already two good answers that say what I would have.  I add only this:  Start documenting everything.

There seems to be something wrong if your main supervisor doesn't want you to bring up this issue with others. I think you probably need to counter that in some way. Perhaps a private conversation with the department head or one of the other supervisors would be appropriate. But it might also be risky.
I wonder, too, if you are so valuable to the main supervisor that they just don't want you to finish early so that you can contribute more to their program. This, too, is unethical.
However, speaking to another puts you at risk. Make sure that anyone you speak with understands that and has some way to counter it.

In a well-functioning supervisory arrangement there would be no need to keep secrets about your work allocation from some of your supervisors at the behest of others.  This circumstance suggests that your primary supervisor is not acting appropriately in your supervision.  This is something you should escalate to the Graduate Coordinator and/or the relevant Head of Department.  Although I would not presume to suggest it, if there is indeed a risk that disclosure of basic facts of your work allocation to others is "risky" insofar as it might lead to retaliation (as the other answer here suggests) then that is also a sign of serious dysfunction and all the more reason to speak to the Graduate Coordinator and/or the relevant Head of Department.  Making a bad judgment in your work allocation is not necessarily so bad a thing for a supervisor to do (we all make errors) but as the saying goes, "It's the cover-up that kills you".
If it were me, I would first speak to the Head of Department and disclose these problems and then I would talk to my primary supervisor and let him know that I have done so, and that I do not feel comfortable keeping information from the other supervisors on my panel.  I would let him know that I am interested in having a productive and friendly supervisory relationship, and to that end that I would be happy to have a conversation about what additional work is required from me.  However, I would also politely but firmly ask that he refrain from telling me to withhold information from my other supervisors in the future.

Why not star the other way round: Start talking to the first supervisor and then the Head of Department?

In this circumstance I would suggest starting with the escalation to Head of Dept.  Supervisor has already taken action to try to cover up problems in candidature from others so an initial conversation with supervisor might backfire.

@Ben as an australian PhD student, I can tell you that, unless your co-supervisors are totally unavailable, then they should be who you go to first. The head of department may never be appropriate, depending on the university’s policy—they may prefer you to speak to the graduate research coordinator for the school, who look after the PhD students.

@isolatedmatrix: I don't agree with you that the HoD is never appropriate, or even inappropriate in this circumstance.  I can think of nothing in any university policy that would preclude a HoD from having an interest in an academic in Dept asking his PhD student to withhold relevant work information from co-supervisors.  That seems like a big problem to me (and possibly even an ethics breach), and one that could reasonably be drawn to attention of HoD.  If I were HoD in such a Dept, I would certainly want to know about this.

@Ben Let me rephrase: it may never be appropriate to go straight to the HoD before you have seen the graduate research coordinator, or spoken to the graduate research school. The policies I’m referring to are more about who is above whom in the food chain, if that makes sense (i.e., if x doesn’t resolve it, go to y, if y doesn’t resolve it, go to z, etc.). You also have to think of the politics involved. What if the supervisor is friends with the HoD? what if the supervisor brings in lots of money? Happened to a friend of mine, when he went to the HoD. Best to go through proper channels

@isolatedmatrix: I think you're labouring under a misapprehension about the authority/responsibility in Australian university Depts.  The typical situation I have seen is that HoD is responsible for everything, and all other administrative positions (e.g., graduate coordinator) act on delegated authority from HoD.  In the present case there are two issues: (1) administration of HDR candidate; and (2) potential ethics breach by supervisor.  That is something that could reasonably be escalated to HoD directly (though I have also offered the option of grad coordinator in my answer).

And no, I don't have to think of the politics involved (particularly if they involve wild speculation on who might be friends with whom).  Political corruption of the kind you describe exists precisely because people tread so tenderly for fear of retaliation.  It is better to just use the process and assume good faith.

(Moreover, if I were grad coordinator in this situation, the first thing I would do is escalate to HoD, due to the potential ethics breach by a member of academic staff.)

@Ben Then he should go to the GRC. My understanding is that the GRC answers to the GRS in matters of supervision. And i think you’re wildly overestimating what i meant by politics. I’m not suggesting a big conspiracy; I’m suggesting that, if it’s one person’s word against another, the HoD might be biased. Depends on how much money the supervisor brings in. But are you seriously arguing that the OP shouldn’t go through the proper channels? If the GRC goes to the HoD, that’s fine, because the OP would have a member of staff advocating his case (against a member of staff).

This conversation is no longer productive; thanks for your input.

The very fact that your supervisor wants you to keep this quiet means he knows he’s doing something dodgy.
If you are afraid of bringing this up with your primary supervisor (as in, specifically tell him that it’s not right for him to expect you to complete someone else’s work, and it’s completely inappropriate to take one of your projects—which, I assume, was part of your original research proposal—to give to someone else), I would first speak to your co-supervisors, or your school’s/department’s graduate research coordinator. That is one of the reasons you have them. The head of department is not responsible for candidature or supervision directly.


text:
Ethical question regarding authorship on CV
I am an undergraduate student doing research work for multiple PIs as part of an international particle physics collaboration. Although my work is related to recent papers published under this collaboration, I did not participate in the review or composition of these papers.
Is there an ethical way to list these papers on my CV to apply for summer research opportunities?

Background
Participating in collaborations at CERN may qualify you to enter the author list for a certain experiment, according to the minimum requirements stated by CERN. So you can get co-authorship on all papers published under the collaboration for a fixed period of time.

Can you clarify what you mean by "my work is related"?
Did you contribute? Did you create data or perform experiments that are used in this paper?

I did not create data or prepare experiments for all of them, but some are more related than others. Let me be a little more specific - I am performing silicon sensor tests for an upgrade to one of the projects at CERN, so some relevant data was produced and processed by me, but not all papers published by my collaboration are directly relevant to anything I've contributed to, and I don't know if I could be considered a part of my collaboration as an undergrad.

If you haven't contributed to those papers. You cannot list them in your CV.
However, you can use wordings like Buffy (see Answers) suggested. You participated in project "XYZ" led by Prof.X at CERN. (Assuming your work was part of a given "XYZ")

I would ask one or more of the professors whether something like the following would be ok with them.

Participated in the "Undivided Underwater Basketweaving" project led by Prof X and Prof Y that resulted in the paper "...".

They might have better language that would be appropriate. If you were acknowledged by name in a paper you could say that as well.

Thanks, this helps. That's my main confusion - I don't know if I'm formally part of my collaboration, and my name is not listed under my institution on the author list, so I obviously can't say or imply that I am an author


text:
Salary Disparities Between Fields
Have professors just come to accept that there are significantly higher salaries in certain academic fields (generally engineering, some business, law, etc.)?  Does it ever cause tension within a university faculty?  The irony is that not only do certain academic fields pay higher professor salaries, those same fields often allow for greater ability to do consulting and other income supplementing activities.

where in the world are you basing this on? in Germany all professors in all disciplines get the same amount of state fixed salary, so this statement is simply untrue for some countries.

I agree with Sursula. In many countries I worked before, in Europe and South America, all academic positions in public institutions have the same salary range independent of the field. Is this a question about private universities?

I am definitely talking about the US.  As with most things, the US tends to be more market based and willing to have salary differentials.

@Sursula See e.g. University of California, which has separate scales for business/economics/engineering, law, health sciences, and veterinary medicine.

This is certainly specific to the country you're asking for. It is true in the US, but it is not true in Germany where professors are (largely) paid the same regardless of the field they teach and research in.
Underlying your question is a suggestion that different salaries are unjust -- if that were not the case, "just come to accept" would not be an issue. But, I think your premise is at least open to debate. In the end, at least in the US, salaries are subject to market forces. If new PhD students in computer science, for example, can earn starting salaries well into the 6 digits, then universities will not have a choice but pay professors starting salaries that are substantially higher than, say, professors teaching medieval music who do not have a market that provide such high competing salaries. Perhaps one decry that these music professors do the same job and should earn the same salary, but meeting in the middle would then simply imply that computer science departments would be very empty -- because nobody would be willing to do the job.
So yes, there is an element to unfairness about this, but at the same time it's also reasonably pragmatic.

From what I heard recently, there are actually quite extreme salary differences between professors in Germany, with individual professors having negotiated to receive twice the default salary (according to "W-Besoldung"). I don't know how the situation is between different fields, though.

Note that the example of Germany you quote shows that the fear that CS departments would be empty seems relatively baseless. CS PhDs in Germany definitely also have much better paid job options compared to medieval music PhDs, professors teaching the two subjects are paid essentially the same and nevertheless CS professorships are all filled and quite competitive to get.

@quarague If you talk to department heads in CS in the US, these fears are not without merit. Starting salaries for assistant professors of CS in the US (~$120k for 9 month salaries, plus grant funding in the summer) are about as high as W3 (full professor) salaries in Germany, In part that is because the CS salaries in industry in the US are very substantially higher than they are in Germany.

Yes I am definitely talking about the US.  The US tends to have more market-based compensation in just about everything hence the disparities.

Also, did not mean to imply that I thought salary differentials was unjust.  My question was more around whether this affects how the different faculty get along and whether the salary differentials cause tension.

I see. Of course there is envy, but in the end people make it work. It's also nothing you can change, so there is only so much complaining about it that is useful.


text:
When to contact potential supervisor in USA PhD?
When filling out US PhD applications in the Humanities, there is a part that asks to list three faculty members one would like to work with. I only know their biographies from the department website.
Is it recommended emailing these faculty members before or after submitting my application?

Does this answer your question? How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor?

@Sursula I think only the second question is a duplicate (it shouldn't be more than one anyway), but the first question is not.

@TheDoctor Yeah I know, but there shouldn't be more than one question anyway and the rest feels very much like a depends on individual factors situation

@Sursula Agreed. I was reading more as "is it required?", but "is it recommended?" makes it more vague. When it is a requirement it should be in the application guidelines. I'm voting to close.

Will you have a masters already when you expect to start or only a bachelors?

@Buffy I have two masters, but they're not exactly in the same field as the PhD I am applying for. You see, I had a double major for bachelors. The Masters were for one major. Now I want to pursue a doctor's in the other one. Sorry, it is a bit long-winded...

In most fields and most universities in the US, it isn't necessary or expected to contact a potential advisor as part of the application process. Admissions are handled by a committee of faculty who evaluate all applications. This is to help assure fairness and equal treatment. One selects a dissertation advisor later, even, perhaps, after any required qualifying examinations are passed. I expect this to be the case in the humanities. The exceptions seem to be only in lab-based science.
In particular, it isn't the supervisor that "accepts" you for admission and likely has no (or very little) say in the matter unless you are truly exceptional.
A letter to a potential advisor might be fine as an introduction, but might just be a distraction for them (noise). Their proper response would probably be, "fine, make application as usual".
See the answer for the US here: How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in Country X?
I suspect that the question was asked simply so that the committee can get a sense about balance in requirements for faculty time for the near to mid future so as not to overload anyone and to try to provide supervision opportunities for some other faculty.


text:
Inaccurate citation rate of book on Google Scholar
The problem: incorrect citation rate of my 2001 book. In early 2023 Google Scholar changed pub date to 2011; after pub date error the cumulative citation rate fell from 10,00+ to 2000+. Can the citation rate be corrected/edited?

Sounds like a question for Google…

Assuming your profile name is your actual name, setup a Google Scholar account to claim your articles. That may let you edit the citation details.


text:
non-US PhD's with extensive course work
I think I understand the general difference between US and European PhD.
US

GRE is compulsory to get admitted to any PhD programs.
First we get admitted to the institution.
Need to do extensive course work though if one has masters.
Will decide about the area of PhD only after completing the course
    work.

Europe & Australia

GRE is not compulsory, but might help to improve the chance of
getting an admission.
We will know the research area in the beginning.
Most seems to have no course work or little course work.

If I am right it seems both have its own advantages and disadvantages.
I want to apply for a PhD with extensive course work (in the beginning of PhD) but I must know which area I'll be doing my PhD when i get admitted and the PhD duration must be more than ones without any course work (i expect around 1+4 years of funding).
What are my best options considering the above concerns ?
Note: I am looking for PhD in Theoretical Physics

Why do you want to do extensive course work? For example, I have to take a number of credits during my PhD, but nothing stops me from sitting in as many extra classes over that number as I see they will help me.

@Davidmh thts right. but i have  reasons to believe that it'd be the best option for me in the long run, if the first one year (atleast) is only course wok and it is funded, quite like the US.

But why? I have the feeling this may be another instance of the XY problem.

@Davidmh well.... My masters was not particularly meant to do theoretical work in basic science (from my experience and point of view). To be precise my masters was neither in physics or theoretical physics, but in optics. I think if i have to do course work in PhD, rather than directly going into research, that would strengthen my knowledge and i believe this is the best option i have.

I think the usual solution in non-US systems would be to take a second masters (for coursework) before embarking on a PhD (and thus going into research).  It sounds like your focus on a PhD is mainly because PhDs are usually funded, and so maybe the question you should really ask is "How can I find a funded masters program in theoretical physics?"

@NateEldredge though it is an option, wasting 2 years on masters may not b a good idea. may be i can ask "what is the maximum duration for a PhD with course work (beginning) in europe (in theoretical physics) ?"

It isn't necessarily "wasted", in all probability you'll have to take more or less the same courses in a PhD if you didn't do them before (because you'll need them for your research).

@vonbrand thanx.but is it anyway possible to abtain a 4+1 phd in europe, quite similar to US phd duration ?

I have a PhD in theoretical physics obtained in Germany: in particular

GRE is not compulsory, but might help to improve the chance of getting an admission.

GRE is totally irrelevant.

We will know the research area in the beginning.

this is mainly true all across Europe but however there are some departments whose research projects are to be decided on your way throughout graduation (it happens in Italy, for example). I had a very strict and detailed project to fully adhere to, but it might not always be the case (with corresponding advantages and disadvantages). Also notice that sometimes, for whichever reason, PhD students change projects along the way (mostly because they do not like it or because it is a dead end line of research).

Most seems to have no course work or little course work.

Wrong. I had heavy teaching duties (three-four semesters), mandatory classes to attend and corresponding exams to take (it happens in other European countries too). Besides that, compulsory seminars and conferences to take part to.
As a general rule always determine with the department you are applying to what the local rules are: it is very department dependent and even in the same department different scholarships may get treated differently and have different loads. I would personally go for a research project I like and then manage the extra curricular activities accordingly: after all, the chances to get a position afterwards will only depend on your final PhD thesis (and related papers); nobody ever looks at the exams marks and classes you have taken.

good to know this. so u mean one has to do course work and exams mostly graduate level, before starting research work ?

but in that case what is the PhD duration (funding) ?.. is it more than typical european PhD's without any course work ?

Before, after or during depends on the local rules: in my case it was in parallel. PhD duration is officially three years, practically as long as your supervisor decides to award you the grant.

thanx. That is what i am concerned about. If the duration is same and one needs to do course work in parallel, is different. Is it possible that the course work is in the beginning and the duration is one more year considering the course work period, than the typical european PhD's ?

Again, there's no such thing as typical European PhD: Europe is not one big country, rather it is the collection of many different things and each department has their own regulations. However, yes, the example you mention is typical in Italy, in some university, where you have 1+2 (1+3), the first year being devoted to course only.

thank you. I understand ur point. i mean by "typical" is 3 years. to be precise i mean 1+4 years ?

In my PhD (USA) had a set of rules taking a set of courses from different lines, many were taught very irregularly (if at all). I tried to puzzle a way through the maze. I gave up, talked to my (provisional) advisor. He told me "Oh, instead of two terms of foreign language, you'll have to take two terms of statistics. Go get a minor, approve your qualifying exam Oh, and do a thesis." There were two introductory courses suggested for all graduate students, I took them, and some "special topics" classes related to my research. I.e., don't take published regulations too seriously, ask around.

Depending on the area, you might be required to take an MPhil or Research Master. This is the equivalent to the coursework in the US, and then some electives related to your research area. Again, depending the Area, you will find that there are many universities that (at least try) to implement the US standard. In Business and Economics for example you have BGSE, Bonn, Toulouse, EUI, among many others that have a very "US" style doctoral program, just hidden by a (almost always mandatory) Master of Research plus the Doctoral Program which is mostly research.


text:
Is it usual for a PhD thesis to have two distinct subjects?
In my PhD studies I have slipped off my original track of research. This was also caused by the fact that I found out that my work can be generalized to a broader scope. It is not so bad, during this detour I did a lot of work.
But then I tried to get back to my original subject and did a lot of work there too. So now after 3 years of studying, I have several papers and a lot of data for both tracks. I don't think that the results in any one of these tracks are sufficient to graduate, but together they are.
Should I:

try to find a unifying theme and try to make my thesis seem unified on the outside, or
should I transparently say that my thesis is about these two subjects?

It could also depend from the rules and customs at your institution (university/school/department). At my department, for example, a PhD thesis is not much more than a collection of articles with an introduction and no unifying theme is even required!

It's not very common, but my dissertation had work on two subjects that were only loosely related. (I didn't switch subjects like you, but my interests are broad.) The title ended up being somewhat generic, but it was otherwise OK.

I suggest consulting your advisor and PhD committee.

Option 1. At least in computer science, it happens often (but not always) that someone works on several somewhat disjoint but somewhat related problems. It's all about the glue and the story; if you can sell the cohesiveness of the thesis in the abstract and introduction, you're golden. Be upfront about the fact that there may be some disjoint problems, but try to find and highlight the unifying themes.
Here's a quote my advisor always tells us which has relevance to this: "all wells, when dug deep enough, lead to the same water source."

Yes, it is computer science :)

Yes, I mentioned in CS because my PhD thesis was in CS and it was REALLY disjoint. It's all about the sell =). That said, my advisor is a really good "salesman". he can take two vaguely related topics and "glue" them well. This is a skill I hope to learn!

In social sciences a lot of thesis (and even papers) are about a methodology and one practical application - or about a practical application as a case show of a methodology. This can be a way to glue together different topics if one can be seen as a particular case of the other.

This really appears to be about titling your thesis (and maybe writing the introduction). The question, then, I guess, is: who is going the read your thesis and title? Do you want to have a highly descriptive title (Description of topic 1 & description of topic 2), or could you just say (Vague title that sums up both, broadly). In general, I'm not sure if one is objectively better than the other - the audience matters.


text:
Is it possible to do a cheap or free online or distance Ph.D. program?
Is it possible do to an online or distance Ph.D. program at all?
If so, are there ones that are cheap or free?

Removing the "because i have no time to going to any University now" is significantly altering the question.

@Lohoris Agreed, but if it was included this question should probably be closed. Now it can at least garner useful answers.

You might consider studying in Europe. AFAIK, universities are cheaper...

Beside the fact that doing a (at least remotely meaningful) PhD online/distance sounds awful suspicious.. would you mind to tell us what is your major/topic? Your options are most probably very different if you try to pull this in Theology or in an experimental STEM field.

It depends on what exactly you want and where you live. E.g., one could argue that in STEM, it is normal to not pay for your PhD from your money: in Europe, there are funded PhD positions; in some other countries (e.g., in the Middle East, in South America), there are government grants that allow students to go abroad and get PhD. But these are full-time programmes.

To a first approximation, it's not possible.  There are few online or distance Ph.D. programs, and they usually have bad reputations.  A Ph.D. from a university with a bad reputation will actually be worse for your career than having no Ph.D. at all, so you should be very careful.  Plus these programs are as far as I know never free.  You can get financial support for Ph.D. work in several ways (competitive fellowships, a faculty member's research grant, teaching classes for the department), so depending on the field you may not need to pay anything yourself and may even earn a modest stipend, but that's not because the program itself is cheap or free.  Ph.D. supervision is intrinsically time-consuming and expensive.
I'm skeptical of how serious your question is.  Hoping for a free online Ph.D. isn't really reasonable; furthermore, if you have no time to attend a university, then you probably have no time to complete the years of full-time research required to write a Ph.D. dissertation.
However, I felt it was worth answering to warn you about scams from unaccredited universities.  There are plenty of diploma mills that will offer you a relatively cheap and easy Ph.D. online.  Such degrees are completely worthless, so they'd basically be stealing the fees from you.

A PhD requires significant time input from an advisor – several hours a week from somebody earning a decent salary. That's not something you can get for free or at a distance.
If distance learning is an absolute requirement and you're in the UK, the Open University might be what you're looking for. If free is an absolute requirement, you need to look into potential sources of funding: in most places, there's no such thing as a free PhD but there are organizations (including some governments) that will pay the fees for good students. But be aware that these are very competitive.

Peter- where are you located and what is your citizenship?
Many countries have Higher-Degree-by-Research (HDR) for free or minimal payment but only available to local students and based on competitive entry.
For instance, in Australia, many PhD programs are currently free for local students, but you must be citizen, secure a commonwealth 'position' (as basically the Commonwealth covers your tuition) and in around 2016- fees will be introduced. I think international students can also apply for tuition-free positions but this might depend on the university.
Depending on your Faculty, research topic and resources required to undertake your research - it is not uncommon for a PhD to be undertaken 'remotely' in Australia. However, Australia generally does NOT have course-work related PhD - the entire 3 years is research and thesis writing (this differs from the system in the USA).
I think also Germany and Belgium have free higher education.

Free PHD education <> Free distant PHD education as the OP wants. The fact that after being accepted for a PHD on a traditional university, you may do some work remotely (if the supervisor agrees to that which is not 100% sure) it still does not qualify as a free online / distant PHD, as the OP wants (and which I believe does not exist anyway).

@Alexandros It is free. The option to work remotely and have supervision meetings via Skype or phone could be negotiated at the time of entry. Some projects do not require on campus data collection and analysis. While people asking this question may merely be seeking the qualification and looking to avoid real work, others who land on this page may legitimately be looking for a flexible and off-campus option for pursing a PhD. This flexible option is certainly possible.

Many UK universities offer a "PhD by published works". Basically you take a group of scientific papers you have written that demonstrate a PhD level of work and competence. You then write an introduction/summary, submit it with the collection of papers (the university will provide a supervisor to assist with this assembly process) and they examine the work, give you a viva etc. There will be fees but afaict the total fees paid will likely be much lower than a traditional student will pay as you will only be registered as part time and will not be registered for as long.
Many Universities restrict this to their own former students or others who are in some way associated with the University, but there are some who offer it to extrnal applicants with no previous relationship to the University.
This is NOT going to be an easy way to get a PhD, but if you have managed to be active in academic publishing without getting a PhD the traditional way (a traditional PhD program is basically a research apprenticeship) and you want to convert that work into a PhD then it may be an option for you.

There is NO free doctorate ( or degree at any other level) from any  properly accredited university. BEWARE diploma mills!! I began my PhD in Australia when the exchange rates were much better and later had to drop out due to a family emergency. I've been researching less expensive degrees, but my area is nursing, so it most likely does not apply to you. Your best bets are state schools which offer online doctorates, or looking overseas at England/Scotland/Wales. As mentioned above, Germany has free tuition, but not all courses are offered in English.  My concern is that you say you "have no time". Do not believe that  because a doctorate is done via distance that you will have an easier time of it. I skyped and phoned my advisor in Cairns, Au. weekly for an hourly conference. Then there were the hours of research I did prior to those conferences. A doctorate is time-consuming. There's no way around that. You may get decent tuition at perhaps 250.00 to 350 dollars a credit in a state school (most doctoral courses are 3 to 6 credits each depending on your area of study), but you will still have to put in the time and then you will write a dissertation with multiple revisions. You don't sound ready for doctoral study, my friend. I often tell my undergrad nursing students who say they have "no time" to do their work that the world will not accommodate them. That's just  life. Sometimes we must wait for the right time to go to school, or we have to make a great effort to ensure we set aside the time if we really want the degree.

Germany really isn't an option, as the PhD position itself is paid and usually requires some sort of residency. (The PhD also has a master's degree as a prerequisite!)

There is NO free doctorate... — This is technically true but misleading.  Generally speaking, PhD students should expect to be (and in many fields, like computer science, actually are) fully funded by teaching assistantships, research assistantships, and/or fellowships—including full tuition waivers—for as long as they are enrolled.  Accepting admission to a PhD program without funding is incredibly foolish. If they don't pay for you, they don't really want you.

There are certainly free doctorates (at least in terms of money). For example in Denmark where a PhD "student" is not actually a student but an employee. There is not even a question of being funded via TA'ing, which is instead included in the work description in the contract.

MOST PHD PROGRAMS IN THE USA ARE FREE!!! YOU WORK FOR THE INSTITUTION
AND THEY WAIVE YOUR TUITION!!!! (You BECOME a servant for a professor for 3 to 7 years) (He may or may not give you a phd after your service!!!)
I suspect that most of the people answering this question have never
been in a doctoral program!!
1) DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME AND MONEY GETTING A MASTERS!!
For most phd programs, you only need a ba or bs to apply.
2) Phd courses are all home made by the teacher from academic journals!
Text books are not used (you already know every thing in all the textbooks)
3) The training program consist of reading adademic journals.(Thousands of them), then doing your research project.
4) The goals is to train you to be able to write, research articles for
academic journals ( not to train you to teach in a college).
5) If you want to be a college teacher a phd is required to get a full time
job.  Ba or Bs Or Masters is good enough for a part time college teaching jobs.
6) College Chairmen are usually only hire people like them selF!
if the chairman is harvard or columbia, he or she will only hire
people from those schools!!!
7) REPUTATION OF THE SCHOOL IS VERY IMPORTANT, IF YOU WANT TO GET
A COLLEGE TEACHING JOB!!
8) London university and the university of south Africa had very
well respected external academic phd programs that could be done
outside the country. I know of one person witha a south africia
external phd, who worked at NYU business school.
9) The courses are twice as difficult as a regular BA course.
10) Most Phd students are foreign, so they audit the courses 1 or 2
times, before actually enrolling.
Good luck,
Bill

Welcome to academia stackexchange! You seem to hold some strong opinions, which can be good; but I recommend you stay away from passages in all caps as this sounds to some (me) as if you're shouting. If there's something you really want to highlight (although I'd go light on it), you can do it like this (type a star to the left and right of the highlighted word).

@gnometorule: Actually, many of the points are not strong opinions, but incorrect statements. At a minimum, #2, #3, #6, #9, and #10 are either mostly or entirely incorrect.


text:
Should I dress up for conference banquet/gala dinner?
I am thinking about what should I bring to the conference.
Normally, will people dress up (like full suit) for the dinner?
p.s. I am in CS domain.

Related: What do people usually wear to conferences?

Since the previous question already addresses presentation, I edited this one to focus on dinner wear.

@DaveClarke that depends on the attitude. For example a monocle requires to put it on right after finishing the presentation (with "Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your attention") and before saying "Are there any questions?".

Remember that there are many options between "sandals, old jeans and t-shirt with coffee stains" and tuxedo. Casual dress shoes, a nice jeans and a proper (polo?) shirt, for instance. Looking tidy may be in order but "dressing up" (as in disguise) only looks silly.

This question is similar to: What do people usually wear to conferences?. If you believe it’s different, please edit the question, make it clear how it’s different and/or how the answers on that question are not helpful for your problem.

No. You do not need to wear a suit for presenting at a conference. Most of the times, CS conferences have the typical t-shirt (or shirt), jeans combination of computer / tech guys.
For the dinner, you can dress a little more formally (if you want) but still a suit is not required. In fact, if you are young (<30) , wearing a suit and a tie would probably seem a little weird.
Bottom line: Wear what you usually wear when you go to work for the presentation and a little more formal (nicer) wear for dinner.

Expanding on the answer. There will probably be people from industry and they will probably wear suits or at least sport jackets (and no ties). A bit more formal than usual is not bad. It really depends on what makes you feel comfortable. For the bottom line I'd simply say: nobody cares.

@Trylks This depends a lot on the company, and whether they are there as conference participant or officially representing the company (e.g., in a booth). The latter are usually required to dress up as part of company policies, they former tend to dress casual like everybody else.

@Trylks But, yeah, many companies have formal dress code for any publicly-facing meetings.

Question was updated to just dinnerwear, you may want to remove obsolete bits from the answer.

@Trylks The people from industry that I've met at theoretical CS conferences dress just like the rest of us.

@DavidRicherby theory and industry is an unconventional combination, industry is usually more interested in practical (and profitable) stuff, so they are probably pretty much like academics, without managing or lecturing involved, and that makes perfect sense;; unless you mean that "the rest of you" wear suits just like these theoretical industry guys, that would be funny albeit a bit misleading.

@Trylks No, we theory guys dress like other academics. My point is that you shouldn't assume that industry means ties and jackets because a lot of companies don't make their tech guys wear that sort of stuff when they're not in front of customers.

If it's not the first iteration of the conference, chances are that you could see past editions of the conference, including some pictures of the dinner, so you can just do what you see.

Basically, what @Alexandros said. Just wanted to add a specific example: a (CS, European) conference I attended last summer got this fancy place for the gala dinner, and they asked the attendees if they could dress in formal wear.
This wasn't quite well received: most people didn't pack a suit (a lot of them traveled with only hand luggage). The collective decisions was to either do the best they could (in the situation) or not really care.
Finally, the dinner was a mixture of some suits and dresses (but mostly on older people, I would guess 30+ or even 40+), most people in pants and shirt combination or half-serious summer dresses (instead of standard T-shirt) plus an odd few wearing crazy print T-shirts and jeans. I've seen a few people come in with a tie, look around and then discreetly take it off and tuck it in their pockets :)
So bottom line is: overall, people at the gala dinner will be slightly less casually dressed than your typical day in the office (in European labs, at least) or conference presentations. Also, it's not uncommon to end up in a bar after the gala, and you probably don't want to overdress and look out-of-place if that happens.

+1 for the bar after the dinner. You definitely do not want to go overdressed there.

This also really depends on where you are. Where I am (Japan) formal dress is expected, even if you work for a boss who realizes that people who wear nice clothes are guaranteed to have -10 debuffs to INT. Whether or not we actually want to hire people who mimic the homeless and hip in dress habits, there are contextual standards to which participants who intend to go somewhere should attempt to adhere (hint, most folks aren't going anywhere, their whole lives -- hence the oceans of hip mediocrity in which we swim).

@zxq9 True enough for the location. I added "European" in my answer (I understand there's variations in Europe too, but in my experience, everybody's good with what I described).  But really, I wouldn't expect somebody who knows that putting on a hoodie and baggy pants will NOT cause a -10 INT debuff to imply those people "mimic the homeless". While older generations might still have prejudice like that, I would expect that we are would try to overcome those instead of spreading them. The next "homeless mimic" you see might just as well be your kid's math teacher - if you're in Europe.

I can only tell you my experience at conferences - biomedical in the U.S. - the bio conferences tend to be pretty dressy with most conference goes in sports coats (for guys) and formal pant suits for women.
I would bring a nice shirt/slacks and sports coat, at least you can quickly mold to the situation.  I didn't know the conference was that dressy and felt out of place in a polo shirt and slacks (this was again my experience).  But every industry is different, it depends on where the conference is (hawaii or chicago), how many people are there, who you want to impress, etc.).  Nobody will remember if you overdressed but everyone will remember if you were that guy who showed up to a gala in shorts/t-shirt.

I was just about to answer something along that line. In medicine or a medical-related field, the attire is usually formal at European and American conferences, for talks and socials.

And contradictory to what's being said in other answers, if anything, the attire for socials is less formal than for talks (understand: no ties, jeans, dresses etc.). It's best not to show up in you favorite 'LabView' t-shirt, cargo shorts and leather sandals with socks.


text:
Advice for dinner with prospective Ph. D. advisor and grad students?
I'm applying to doctoral programs right now and I'm having dinner tomorrow night with a professor and three of his grad students. I'm very hopeful to join this lab. I've spoken with the professor before and would like to focus my attention on the students. I've never done anything like this before.
Do you  have any suggestions for questions I should ask and how I should act? I wanted to offer to pay for dinner or at least drinks since they are going to this trouble, but would that seem like I'm trying to schmooze my way in? Would it be weird for me to write notes on what they say at dinner?

Don't get drunk already at the appetizers ;-) And no, don't take notes. Relax and enjoy the dinner.

To add to the Massimo's comment on not taking notes, yeah I think that would seem weird. If the conversation is about science, and a particularly interesting point comes up or you want to take note of someone's name to look up a paper, make a note on your phone.
Offering to pay might be polite, though if the prof's paying through his department or a grant I wouldn't insist. I think it's safe to say that if the grad students don't pull out their wallets, neither should you.
Just act normally. Be yourself - it is not a formal occasion. The prof will have invited his students along for two reasons:

Because dinner with just the two of you could be exceedingly awkward
So that everyone can get an impression of how you'll fit
in with the group.

Just make the usual small talk with his grad students to (hopefully) find some common ground, talk a bit about their projects, and make sure to have a good yarn about non-work-related things too. Your scientific prowess will not be assessed at the dinner table!

Thank you for the advice! It went pretty well, and I definitely worried about it more than I should have :)

All of what @Moriarty said except that I disagree about taking notes using your phone. It's just very hard to look professional doing so and too easy to get (or look) distracted.
Carry a little reporters notebook and pen and pull that out if you need to jot a name down. You'll get more prop points if the notebook looks well worn.
Also, even if you think you have a good alcoholic tolerance, I would drink no or close to no alcohol.


text:
When can a person be called a PhD ABD?
Can one call oneself a PhD ABD (All But Dissertation) after completing all of the course work and working on the dissertation?

and student who has just enrolled in PhD without coursework? are you a PhD ABD immediately?
The PhDs I am considering are "assessed solely on the basis of a thesis", which is not at all unusual here in Australia (to my knowledge).

You can call yourself whatever you like, whenever you like.  But I wouldn't recommend using "ABD" in any official capacity, ever.

Looks like a dupe of four other questions today...

Just remember, ABD means Almost Became Doctor.

@JeffE I once commented that ABD is like saying you climbed Everest (All But Summit) because you made it to base camp.

Any natural born US citizen over the age of 35 who has resided in the US for at least 14 years can call themselves "President of the United States ABE" -- all but elected. PhD ABD is similarly ridiculous; the dissertation is the requirement of the PhD and everything else is meaningless.

I had never even heard of ABD until today and I have to say that I would have felt extremely mislead if I were to ever find it on an application or something similar (as I would expect it to be a doctorate in a field that is abbreviated as ABD).

Some people think it's ok to call yourself PhD ABD when in the Canadian or US system, you pass the qualifying exams and coursework, but haven't yet, or fail to ever, deliver the thesis.
But simply do not call yourself PhD ABD.
It's not attractive to advertise failure.
You're either a PhD candidate, or you're a PhD, or there's nothing to say on the subject (bar a line on the CV filling in the black hole on your timeline with discreet mention of an aborted doctorate). PhD ABD is a ludicrous pseudo-title.
A PhD that's All But Dissertation is like an espresso that is All But Coffee. It's hot water with a bit of sugar, thus defeating the entire purpose of the exercise.

@TobiasKildetoft: because hot water on its own would just be a masters?

I don't understand the statement "it's not attractive to advertise failure".  That seems to suggest that the term ABD is primarily used by people who have completed part of a PhD program and then given up.  I agree with the criticism of that practice (though I haven't seen it myself), but that doesn't seem to be what the question is about.

The question seems to be about current PhD candidates using the term to indicate a stage in their candidacy.  The distinction being made is useful, the term ABD is commonly used to make that distinction, and completing the non-thesis requirements for a PhD before the thesis is the ordinary process, and not any kind of failure.

At least here in the San Francisco Bay Area, many high-tech companies will list "Ph.D. or A.B.D." as qualifications in job listings. The latter isn't meant in a derogatory way.

I also wish to mention that in certain places and in certain disciplines using the term ABD is strictly prohibited. For example, a psychologist in many places would get in serious trouble for referring to themselves as a psychologist, Ph.D. ABD, even if being a registered psychologist (with an MA, for example).

@Henry I haven't heard of someone calling themselves ABD if they've left the program, but EnergyNumbers (apparently) has: "or fail to ever, deliver the thesis."  If the term connotes that possibility in some places, I'd hesitate to use it there too.   But even where I would use it, it's more of an "in-group" term for others in a PhD program. E.g., "So how far along are you?" "Oh, I've been ABD for about 8 months now."  I wouldn't expect to hear it in wider usage.

I once said that ABD is like saying you "Climbed Everest, except for that tricky part above base camp with all the rocks and snow".

@Henry, in the vast majority of times I have heard someone refer to themselves as "ABD", it was because they had essentially washed out after comps/quals. Very few current students call themselves "ABD" ... as EnergyNumbers states, once you've completed the coursework and defended your prospectus, you're a "candidate".

@Jacob: there seems to be some variation in what people have encountered, and I don't know if the difference depends on field or region or something else.  But we should all be careful about making broad assertions---you may have seen very few students call themselves ABD, but I've seen many students do it. You've seen former students call themselves ABD, I haven't. Anyone considering using the term should take into account how it's used by other people around them before figuring out which case they're in.

@EnergyNumbers: It would be weird to use as a title, but as an answer to the question of where in the process a student is, it seems like a perfectly reasonably description, and I'm not aware of an alternative term (again, in the field/places I've been).

This is a fantastic little rant but I don't think it is an answer to the question.

@EnergyNumbers: The term "PhD candidate" is common, but it's frequently used to refer to anyone in a PhD program.  I received my PhD at an institution that, I learned today, officially referred to completing the various exams as "advancing to doctoral candidacy", but I don't recall anyone using the term in practice, and this conversation is the first place I've seen anyone use it to distinguish students who've passed exams from those who haven't.

At many schools there's an official step of "advancing to candidacy" or something similar which is the last official hurdle before the dissertation.  Although ABD is an informal term, I would expect somone who described themself as ABD to have passed that step.

There is a huge level of variation in what "advancing to candidacy" means. In many programs, one can advance to candidacy well before reaching ABD status.

@ff524: Fair enough, I'd still expect someone who said ABD to have advanced to candidacy or done something similar.

No.  If you have advanced to candidacy, you refer to yourself as a "PhD Candidate," which is an official title, and which is superior to ABD status.  "ABD" is only used by people who have not yet or have failed to advance to candidacy.

@SigmaX: That simply isn't true.  First, ABD literally means that every requirement for the degree has been met except the dissertation (and dissertation defense).  If the requirements are (coursework, teaching practicum, candidacy, dissertation), then an ABD must have completed the coursework, teaching, and candidacy.  Whereas a Candidate might not have completed the teaching requirement yet.  On the other hand, the title PhD Candidate requires candidacy in the present, while ABD only requires it in the past (possibly now expired), so Candidate is more promising of a future degree.

@Ben Voigt: i suppose I always thought of the dissertation proposal as being included in the 'D' of ABD.  In programs where the proposal is the final step before candidacy (and the only step left before diasertation), then perhaps we're both right :).  You're right that programs that have additional requirements that may be contemporaneous with the dissertation would yield a more complicated picture.

ABD is not an actual title but rather just a little construction people use to describe a state that many graduate students find themselves in. I think that you can honestly call yourself ABD if you have completed all of the requirements of your PhD with the exception of an approved dissertation and/or dissertation defense.
Here is a very incomplete lists requirements that PhD programs might include and which an ABD candidate would be assumed to have finished:

Successfully completing required course work and/or resident semesters/quarters
Passing general examinations and/or qualifying examinations
Fulfilling language and/or fieldwork requirements
Having written and/or defended a dissertation prospectus or proposal
Maintained a grade point average over some threshold.

Of course, there are many other requirements like this that programs require and that an ABD student would have to have fulfilled. If you have done all of them, except the dissertation, you can call yourself ABD. If you failed to complete any of the non-dissertation requirements, you are not yet ABD.

In most programs, defending the proposal/prospectus advances you to candidacy.  At that point, you're beyond ABD—you are now a "PhD candidate," which is a genuine title.  If you tell me you are ABD, I will assume that you have not advanced to candidacy.

(edits elsewhere recently bumped this question to the front page, which is why this comment is nearly 1.5 years after your answer) For what it's worth, where I work (not academic) we often get applications to job postings that include ABD. These are typically people 10+ years out of graduate school with no intention of returning to academics, and their use of "ABD" serves (correctly) to distinguish them from Masters only applicants (e.g. MFA degree is common here). Often, these are people in humanities disciplines who spent several years working on a Dissertation and finally left academics.

If I saw this, I would read it as someone that had passed a PhD in a subject of ABD then after I found out; discount them for any jobs for misleading me.
“PhD candidate with publications” or “Withdraw from PhD but published” would be more meaningful.

You're not a "PhD candidate" until you advance to candidacy.  An ABD student is typically someone who has not advanced to candidacy.

In Germany and Belgium they use the (informal) title Doctorandus (abbreviated Drs.) which means something like "He who will become Doctor". In Belgium it means PhD candidate and in Germany it means the dissertation has been approved but the candidate needs to defend it in public (generally a formality).
In the Netherlands they used to give the official title Drs. as an equivalent to a Master degree.
In Italy, anyone with a university degree is Dottore (which means "Doctor" according to the dictionary but is not at all that level).
There are large differences in what a school diploma means. I have read (American but also some Southern European) PhD dissertations that would not be good enough for a Master. An acceptable dissertation is either a book that is published by a respectable publisher or a collection of 4-6 articles accepted by peer reviewed journals (at least one article in a journal with a high impact factor). ABD is ridiculous, to me it means that you did not finish it and you are not about to.

By you are not about to, do you mean an ABD will never finish it?

Maybe it's used in some fields that I haven't come in touch with, but I've never heard about the title Drs. in Germany.

I have struggled tremendously over the use of the term ABD. Unfortunately, due to illness and institutional failure to process IRB application appropriately, I aged out of the program. However, course works and comps were completed on first round and when I look at the money I spent I feel that I am entitled to something. Therefore, I use the term ABD with pride instead of shame and have continued my PHD studies at another institution. So, if you have eaten up your student loans pursuing a PHD that you aged out of and passed your comps regardless of what others say it is time that we stand with our PHD ABD with pride because we have paid for it.

I am so disgusted by people downvoting those comments.

In the USA, PhD ABD is ludicrous only to the arrogant academic. PhD ABD gives very important information to non-academic employers. Namely, it signals rigorous training in the production of knowledge process, as attested by passing qualifying exams necessary for Candidacy. By definition Candidacy attests one has the tools to endeavor in that process; i.e., dissertation project.
A Master's degrees' objective is different: it is training in specialized analysis. A distinction in title to reflect the distinction in training is therefore appropriate.
PhD ABD also signals that one has chosen to work in the productive sector v. in Academia. Plenty of reasons to make that choice!
Whether someone left the PhD program due to their inability to complete the dissertation/coursework successfully or their free choice is very easy to tease out (e.g., in an interview process, via transcripts showing performance, etc.).
So to the orthodox I say: be more open-minded. Show nuanced discernment. Note that your fundamentalism is against Academia's core mission!
In the end, a PhD ABD who knew he/she was in the wrong place and cut their losses is much better off (economically, and arguably socially and psychologically) than a 7-year frustrated post-doc that can sign PhD after their name! Due to structural problems in higher-ed that is where most PhDs land. The people vilifying the PhD ABD in pejorative terms here and elsewhere sound like the latter trying to prove that although they are unhappy, at least "they did not fail" like the PhD ABD.
As a PhD ABD I can attest that could not be further than the truth! I am much happier with my lot! One, by the way, which most people call remarkably successful!
Yours truly,
M.M., PhD ABD

I like the humor, but how's "PhD ABD" different from just having a Master's, outside of the implication that a PhD was attempted-but-not-achieved?  Or was this intended as tongue-in-cheek?

For academic jobs it's important on your application to indicate that you are post-comps or "ABD". Many institutions will not consider your application without the accompanying ABD if you are still working towards completing the PhD (usually in the Spring following your Fall applications).

I agree.  There are other ways to indicate your status in the program, as jakebeal has suggested.  And putting ABD after your name is often seen as just plain foolish.  I know someone who kept it attached to his name for his 30+ year academic career (he was never on the tenure track), and it was thought to be silly.

Officially, you are either a "PhD student" or a "PhD candidate," and there is no in between.  I, however, do like to tell potential employers that I have "finished my coursework."  That makes clear that I am advanced PhD student, although I am not yet a candidate, and avoids the connotations of failure that come with "ABD."


text:
I have no publications or professional experience, will my short CV look bad for US graduate admissions?
Generally, it is a requirement to add CV in the graduate application, where they suggest to add professional experiences, journal articles info and research works details.
The problem is that, I don't have any journal papers and also I didn't do job. I did a project in masters and I have experience to do thesis works. Therefore, all the  information is contained within one page in the CV.  Will it be considered as a bad CV as it doesn't have a lot of info as they expect?
NOTE: I didn't add any test score on the CV because I wrote these info on the application.

It definitely isn't unheard of to have a short resume/CV coming out of undergrad. Also, having just one page is perfectly fine and is actually about what I would expect from most people.
If you must fill space, I usually recommend adding course projects or personal projects relevant to your field.

CV's come in many formats.  Some will list "research experience", where you can list your supervisor and describe the project you worked on.  You may also want to list workshops or training you have taken outside of your academic coursework.  Awards and other recognitions should also be added.  I would suggest that you search online for examples of CV's or ask someone from your cohort for an example of their CV to get more ideas and examples.  The idea of the CV is that it is a place to elaborate on achievements and experiences that would otherwise not be noted in your application.


text:
Does it make sense to make exam grading very transparent?
Is it advisable (in terms of the benefit for the students and the work it causes) to make the grading completely transparent to students? I think for instance of publishing the sample solutions for the exam or the distribution of the grades given. Would those measures be suitable to convince the students that the grading is fair or would it rather make worse students feel treated in an unfair way and trigger many complaints? As far as I understand the University now normally lets the students only see their individual grades. Of course they will always compare themselves in smaller groups.

There was a similar question a little while ago, and one of the answer (by @BrianBorchers )correctly points out: Don't release the rubric unless you're really willing to give credit according to the rubric even if a paper has obvious flaws in areas not covered by the rubric.
(the answer is here http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30601/should-students-be-shown-the-grading-rubric/30603#comment67319_30603)

In the class I TA (programming), we don't have a tests, instead the students are given practical assignment. To promote the transparency, we publish "error cheat sheet". At the start every student has full score, I then go through his code and for every violation in cheat sheet subtract the relevant points. It works well, but I undesrtand it's rather  specific.

Transparency is great, when you can do it.  Many of my large undergraduate classes would show a score histogram for every major quiz or exam, and some would explicitly give the grading rubric.  This was generally very much appreciated by the students for exactly the reasons you give: better understanding of how they stand and why they got the scores they got, letting them judge fairness and know when to reasonably object (which sometimes happened).
From the TA side, my experience was that transparency actually decreased my work, because it meant that I didn't need to deal with many spurious complaints, and that many of the complaints could be resolved directly through reference to the rubric.

When can't you do it?

@JeffE I can't think of a time, but one of the things I've been learning on this site is that there are a lot of institutions that behave in ways that seem awfully odd to me...

@JeffE: When grading essay answers (sometimes).

I always made my grading as transparent as possible. It makes it fairer for the students and if they complain and gather points where they should not get them, it helps me improve the grading in the next exam.
From my point of view, tutors/teachers/examiners that do not make their grading transparent are not professional and seem to be weak at grading, otherwise they would not fear to make their process transparent.


text:
What should I write for "Research and Teaching Merits" when applying online for a PhD?
Recently, I want to apply for a PhD position in a place which uses an online system to submit applications. The position is going be filled by either a PhD student or a Postdoc. There is a section in the application form titled "Research and teaching merits" with a mandatory field "Field of research". I wasn't sure what exactly I should write in this field so for now I left a '-' character there.
I searched on the internet but I couldn't find a clear answer about what I should write there. I also contacted the emails provided with the advertisement but there was no response.
What do you think I should write in this field of the application form?

AFAIK, the section Research and Teaching Merits ought to encompass accomplishments made as a researcher and as a teacher. This could include any distinguished teaching award you might have received in your teaching tenure. If there isn't a separate publication field, you may include your publication here.
As for the field named Field of research, this would mean your current domain within the main subject of research. For instance, in Computer Science, fields could be like Machine Learning, Computational Neurosciences, Wireless Sensor Networks, Data Security, etc. Likewise, there would be many specialization areas within Mathematics, Electronics, Instrumentation, Mechanics, and so on.

Would it make any difference in the meaning of "Field of research" when it is under the section (in the context of) "Research and Teaching Merits"? What do you think?

@user31387: Well, not much. It just means the field of research in which you state your research merits.

authors: علي محسن محمدحسن


text:
Found a mistake in my paper after submitting the final version. What should I do?
Recently my paper got accepted in a journal. After that we submitted the final version with all corrections. Now I found an error in the way I calculated some type of numerical error. I don’t think correcting the numerical errors will change any of the conclusions of the paper.
What should I do in such a situation? Is it necessary to submit an erratum to the journal?

The first thing to do is to contact the editor and ask for advice. Follow it. The second thing to do is to check the conclusions of the paper to assure yourself they they are still ok. The third thing to do is to prepare an erratum note in case it needs to be sent.
But the editor may have a solution if you are fast enough.
But if the conclusions are compromised you may need to ask if the editor can pull the paper while you go back and rethink everything.

If your paper hasn't been accepted yet, write to the journal's editor as soon as possible. If your paper has been accepted, write to the journal office as soon as possible.
Chances are you'll be able to make this change before the paper is published, but you still want to make this known quickly. The editor will care if the mistake needs to be re-reviewed. Similarly, the publisher will care if the revisions change the layout. The first round of typesetting is the most laborious; if the revisions e.g. change the positions of figures, they might have to start work again from scratch.
The longer you wait, the more likely you'll have to write an erratum.