text:
Writing a letter of recommendation for a mediocre student
A former student has asked me to write a letter of recommendation.  I am always quite happy to do so -- but in this case it's hard to find much to say.  The student took two classes with me and earned B's in both; moreover, both classes were large lectures, so it was more or less impossible to notice most individual students' participation or abilities.  I would really like to help but I am not sure what I can write other than a description of the courses the student took and a report on his grades, which were fairly close to the median in both cases. Any suggestions on what else I can say?
Edit:  Since a few people have asked, the letter is (in this case) for a one-semester study abroad program in Manchester.  I have no idea how competitive admissions are, but it's not like grad school or a job.

Possibly relevant : https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/62564/72855

Would you let the student see the letter or not?

“both classes were large lectures, so it was more or less impossible to notice any individual student's participation or abilities.” I don’t think that’s quite true? You just need to be that one guy who sits towards the front and always puts his hand up whenever the instructor asks a question to the class.

@mmeent: While this may be true, i've seen members with high reputation in this forum (I think, eg Bob Brown) who stated that it is their policy to deny (!) letters to people who want to exercise their right on viewing the letters.

@nick012000 You're being overly literal. Sure, you might notice a few of the students. It's clear from the question that the student in question wasn't one of those.

As others have implied, this may be do'able, depending on what the letter is for. I once wrote a recommendation for a student who was at best within the top third of a high school precalculus class (at a very academically strong school, however), and my initial reaction was that I couldn't help the student, but I learned this was for a not very competitive summer biology camp, or something like that, and applicants needed at least one letter from a math teacher, and in looking over the materials it was clear to me that this student easily exceeded the minimum they wanted for math.

@mmeent That's misunderstanding the US system (can't speak to other jurisdictions). Students waive their right to view letters under FERPA when submitting them in every case I've ever heard of. It is normal for professors to decline to write them if FERPA protections aren't waived. It is absolutely not normal to assume letters will be written by the subject in the US, although I won't deny it may occur.

"both classes were large lectures, so it was more or less impossible to notice any individual student's participation or abilities." So? You don't have any graded homeworks, assignments, email submissions? Why can't you just briefly look at their submissions and exams again? Unless this was a course with no homework or exam.

@smci: You have to get rid of those at the latestafter 2 years in my country. This might be a reason.

The length of a recommendation letter speaks volumes.

@user114084: I understood 'former student' to mean 'a recent semester' not '>2 years ago'. If this was the cause of OP's problem then they should state the time involved and how long individual student assignments are (typically and statutorily) retained for, in that country and university.

Can you mention grades in the letter? In the US, that may violate student's privacy. I am not sure but wanting to know more.

I agree with JoshuaZ that it is good to (1) see what they want recommendations for; (2) make clear to the student that you are willing to write a letter, but won't be able to say much besides how they performed in your class; and (3) make sure they still want a letter from you rather than someone else who may be able to write a stronger letter.  (In many situations, they may not have better options for recommenders.)
I generally try to meet in person with students to discuss such requests, and at some point suggest they provide me with an (unofficial) transcript and some of their relevant application materials.
That said, here are some things to think about to help flesh out your letter:

Do you have evidence (from your gradebook etc) of them attending regularly, being punctual/responsible with assignments, showing good study habits or work hard, being motivated, performing consistently, or improving throughout the semester?
If you still have their final exam or some of their assignments, you can look though those again and try to find positive qualities.
From your interactions with them (even just interactions regarding the recommendation letter), does the student seem respectful, friendly, professional or organized?
Think about how the class they took from you compares with what they are applying for.  Maybe you taught them something useful.  Or maybe they were only mediocre in your class, but maybe comparing with the general population of people applying for said opportunity, getting a B in your class should put them in the 10% of that applicant pool.  Many times, faculty have high academic standards and aren't aware how much stronger (in whatever sense) their average students are than the general population.  (As a mathematician, I am often shocked about how mathematically weak many of the people who get hired into good data science jobs are.)  Can you compare them favorably to people you know who succeeded in similar roles to what they are looking for?

If the student provides you with transcripts/application materials, you can try to use things you see in those to support any positive qualities you may have divined from the above (e.g., being motivated or focused).
Of course you shouldn't try to stretch the truth, and you may as well frame the letter by saying you just had the student in a large class without much personal interaction.  Still, I find that usually one does not need to look too far to see evidence of positive qualities, and say whatever I feel I am able to truthfully and trust whoever is reading the letters to interpret them appropriately for their situation.

This is actually a much better answer than my answer.

@Thanks, and thanks for the bounty!  I've never thought about giving bounties for existing answers, but it's kind thing to do.

Before you write the letter, discuss this with the student, and be blunt about it. Most likely the student needs a letter for something and this is the best they've got. One thing is to turn this in to a teachable moment about the need for students to make connections with their instructors. Depending on what the student wants the letter for, this may be sufficient for their purposes. Some things requires letters but don't pay close attention to them. Did the student say what they wanted the letter for? That maybe should be impact what you say and whether you should write it.

It's only fair to let the student know that you can't write a very positive letter.

In such cases I've done just this: kind but clear. I basically say "this is the only letter I can write about you, and I will certainly write that letter if you wish, but you should consider whether there is someone else better placed to write you a more personal and positive letter".

For a 200+ student lecture class, I'm not sure its either feasible or desirable for all those students to be trying to "make connections" with that instructor. Just having a nice half hour chat with each of them would chew up 100 of your office hours.

Distinguish between "make connections" and "make an impact". You don't want them to talk you to death esp. when they have nothing to say, which is common. You want them to be attentive, learn the material and do good work, and (optionally) maybe just maybe ask insightful questions or criticisms; the latter is optional, the former essential. (They don't necessarily need to ever set foot in your or your TA's office; email (/bulletin board) is fine and probably better for sharing. As @T.E.D. says).

Personally I'd prefer the people who compress the most insight into the least volume of communication (pretty much, think of the opposite of a TED talk).

Anecdotally I heard many (esp.) Law School classes are overrun with exactly the opposite type of person: students who want to "make an impression" by asking sycophantic, stupid, irrelevant, fatuous or RTFM questions (often just to get the 'class participation' marks. Bear in mind this is partially intended to encourage non-native English (or whatever) speakers to participate more, but it obviously has severe side-effects). You might want to reflect on whether your assignment/exam grading rewards expressiveness rather than clue, or whether you want it to.

@smci I agree with many of your points and those of T.E.D. above as well. The 200 person class is really not the location to make that connection. But even in a very large university, they'll take some smaller classes. But yes, in the large classes, your distinction about impact v. connection is well taken.

@JoshuaZ: Right. University classes are not a cocktail party... and in life we don't (or at least shouldn't) get marks for pretending to knowledge we don't have (cf. Po Bronson)... often the opposite of how the world actually works... unless the university's intent was to train hordes of management consultants (God forbid).

How can OP even write this letter? They don't know anything about that student personally except the student's grade.

@einpoklum , You can write a letter that says exactly that. They took X class and got Y grade, and what that represents. It won't be personal and it will be obvious to anyone reading the letter that it doesn't really have much additional information.

@JoshuaZ: I don't think that counts as a letter of recommendation. Any bystander can write that based on the transcript.

@einpoklum Sure, it shouldn't, but that doesn't change the fact that some programs require letters and then don't pay much attention to them at all as long as they don't have any obvious red flags.  It isn't going to get them into anything that competitive. That's a big part of why I said they should find out what the student intends to use it for.

@JoshuaZ See my edit to the question.

Don't write a letter.
Given that the student...

took two classes with me ... [which were] large lectures, it was ...impossible to notice any individual student's participation or abilities.

earned B's in both [classes].

It indeed seems you have no basis for recommending this student, and should therefore not write a letter of recommendation. (Unless your classes are super-hard and most people get D's or lower). As @Buffy suggests - you can tell the student that you're sorry, but you don't know him well enough to write a recommendation.

This is probably the best advice. But tell the student why. "I don't know your potential well enough to comment. The general things I could say won't help you." You can also recommend that they get letters from those with whom they have worked closely.

@Buffy: See edit. Also, I'd say you can't write a recommendation based on "general things". If it's not personal - there's no sense in you writing it, it's just a grades printout or what-not.

@Buffy is "the general things I could say won't help you" not a decision that should be left to the student? Presumably the student knows this (or will be told this as per JoshuaZ's answer), and if the student continues to believe this it seems that the professor forcing the student to choose otherwise is a bit out of place

@DreamConspiracy, yes, and I would write the letter if the student insisted. But first I would carefully explain the consequences. The student probably isn't very sophisticated in how it all works. And I mean insisted.

You can write a simple letter describing how average the student is. That is not a bad thing. Average does not mean mediocre. Mention first that he took 2 classes with you and:

Attended as per reglament/regulations
Presented his work/homework as requested each time.
Got along with other students and never got into a fight.
Was respectful to his superiors and equals.
Kept himself orderly in class

A person does not need to stand out or be exceptional.
A recommendation letter can recommend how average good is someone. Grades are not important if he did pass the course, which was the objective, and in some regards or countries, the capacity to get along with others (AKA dont get in trouble) is even more important. Some institutions will prefer a candidate that can work along people and follow orders than one that always tries to show off.

Irrespective of the performance of the student, the key point is to avoid telling untruths to the student and to the admissions committee in Manchester.
If you have the time and inclination, you might want to ask the student what are his objectives in going for one semester to Manchester, and how he feels that the course of your program prepared him for this study abroad, and how he feels the courses in Manchester will help him when he comes back.  Such questions usually provide good fodder for reference letters.
Writing a long and meandering letter of support when it's clear you don't have much to say is not necessarily helpful.  So, if there is really little or no justification for expansive comments, you should tell the student that you're ok with writing a letter of support but that you are not in a position to say much beyond providing some context for the grades in your courses, v.g providing historical averages and other trends.


text:
Good online resources for teaching students how to write a research paper
What is a good online resource for a student who doesn't know how to write a research paper?  Content I would like to see included in such a resource: how to use library databases, what a thesis statement is, how to distinguish reliable online sources from unreliable ones, how to write a bibliography, how to cite sources in the body of the paper, etc.
The target audience would be first-year undergraduates, although to be honest something written for K-12 students (particularly middle school and high school) would probably be very useful, too.
Edited to clarify:  I do not mean "research paper" in the sense of "original research", but rather "Find sources about topic X in the library or online and write about them." This is a fairly common type of assignment for undergraduates (and, for that matter, high school students) in the United States in, for example, the social sciences and the humanities.

Do you distinguish between STEM and Humanities?

@svavil The kind of paper I have in mind seems (in my experience) to be more commonly assigned in the social sciences and the humanities, but if there are good resources designed for STEM students I would be happy to see them.

First-year undergraduates are rarely taught to write research papers; in my experience, the skill set you look for is taught to Master's students and PhD students. Look for self-help books intended for PhD students. To name a few,

Umberto Eco's How to Write a Thesis is a brilliant insight into the subject, dealing with questions such as "I am a student of some obscure subject in some distant town in the middle of nowhere, how do I start?".
How to write consistently boring literature by Kay Sand-Jensen is more of a style guide and a check list, but it's definitely a valuable extra reading.
The Unwritten Rules of PhD Research by Marian Petre and Gordon Rugg walks aspiring PhD students through every aspect of their new lives, from working with a supervisor to writing all sorts of articles to delivering a viva.

Please make use of resources in these answers: Learn to write scientific papers in medicine, Are there resources for learning how to write a scientific paper?

I do not mean "research paper" in the sense of "original research", but rather "Find sources about topic X in the library or online and write about them."  This is routine for undergraduates in the United States in, for example, the social sciences and the humanities.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How should I take a potential PhD supervisor's age into account, when planning to follow PhD with habilitation?
I plan to apply for PhD in Finance/Statistics next semester, and hence searched for potential supervisors.
An issue I have is that many interesting candidates are above age 60, and in Germany Professors retire at 65, such that a subsequent post-doc/habilitation would most likely require a different supervisor after PhD. One Professor just started his position at age 40, but so he has not many notable publications and I am unsure whether he might change university soon (he just changed it from another 4 years position).
Could someone advise me on the importance of age for selecting a PhD supervisor in context of a long-term future academic career?
The time for PhD would be 4-5 years, and PostDoc/Habilitation/AssociateProf usually again 4-6 years, with goal of potentially becoming Full Professor in Finance/Statistics.

@PeteL.Clark "Future academic career"(also habilitation/PostDoc). I think it would be hard to find a different professor for habilitation if I had not had my PhD with him?

Formally it requires a supervisor, but the research is more independent, with a final examination in the end.

You should also mention the field you are in; traditions vary wildly (for example, habilitations are becoming very rare in some, but are still more or less expected in others).

emcor: "I think it would be hard to find a different professor for habilitation if I had not had my PhD with him?" I'm not sure why you think that.  I checked several examples just now and in none of them was the Habilitation supervisor the same as the PhD supervisor.  Moreover, from all that I know (but again, I am talking about a different academic system from my own), thinking seriously about your Habilitation before you begin your PhD program is almost uselessly premature.

@PeteL.Clark Thanks good point.It is truly premature in a sense, but I was just unsure that I could make a mistake now if I cannot change it after. I realized that when the supervisor retires/passes away, at least I would definetely not be able to habilitate there (it happened to some people I know).

@emcor That sounds like wrong information to me (and I come from an academic system that has habilitation).

@Alexandros I just pointed that this was the "least" which can for sure happen if one does not consider the age (so it is important to consider). I was asking what other things might be relevant in this context, e.g. as said the younger supervisors usually do not have as many good publications.

First: a few people commented that thinking about your postdoc/Habilitation before even starting your Ph.D. is premature. I disagree. I have seen too many people coast along during their Ph.D. time without ever knowing what they are going to do afterwards, and certainly not preparing for their post-Ph.D. time, whether in academia or in industry. So I would say you demonstrate good long-term thinking. Already thinking about your academic career will help you prepare to work out a research program, network (more on this below) etc.
Second: there is no problem whatsoever with changing advisors between the Ph.D. and the postdoc period. To the contrary! If you stay at the same place for almost ten years, you will need to explain why you never moved, never checked out other places to work, other approaches to research. Many, many (most?) people will switch advisors at least once, or possibly even do postdocs in two different places.
Incidentally, this is why I think it is a good thing you are already thinking about your long-term future now, because it is never too early to start meeting people at conferences with your future in mind. You may just meet someone at your first conference who you could collaborate with or spend your postdoc time with.
So I would definitely recommend that you consider the older potential advisor. He sounds like he could introduce you to lots of people, and you will likely not need to pack up and move somewhere else during your Ph.D. period, which seems possible with the younger professor and which could somewhat mess up your personal life.
Of course, these considerations are all not the highest priority. You should definitely keep other aspects in mind in choosing where to do your Ph.D., like the kind of project you would be doing for either of the two professors, or whether the two of you "click" on a personal level, or what financing there is, or lots of other things you should discuss with your potential advisor ahead of time.
Finally, there is no Habilitation in Germany any more. Nowadays, Germany has moved to a more American style in academic careers. You will do a Ph.D., then a postdoc, then usually a Juniorprofessur (roughly, assistant professorship - not tenured and limited to six years), then get your Ruf to a tenured position. It's quite possible to skip the Juniorprofessur, though.

There still is a Habilitation, but it is losing importance. Often it is enough to have something equivalent, such as a Juniorprofessur, leader of a Emmy-Noether-Gruppe, or similar positions abroad.

Thanks for your complete answer, also good point that changing supervisor is really expected and beneficial.

I am puzzled by your equation of "postdoc" with "Habilitation".  In my understanding these are not the same at all: e.g. (i) a postdoc is a job, whereas a Habilitation is a written document followed by an exam.  (ii) A postdoc is what you start right after a PhD ends; a Habilitation cannot be done at this point.   Could you clarify who commented that thinking about postdocs before starting a PhD was premature?

Also: "Finally, there is no Habilitation in Germany any more." I am not German, but from all the information I can find that does not seem to be factually correct.

Finally, I think you are taking my comment in the wrong spirit. Someone who is starting a PhD should absolutely think about their longterm academic career. But there is a big difference between thinking about the future and trying to plan a decade ahead based on the (understandably) rather naive assumptions of someone who hasn't even begun a PhD program. The whole premise of this question is that the OP is afraid to choose a PhD advisor who will not be around in 10-15 years to direct a Habilitation (which by then really may not exist). This is not a useful kind of planning ahead.

The Habilitation used to be the qualification you needed to apply for professorships. It main component was the Habilitationsschrift, also called a "second thesis" - essentially another book, after the Ph.D. thesis. Conflating the Habilitation with the postdoc is rather analogous to conflating the Ph.D. (which is a title) with the time period one typically ends with getting a Ph.D. Essentially, why would you do a postdoc if your goal was not to stay in academia, which until recently meant doing a Habilitation but now can be done via a Juniorprofessur?

I am more familiar with the French system than the German system: I once witnessed a French Habilitation defense.  The candidate -- who was older and more eminent than I am, though at the time I had a tenure-track job -- must have been at least 10 years past his PhD, and he was doing this so as to be able to officially (rather than de facto) direct PhD students.  As I said before, something that you cannot start until several years after your PhD seems quite different from a postdoc.  BTW, a Juniorprofessur is not the same as a postdoc either: that position has no equivalent in the US.

I did a bit more research.  It turns out that the German system is significantly different from the French system.  In the French system there is no academic designation for people preparing for the Habilitation (hence my remarks above), but in Germany they have the "academic assistant".  This webpage http://www.eui.eu/ProgrammesAndFellowships/AcademicCareersObservatory/AcademicCareersbyCountry/Germany.aspx makes a distinction between a postdoc and an academic assistant, but I agree that the two are closer together than I had thought.

Trying to reduce the German academic system to a simple statement is impossible -- the traditions in different fields, states (which are autonomous in this respect), universities and even departments are too varied for this. In general, an open position for a full professor will (often, but not always) list among the requirements a "habilitation or equivalent qualification", where the hiring committee can decide on what counts as "equivalent"; a successful evaluation as a Juniorprofessor will usually do the trick, and is even frequently explicitly listed.

@PeteL.Clark A Juniorprofessor can, as a first order approximation, be compared to a tenure-track assistant professor, while a postdoc almost exclusively refers to someone (with a PhD) hired for a grant (meaning fixed duration of two to three years with a possible extension, no teaching duties, and research deliverables specified in the grant proposal). The "academic assistant" is a position that really has no analogue in the US system; it's a long-term postdoc (up to six years) not tied to a grant, but including teaching duties and at least formally without any independence.

@Christian: A Juniorprofessor position is like a tenure-track assistant professor but without the possibility of tenure in that job: that is however a huge difference! And Juniorprofessors can have PhD students, which is very unlike any non-tenure track job in the US.  And "postdoc" itself means several different things (even in the US), as I have had the occasion to discuss on this site before.  The type of postdoc that I did, for instance, seems perhaps closest to "academic assistant", although still not that close.  It's complicated!

@Christian: Anyway, with your experience maybe you can weigh in on the question at hand: it still looks almost useless to try to pick one's Habilitation director at the same time one picks a PhD program.  Do you disagree?

@PeteL.Clark In principle, a Juniorprofessor should be able to get tenure after a positive evaluation, but the practice varies wildly from university to university. Some do in fact offer tenure (at least after a counter offer), some hire five Juniorprofessoren for two tenure positions... You are of course right about postdocs in the US (that's something I learned on this site), but in Germany the term is exclusively used for positions financed by grant money, while university-employed researchers are called academic assistants.

@PeteL.Clark And of course I don't disagree - who knows what field the OP will be interested in in five years. And no advisor will commit to mentoring a habilitation before they have seen how the PhD turns out.

The Juniorprofessor-ship has been ruled unconstitutional as it is a thing given by the federal republic whereas education should be a country thing. I am not sure about the current state, but I think this construct is no more.

As others have mentioned, planning the trajectory of your academic career past your PhD is very premature at this point. (After all, one of the jobs of your PhD advisor is precisely to help you with this.)
Something that -- surprisingly -- has not been mentioned so far: Talk to the professors. Taking on a PhD student is a serious commitment no advisor will make lightly, so if they have any doubts whether you can complete the thesis with them (either because they plan on retiring completely from academic life, or moving next year to a different continent), they will tell you so. We can only guess at the likelihood, but they will (hopefully) have a much clearer idea.

Yes I have no doubt to finish PhD if I start it, but if after retirement the Prof. is no longer active this might be a problem for future connections, and for a young supervisor they switch university more likely which might also be to considered. I will also 'talk to the professors', just thought this forum might also be a good source.

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


text:
Is there a way to continue on research when there is no hope?
I am a PhD student in the final year of my studies, I am positive that I will get my degree. However, I have published only two papers, one in an A conference and one in a B conference. I have three more papers but those in my opinion are small contributions.
I am in CS and people have a lot of papers and an average student has at least one or two A* conference papers. But as I mentioned I have none. The research jobs including industry and national lab require A* papers. I am scared to even apply to those, and they might see my profile and laugh at me.
I tried my level best throughout my PhD. My professor has just started researching my topic, so she just gave me the subject name at the end of my two years, I have read multiple books and papers on my own and come up with my problem and solution, with no guidance as she does not know the subject. However, I am unable to reach the standard that A* conferences require.
I want to stay in research, anywhere in industry or national labs. Please let me know if there is some way. Is there a possibility to take a job and work on getting better papers and then go for a research job?
By the way, my work is on AR, so computer vision, neural networks, and robotics intersection.

Have you talked about this with your supervisor? Depending on the field (and niche), having a very useful expertise and good topical fit to a postdoc can compensate a less impressive publication record. Your supervisor might know groups/labs/companies that would be your closest topical fit.

Sorry for your troubles but this might be better on a board about your subject than here on Academia, which is very general.

‘[R]esearch jobs including industry and national lab[s] require A* papers,’ my emphasis. Would you share evidence of that, or at least explain where you get that idea?

@coffee_into_plots I approached my supervisor, but she said that this is a new topic for her as well she is not sure as to what a good next step for me is. She said that she did not want to steer me in the wrong direction as she is not aware of my research.

@Aruralreader Meta ``Preferred Qualification" (Publication track record at conferences such as NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, etc.)
Postdoc requirement asks for papers in (NeurIPS, ICML, ICLR, CVPR).

It’s good you know your target audience. I wouldn’t say, however, Meta is representative of the industrial sector.

@Anamica Adding to what A rural reader said, Meta can dictate that they only want people applying who are publishing in top conferences because they're, well, Meta. There are PLENTY of other places doing research that are less "picky", for lack of a better term, about the tier of conferences that their prospective employees/postdocs are publishing in. You may have to adjust your sights lower than working for a FANG company right out of the gate, but you can still definitely have a career doing research with your publication history.

This answer applies only if you know you truly enjoy teaching, including introductory classes.  (This includes having enough teaching experience to know.)
You might consider looking for a job at a teaching-oriented college or university.  Teaching will be the primary focus of your job, but you will also be doing research, particularly research that can involve undergraduate students.  (Do keep in mind that the pay is often (though not always) quite low, and finding time to do enough research to remain competitive for more research-oriented jobs in the future is likely impossible.)

Thanks for the comment. I am more interested in research than in teaching.

As someone who took this direction (in maths), I can say that it may be your best chance. I have managed to make several meaningful research contributions, but just not at the rate of colleagues working in a research institution. If you aren't firing on as many cylinders as colleagues with the A* rated conference papers, it is probably best to accept this date and do your best with it.

Sorry for the spell correct: "date" should have been "fate". For the record, my goal in getting a PhD was to do research, full stop. I had no interest in a primarily teaching oriented job, although I am lucky enough to care about people and discharge my duties as a teacher. The fact is, finding your way into a research career requires many factors to align...not the least of which being the finding of a fruitful direction that people want to see progressed. In the end it is not about you, but about what the community wants to see accomplished.

While a strong publication history is certainly extremely helpful in getting jobs after a Ph.D., it is not the end of the world (or your career) if you graduate without them (though certain career paths may be more difficult than others.)
Try looking for postdoc positions. Some supervisors may hold your lack of publications against you, but many will prioritize other skills you can bring to their lab. You will need to be a bit careful - make sure that the labs you're looking to apply to are actively publishing, so that you can beef up your publication history. With a successful postdoc and the associated publications, future employers/research positions aren't going to really care that you didn't have many publications as a grad student.

@Anamica Also going to add this as a comment because it is somewhat specific to your situation and not a general answer - anecdotally, this is the path my career took. I had few publications as a grad student, and just completed a postdoc that was more fruitful (and am now hired in a full-time permanent research position.)

Thanks for the comment. I will look for suitable postdocs.

Similar to my situation i had a high risk PhD project from which I published little but learned a lot. My postdoc resulted in several publications and after that I got my first position

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


text:
PhD in mathematics with a BSc in Physics
I want to apply for a PhD in mathematics in the United States, I did my BSc. in Physics at one of the best universities in my country, where I enjoyed studying the mathematics behind physics theories, but I only had to take three pure math courses. That's why after that I started a Master's in mathematics. Since I had to work to pay for my studies I did not fully dedicate myself to learning math, in the master's degree I took some one-semester courses on analysis, differential geometry, and algebra, but I don't know if this is enough for a PhD. I know that in the US you have to take hard QR exams (in algebra, analysis, or topology) in the first two years, and I'm wondering if I could pass these QR exams without the basic knowledge.

What do you mean by "approve " a QR exam?

I mean obtaining the passing score on the respective qualifying exams (analysis, algebra....).

You got two years to learn the material no? So presumably it's possible (if that's what you're asking).

I can't speak for all programs, but my experience is that qualifying exams in math are very difficult and are based on advanced, not elementary, material. The courses you have taken are unlikely to be sufficient to pass any of them. Qualifiers are difficult even for those with a much deeper math background than you suggest you have.
On the other hand, most programs provide advanced courses that lead to the qualifiers. But it will take a year or more to take those courses and they are also quite difficult even for those who have majored in math as undergraduates.
It isn't impossible, assuming you get admitted, but it will be difficult. But if you are admitted then someone has predicted that you can get through it. And note also that it is fairly common for US students to change fields between undergraduate and graduate studies. This is partly explained by the broad nature of undergraduate studies here.

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


text:
Seeking Advice on Authorship Dispute
My supervisor, who had no contribution to my thesis work, instructed me to write a paper from it for clearance. I provided a draft, but he submitted it to a conference with himself as the first author without informing me. Today, I received an email to authenticate my authorship. I wish to pursue higher studies on this topic and plan to apply for Fall 2025, where being the first author would greatly benefit me. What should I do?

Kindly give me guidelines.

have you talked to your supervisor about it?

what do you mean by no contribution?

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/169853/advisor-wants-to-put-his-name-on-my-paper-when-i-did-all-the-work-and-found-the

First, you should try to resolve this with your supervisor, just to eliminate any possibility of misunderstanding. If the situation turns out to be unethical, aka premeditated, then you can contact the conference organizers and submit your thesis as proof, since the thesis should contain all the content, your name, and your supervisor's name.

I want to clarify the point about having it as a misunderstanding. I once heard a story in my department where this sometimes happens when the supervisor formats the article, like rewriting or reformatting it to fit the standard using their template, then the name of the author got changed and overlooked. Of course, this is very unlikely, but it's worth considering as it could possibly prevent a falling out with a potential partner in your academic career.


text:
What are the pros and cons of laptops in a classroom?
I simply could not pay attention in a lecture if I brought in a laptop. I always take notes by hand, especially since that's supposed to be better for learning.
A professor of mine stated that laptops are distracting to other students and moved them all to the left part of the lecture hall.
I'm curious, what are the pros and cons of using laptops in a lecture, from both a note taking and teaching perspective?
I would like to teach someday and I can see myself banning laptops (I also hate the typing noise but that's just me).

If the typing noise is your issue, then what is your stance on tablets or other devices that have a touch keyboard?

Great article on this subject: Why I Just Asked My Students To Put Their Laptops Away

What about people who write with a stylus (not type) on a laptop?

What subject? I really think it would depend on the subject.

As I see there are two problems here. First, the use of laptops (on which most people have commented) AND splitting the class in two groups based on the use of laptop (this is more critical issue and no one seems to have commented on it).

I think due to increasing lecture sizes, and in complex or technical courses, having something like a tablet or laptop is considerably useful!
There's something to be said of classroom etiquette, however, in that not everyone is equally courteous. Some big no-no's for most of my lecturers were:
(1) No recording via the built-in camera, especially without permission, and no holding things up and taking photos. People learn in different ways, but we have to standardize the classroom somewhat, because not everyone can idly sit by and concentrate while 10-20 people are holding up their tablets, taking flash photos, or doing something otherwise weird/distracting to copy lecture notes.
(2) If you have the slides up on your personal device, make sure it's the only thing you have up unless otherwise specified. No one wants to see someone elses Youtube, Facebook, etc. during the lecture.
Beyond that it is distracting to hear the tapping of many keyboards vigorously trying to take notes all-at-once. I think that these people do themselves a disservice by taking word processor notes, however, and that to a great extent hand-writing the notes even if you have a personal device helps to enrich you in the material. My personal method was laptop set to slides, write notes on paper. But again, not everyone learns the same way. At that, for some complex courses I constantly search terms I didn't understand or concepts I might have forgotten about so I don't get utterly lost in the process. To me this decreases the amount of hand-raising and review questions.
I think that having some ground rules, and a little talk about common courtesy in the beginning of the term is good. It's penalty enough for some people to get called out for being discourteous in front of the class, so a ban? Perhaps not. And like I said in the beginning, lecture sizes are up there and not everyone has choice hearing/vision, so laptops/tablets help supplement those people who can't see the presentation or can't hear the lecturer.

I respectfully disagree with your statement on Facebook. If I am not interested in the lecture, but would be forced to attend, leave me to myself and my Facebook. Take away my laptop and I'll get bored; you don't want that to happen in your classroom.

Students forced to attend a class would probably be forced not to use Facebook. That's usually how things go with authority. One authoritarian  measure usually engenders another.

@StephanBijzitter: I strongly agree with Kendall's point on Facebook. Your way of passing the time in class is up to you as long as you don't distract the attention of the classmates behind you (unless you're part of the back-bench). Having FB open in front of a lecture can really disrupt the attention of students behind and next of you.

@NajibIdrissi Then those students should stop watching my screen. If I get bored, I start conversations with everybody around me. Surely that will be much more disruptive.

Everyone learns differently I suppose.  But I suspect students in general would be better off attending fewer hours of lecture.

On the upside, I've had students next to me use Facebook and do online shopping on their screen, and you know what effect that had on me? I thought, "Jeeze, is this why they aren't doing well in this course? I really need to make a point not to spend my class time this way...such a waste." It helped me realize, by way of example, how much better it is to be active and involved in the lecture rather than allowing myself to be distracted by blinking lights. It didn't do much for that students grade, but it helped me :)

Of course, I should note that while I was thinking that I didn't know what the teacher was saying and it took me a minute to catch up. So there's that, too.

@StephanBijzitter Times sure have changed. It wasn't all that long ago that if one was bored in class one had only maybe three options: A) Try not to fall asleep; B) Try to surreptitiously read a book; or C) Do homework for the class you are in or a different class. Of course (C) was a lot harder back in the day when you couldn't do a research paper outside the library or do Physics homework in English class without obviously having a huge Physics book open on your desk. WIth a laptop, a boring class would be the best thing ever for my grades in other classes.

@ToddWilcox: What kind of homework did they assign to you back in the old days that you could actually do in spite of the distraction of having a professor talking at you constantly for an hour or two?

@BrianDHall: You can't just assume they're doing poorly just because they're doing online shopping though. In one of my classes I was so bored that I would go buy and sell stocks (which I later realized my TA noticed (!) and for which he said I should have asked him for recommendations (!!!))... I got the highest grade in that class. To the contrary, there were classes in which I paid careful attention and took extremely thorough notes only to get a mediocre if not below average grade. You really can't judge how students are doing just by what you see they're doing in class...

Are these courses people are just sitting in on social media, bored, etc. mandatory attendance? As far as my curriculum has gone, and this is biological sciences, the instructors upload the powerpoints and if you're going to simply shop on Amazon for the 2 hours you're there, you can just opt to stay home and independently study. There's no need to show up and distract anyone simply on a whim! The courses with mandatory attendance, at that, always had an interactive component where you just couldn't be bored and useless without penalty. I see no reason then to be on Facebook in class.

Or on merit of difficulty alone, you again lack the resources to waste time on social media, bored, what have you.

Recent research by psychologists (paywalled) suggests that you will learn material better when taking notes by hand than when using a laptop.

What about people who write with a stylus (not type) on a laptop?

@FedericoPoloni: Good question, and not one directly addressed by the research as far as I know.  I'd guess writing with a stylus is more similar to writing on paper.

Having audited a course with an iPad and stylus, I can say it is pretty awesome for the tablet user (you can hit the internet to see if you can clarify a point without interrupting the lecture, copy-paste, etc., etc.) but I did feel a little self-conscious about the slight tap-tapping sound made when the style hit the screen as I wrote. I think it was quieter than a keyboard but louder than a pen on paper.

I found a non-paywalled PDF of that paper.

I would consider it to be an individual thing. There are "learning types" and some people learn best be hearing (lectures are a great way to learn for them) others by reading (a good script helps), some need to take notes by hand and others benefit from doing some things themselves. A typical lectures tries to combine this, e.g., by having a lecture, providing a script, and assigning exercises. Not every student will know what's their learning type, though. Someone who can type fast may also have more time to listen to the lecture when they don't need to concentrate on taking notes by hand.

@allo Although your recommendation that a class should combine various forms of instruction is valid, the reasoning based on "learning types" is not.  See https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/LearningStylesMyth among many other sources on this point.

I can only provide a STEM-course perspective of the issue.
Personally, I find writing my own notes on a laptop a more efficient way of note-taking than written. I took some effort to learn to write lecture notes in LaTeX, but in the end, that turned to work very well for me. I can write text, add equations and paste pictures from lecture slides on the fly. I still resort to handwritten notes for graphs and plots, but I hope I'll master Mathematica some day to produce plots equally fast.
Electronic notes are superior to handwritten also in terms of re-reading them in a couple of years (you don't have to decode your sloppy handwriting) and sharing them with others.
That said, I'm advocating for laptop use in classes, but there are caveats. Firstly, learning styles differ, and there are surely people around who will find taking notes distracting. Secondly, I did find that I had poor retention of textbooks read from screen as compared to paper. Writing my own electronic notes, however, provided me with a high enough level of engagement to retain the information.

When I was a student, I did not take notes.  I had a traditional (i.e. paper based) notepad which I used strictly for doodling.  If you do the assigned reading beforehand, you can show up listen, watch, and ask clarifying questions.

@emory, as soon as you move to research-based STEM classes that have no tried-and-true textbooks, you won't have any assigned reading and you'll have to take notes to make use of them in the future. Otherwise, your approach is reasonable.

Or when textbook contains way more material then is actually going to appear in the lectures. Also the lectures are often not structured according to any text-book, even if one or two options are mentioned in the course references.

Since nobody has covered the issue as to whether one can actually ban laptops (and other mobile devices) in a classroom - and with the standard IANAL caveat - I will put forth that it may not be possible to blanket ban laptops at least in cases of certain disabilities.
For instance, I know of a fellow veteran who is a double-amputee who has great difficulty writing quickly but can type at a reasonable rate - and would not have been able to attend college if not for his laptop. Here in the US, ADA and other laws required that he be able to use his laptop - no matter the policy of the professor. In this case his disability was obvious, as was the aid a laptop gave him, but there are many others who have less obvious disabilities for which electronic devices, for note taking, are key to their ability to simply attend college.
If one instead attempted to apply a policy of "banning laptops to anyone without a reasonable need due to a disability" - one may run into other problems. As some universities such as The University of Washington and The University of Waterloo see such a policy as being a very visible accommodation of a disability that is tantamount to our disclosing to our disabled students' classmates a disability that they might not wish to be made public
So if one's university policy, national regulations, or regional regulations essentially force one to allow laptop use - I would call that a fairly strong pro.

To update for post-2020: The state I teach in has passed a number of regulations which now make banning laptops impossible at public institutions. These include bills like HB 233, section 3 part g, pg.6 which specifically states:

A student may record video or audio of class lectures for their own personal educational use, in connection with a complaint to the public institution of higher education where the recording was made, or as evidence in, or in preparation for, a criminal or civil proceeding. A recorded lecture may not be published without the consent of the lecturer.

So the discussion on banning laptops has become a moot point at my institutions as use of electronic devices in the classroom for "note taking" is now a required exception on every syllabus.

This is a very good point.

Thanks. I was going  to write a reply about equal access and anti-discrimination requirements in many places that many educators seems to ignorant of. Thanks for flagging that in a well worded contribution.

Way back during the summer before my senior undergrad year, I interned at a company where I was put to cleaning out an old IT supply area. I salvaged an old 286 laptop from that space, back when Pentium III's were still new, and was able to get it working (in part by installing OS/2 on it!).
I would have to sit at the back of the room in classes, in order to use the power outlets. The laptop wouldn't hold a charge even through half a class period. The idea of any internet access from this machine would have been crazy. I took some notes on the laptop, but rarely referred to them later. It was more about engaging my brain a second time to process and organize the info that seemed important. I've heard that hand-notes would have been even better, but I believe the typed notes still improves over no notes at all.
More than notes, though, I'd sit there in the back of the room and use the laptop to play card games. It might not be a popular view here, but I found the practice of playing games during class to be incredibly valuable. No one is able to be fully alert every day for a full day of classes, and I would do this when I felt myself starting to disconnect from the lecture. The notes would still be open in another window, but I feel like having the card games available allowed me to switch gears a bit without fully disconnecting from what was going on in class, as I would otherwise have done. I credit this practice with improving my grades nearly a full letter grade in every class where I was able to use the laptop (not all my classrooms had good outlets).

As a separate point, I've seen many students these days at the college where I work choose not to purchase physical textbooks whenever possible. They'll have a kindle or tablet, and get their books in electronic format. I remember helping one student break up a large PDF textbook so that each chapter was a separate file, in order that it would load and respond more quickly on her device.
The point is that, in many cases, the electronic device is the textbook. A blanket policy prohibiting devices in cases when the textbook would be available seems unwise.

Here's a community wiki to summarise points. One sentence each.
Pros

Network-connected laptops can be used to find supplementary material, for additional context and detail.
Digital notes are much easier to store, share, search, and collaborate on.
Instructors can use online tools such as Socrative (which is like a clicker that works with a browser) to validate comprehension.
May be required by those with certain disabilities which make hand written note taking difficult

Cons

Anything irrelevant on screen may distract other students, and some students find screens themselves distracting even if material is supposedly relevant.
Typing notes has been shown to reduce content retention versus handwriting.
Drawing diagrams by hand is faster than on a laptop, except with touchscreen devices.

From my syllabus:

Laptop use in lectures in the past has proven distracting to instructors, fellow students, and birds passing by, and has been scientifically shown to be detrimental to learning ([1] [2] [3] [4]). So I request that there be no laptop use during lecture (except mine) and no mobile phones. You are to take notes on paper and then review the topic at home. Taking pictures of me or the slides, or recording what I say is not permitted. Use your brains, plus pen and paper.
[1] Risko, E. F., Buchanan, D., Medimorec, S., & Klingstone, A. (2013). Everyday attention: Mind wandering and computer use during lectures. In: Computers & Education, Vol. 68, October, pp. 275–283. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131513001218.[2] Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. In: Computers & Education, Volume 62, March, pp. 24–31. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131512002254[3] Blackwell, D. (2014). Why you should never take notes on a laptop. [Blog post] http://contemplatingcognition.wordpress.com/2014/06/05/why-you-should-never-take-notes-on-a-laptop/ Retrieved on 7 June 2014.[4] Ravizza, Susan M., Uitvlugt, Mitchell G. & Fenn, Kimberly M. (2016 December 20). Logged In and Zoned Out: How Laptop Internet Use Relates to Classroom Learning. Psychological Science. Retrieved on 2016-12-21. DOI 10.1177/0956797616677314See also http://www.explosm.net/comics/3230/

Pen and paper. Love it. It provides reinforcement that leads to real learning. Search this site for "Zull" for more.

Bit of a wall of text coming up...
As a  physics student I find taking notes by hand to be unbelievably superior to typing along. We follow derivations and other maths through about a third of our time per lecture, copying diagrams many times too, and I find it very useful to have a combination of each step written out explicitly and additional notes with pointers to specific components or demonstrating links between lines. Doing this on a laptop would be so much slower that I think I would actually lose out on some content if I tried. Furthermore the flexibility of taking notes by hand far outstrips laptop, from intuitive formatting to speed of note taking.
Now, I'm not saying that notes produced on a computer are inferior to notes produced by hand, in fact typed up notes I also find to be very effective, but not making them during the lecture. Typing the handwritten notes up afterwards is a great way of re-reading notes and processing the information a second time, thus making effective revision.
This, of course, is all from my perspective as a physics student. I can imagine if one were taking notes that were entirely in strings and sentences, with no diagrams or equations, and one were to be a very good typist then laptop note taking could be more efficient, and allow for increased focus. However, for myself personally it makes no sense to move away from handwritten notes.
On the subject of other students using laptops in the lectures, it depends. If everyone were exclusively using their laptop to type notes or follow along the lecture slide show then that's totally fine, not even a hint of any issue. However, as soon as other students begin to stray, opening facebook or youtube or playing games then many students, myself included, do get distracted. I am of the opinion that if the user thinks that going on facebook or playing hearthstone (to be fair, the guy was really good) is more worth their time than making notes and focussing on the lecture then they shouldn't be there, especially if their actions taken through boredom distract other students, doubly so when our lectures are recorded and made available to us as video podcasts. At that point it's rude and disrespectful to the lecturer and the other students.
tl;dr: depends on what you use it for, notes by hand are more flexible to produce, notes on laptop are easier to archive and re-read. Laptops carry more risk of negatively influencing the folks nearby than handwriting.

Different people are different. Some of my students have the class notes (much more detailed than my scribblings) open and pay attention to the class, others write down what is on the whiteboard, yet others just pay attention. Others don't show up, and read the notes instead.

Just a note, this is a bit long for a comment so I'll be posting here. I don't intend to adress the whole question but just to explain why I did find using laptops to take notes useful in my case.
We used to take note on laptops during my master CS degree. For us the main advantage was that we used shared notes (using Google Docs), this way several people could work on the same document at the same time. This allowed us to have a more complete document because even when the course's pace is fast, there are different people who can work on different parts. For exemple someone is the main note writer, while someone else draws any schema (which is usually fastidious / long), while someone else writes down the oral comments of the teacher or the questions asked by a students and the answer given by the teacher. The roles were switched several times a day and were mainly on a voluntary basis. This was put in place rather spontaneously without
Google docs features a chat which also helped in case of conflict, errors, or any kind of problem without disturbing the class. The chat (and the ability to comment on a part of a document) was also useful after the class when people were studying on their own, because thay could talk to people who were doing the same.
Aside from the note keeping aspect, we also used a shared folder to share any document used by the course (documentation, the course's slides when available, source code used for exercises, logos used for official stuff, past years test subjects, related websites, wikipedia articles, any loosely related stuff).
I feel this helped me a lot because I'm usually not good at taking notes and this way I always had something correct at the end. Even when you aren't fully following (you're tired, sick, bored, sleeping, absent or whatever) you can stop taking notes, just listen to the teacher and you know you won't be missing anything. There were foreign students who used this as a way to check their notes by comparing the shared one and their own (the documents were most often written in English even if we were not in an English speaking country ... in CS most if not all of the documents and some of the courses were in english anyway).
There were times, obviously, when it was used for fun. Someone often shared funny pictures this way. In our case it was always minor and never in a way that bothered the ones taking the notes and cleaned up afterwards, but I guess it depends on the students.
Some context :
We were about 35 students taking this degree. Everyone had a laptop, though not everyone used it to take notes. There were usually 2 concurrent shared documents done by different people (between 3 and 8 people were participating on each document). Both documents were shared freely with all students, whether they participated or not.
In some case the documents were also given to the teacher at the end of the semester (at their request).

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
Submit manuscript to tier A conference or wait and submit to A* conference?
Suppose you have a manuscript and you have just missed the deadline for an A* conference. Should I submit to the next tier A conference or wait until for the A* conference to come around again?
I am in the computer science field, hence the emphasis on conferences, rather than journals.

I would ignore the A versus A* nonsense and submit to the next conference where people will care about the result.

@JeffE Although I agree with you on principle, if you (or one of your students) have a very strong paper that you think will be accepted to FOCS or SODA and you missed the deadline, would you send it to a slightly worse conference?

I think this is unanswerable as is, because it depends so much on individual factors. I imagine it depends a lot on whether it's time-sensitive - does this need to be out there as a basis for future publications? Is somebody else likely to do it between now and next year? Does one of the authors need it on their CV soon? And so forth.

Suppose you have a manuscript and you have just missed the deadline for an A* conference. Should I submit to the next tier A conference or wait until for the A* conference to come around again?

This depends on a number of factors:

How likely do you think your paper is to be accepted in the A* conference? If this is your absolute best, cream-of-the-crop paper and you are confident it will go through, then submitting to a weaker conference just because you did not want to wait will feel like waste down the road. If the A* conference felt like a long shot anyway, go ahead and submit now.
How likely are you to get scooped? If you are doing cutting-edge research in a trending topic, you may want to go for the A conference simply because you are afraid that somebody else may publish before you if you don't.
How important is timely publishing for your content? Many great research papers are in essence timeless, but occasionally one has produced a paper that is of value to the community right now, but which may be much less interesting in a year (e.g., some empirical studies in fast-moving fields are like that). In that case you should submit to the A conference now, because there is a very real danger that the paper will not be good enough for the A* paper in a year anyway.
How important is having the paper out soon for your career progression? E.g., if you are handing in your PhD in a year, or plan to be on the job market in a year, or plan to hand in this selective personal grant in the next year, then having another published A paper may be better than a potential A* paper that comes "too late".
How much value is (in your field and your circles) placed on the "esteem" of the venue? That is, what do you estimate how much more valuable the same paper will be for your career if published in an A* venue rather than an A venue? In a perfect world, it would not matter. In the real world, as for instance in my field, the venue a publication appeared in is ultimately more important in career decisions on all levels than the actual content.

You can always submit to arXiv, then you won't get scooped and you will get your result out in a timely manner for the benefit of other researchers.

My choice of whether to bother with the "tippy-top" conferences depends strongly on their size.  When you have a highly selective but also very large conference like AAAI, I'm quite comfortable to submit, since there is enough space for papers that the decision is likely to depend primarily on the quality of my paper.
For the "super-important" conferences that are single-track, however, there is too much selective pressure.  Because these have become so high-stakes and because such a terribly small percentage of work can be accepted, the decision is often less about "Is this a good paper?" and more about "Are there any reasons that we can use to eliminate this paper?"  This creates an environment in which there is much more randomness in acceptance, as well as a danger of significantly increased group-think, clique politics, and preference for safe incremental thinking.  Thus, I am unlikely to bother prioritizing them too strongly.  To be fair, however, these hyper-selective conferences also do not dominate my subfield or strongly determine my career future, and thus I can afford to do so.
If you or your co-authors are in a subfield and career stage where the difference between an "blessed" conference and an almost-as-good conference is going to make a big difference to university administrators or an in-group that dominates your field, though, then sure, prefer the "blessed" conference.

This sort of ignores the actual question here. The OP was not asking "should I submit to an A* conference rather than an A conference", but rather "should I wait for a longer time for an A* conference or submit to an A conference right now".

Sorry, I thought that was clear in my answer: submit now.

I would submit just to get feedback.  If it is an accept, then re-read the answers here and decide whether you want withdraw and submit it to the A* conference if the comments are very positive.  Otherwise, if it is lukewarm, and an accept, then you at least have a conf paper.  If it is a reject maybe a self reflection is in order.  If there are bugs then you can fix them so you have a better paper for the A* conf.

Withdrawing an accepted paper, because you think the conference isn't good enough, will not go down well.

I doubt it. There are tonnes of excuses you can use to withdraw a paper; e.g,. there is a flaw in lemma x.

That excuse won't hold water if you submit the same paper to a different conference later.


text:
Finding conferences in subject area (Medical Informatics)
I am struggling to find conferences in my subject area, preferably in Western Europe. My supervisor tends to be otherwise very busy and is poor at actually providing this information in practice.
My area isn't terribly niche: it concerns text mining of medical information (therefore straddling both medical informatics and computer science).
Is there a website that contains lists of informatics conferences? Or a particular avenue that one should ideally use when looking for conferences in this area?

Look at papers in your field; some were presented at conferences.

Is this anything like what you're looking for?
Doing some searching of my own, I definitely ran across the problem you mention -- the lists of events in your field are often out of date. So, while there are sites that list conferences by discipline, they might not work very well for you (the one linked above being a tentative exception). This might partially be peculiar to your field, though it does appear in others as well.
However, part of the problem might also lie within search patterns. Hybrid topics are often hard to search successfully due to conflagration of terms, and it seems this remains true for hybrid disciplines.
If you're not already familiar with them, it's definitely a good idea to acquaint yourself with Google's search operators; they can significantly ease your search-related challenges. My favorite is the tilde (~), which when placed before a term includes results with synonyms -- very useful.
Searching like this, I was able to find some individual conferences which seem to have their call for submission still open. (I know little to nothing about your particular field, so if I got these wrong, I apologize):

http://www.imia-medinfo.org/new2/events
http://datamining.conferenceseries.com/call-for-abstracts.php (track
3 on the page)
http://www.kdd.org/kdd2016/calls

A few things I can recommend:
You have most likely done a literature review on your area of research. Take a look at where those papers have been submitted (the more recent ones especially), and search for those specific conferences online for more information. You can use google scholar to winnow by publication date and can view the number of paper citations.
A quick search online came up with these lists for top data mining conferences, which can give you a reasonable start:
Microsoft Academic Search, Conferences in Data Mining, Microsoft Academic Search, Natural language & speech, The top 10 NLP conferences.
Search within a few top conferences to see if papers on your specific topic have been published within them. Try 'text data mining proceedings' in google scholar for some ideas as well.
Don't forget to ask other graduate students who have been around longer for their advice as well. They will probably be able to tell you at least two or three top conferences that they regularly apply to each year.
I'm not sure about your field specifically, but in my experience conferences are grouped between submission dates in the fall and submission dates in the spring. Once you have a list of reasonable conferences you can choose one by the current date appropriately.

I see your area as what can be broadly seen as Information Systems:

text mining of medical information (therefore straddling both medical
  informatics and computer science

In this field, the two major associations are the Association for Information Systems (AIS) and the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). You can find various regional and premiere conferences on their websites. They also welcome textmining, medical informatics, and other novel approaches to information systems.

General lists of conferences tend to be of low quality.  There are a lot of "for-profit" type conferences that you want to avoid.
Your supervisor is the best avenue.  However, if they aren't available as you point out, the next best thing is to look at the references section of journal articles related to your specific topic and identify conferences that way.  Frequently conference papers are cited in addition to published papers, so that will give you an idea of where the people in your specific field go to discuss their research with colleagues.


text:
Are doctoral programs in the USA like a Masters leading into a PhD?
Before I begin, feel I should make it clear that I have no doubt that undertaking a PhD. anywhere, let alone at Harvard, will be a difficult and strenuous task!
To briefly explain, I have graduated with a good Bachelors of Arts from the UK, and am set to do my Research Masters in Holland. However, I have been in contact and have contacted the literature faculties in Harvard, who have been very encouraging but, to be honest, the system itself seems very different.
To clarify, I'll copy in some of what my (possible) supervisor has emailed me:
Our students enter the program, take two or three years of courses, and only then settle on a dissertation topic and choose a committee of three faculty -- one primary advisor and two other readers.
This sounds at once much more fluid and liberal a way of doing things, but, considering the ridiculous costs of studying in the USA, I'm not sure how leisurely that would be in reality! Should I assume that Doctoral programs in the USA are like a Masters leading into a PhD? Is there a scholarship available for both of these?
Has anyone reading this had any experience on the matter, and can relate more clearly how this process works, and whether exceptions are every possible?

The quoted description is pretty standard for how Humanities departments in the US work. Most students entering Humanities PhD programs in the States do not have MA degrees, although a significant proportion of those from the UK do. It would be unlikely that you could skip those first 2-3 years of coursework. Even if you could, it would put you at a serious disadvantage even if you knew in advance what topic you wanted to research. A 1-year UK MA degree, just does not prepare you to the same extent as 2-3 years of coursework.
As for funding, the top students are likely guaranteed funding for some number of years. The funding will likely require some teaching. The teaching maybe in the form as a TA, but is likely to be much more extensive and require you to design and run a large undergraduate lecture class. For those students, the funding will cover tuition and a stipend. Those without guaranteed funding can still get funding for teaching, but you cannot count on it. How tuition is handled depends on the university/department and where you are in the program.
In the Humanities, it is unlikely that any supervisors will have grants that pay for PhD students, but there are grants that you can apply directly for. Some of these cover students in the first few years, but most are for more senior students.
For US PhD programs in the Humanities, unlike in the Sciences, funding should play a huge role in your decision of where to go. In the Sciences, everyone essentially has funding that covers tuition and living expenses and very little teaching. In the Humanities, self funded students and students with with huge teaching requirements are common. There is a huge difference in productivity and happiness between those who have to take out loans, that they will likely never be able to pay back, or teach and those who do not.

Yes, you can assume that the coursework part of an American PhD program is the rough equivalent of a European Masters, and the research part is like a European PhD.  In many American programs, after completing the coursework part you actually receive a Masters degree.
Scholarships do exist (they are usually called "fellowships" at the postgraduate level) but a more common funding method are assistantships, in which you are paid for either teaching or for research work (the latter is often funded by a supervisor's grant).  If you got a fellowship or assistantship, you could expect it to pay for all of your tuition and a low-to-modest salary.  Teaching assistantships are usually based on 10-20 hours of work per week; research assistantships vary, but in some cases you can get paid for doing your own dissertation research.  Depending on the department, the availability of assistantships can range from scarce to universal.  Part of your conversation with your Harvard contacts should definitely be "What funding is available, and how much can I realistically expect to actually get?"

A Humanity PhD generally leads to a book in the US and a couple of articles in the UK. I do not think of them as being the similar at all.


text:
In text listing style - how to use? Any downsides?
I'm currently considering to use a in line (in text) listing style, such as:
'Some things are quite good. (i) Thing A can do this and that, which is awesome because of this and that. (ii) Thing B can do, ... . (iv) Some people also say that this and that, therefore thing Z is great.'
I've got more important points already highlighted through bullets, therefore I don't want to use bullets again for this minor information, plus I want to logically link the single points through sentences, but still provide an easy way to pick out the key words quickly.
First question: I've seen this style in quite a few papers. Is it considered to be a "good" style, or are there any downsides to this approach? Should I not use this style? Does the reader get confused by this?
Second question: Shall the brackets and latin number be bold, only the number, or nothing?
Third question: Should I place the enumeration element right infront of the keyword, or at the beginning of the sentence containing the keyword?

If you have the luxury of being in a LaTeX-using research community, just use \begin{enumerate} and let the journal class file decide for you.

This question appears to be off-topic because it is not about academia, it's about word processing.

Agreed. If question read "What style should be used for journals in Discipline X or theses in discipline Y..." it might be a different issue.

If the numbers are never used, or if the technique is overused, then this can be considered bad style. I would not use it in the example above, for instance.
You can use whatever style you want. There is no reason that they are bold. Sometimes the leading parenthesis is dropped, sometimes both. It's best to consult the style guidelines for the relevant publishers.
Put the enumeration element in front of the sentence or phrase under consideration. Try it out, if you put it near the keyword, then you'll have spurious sentence elements in illogical positions.

Thanks, can you elaborate on what "spurious sentence elements in illogical positions" means? :-)

If you put the (a) in front of the keyword, then you might end up with a sentence like this: "The most important things to remember are to put the enumerated element in (1) front of the key word and to highlight the enumerated element (2) in bold."

Yes it is a good/acceptable style. At least in the fields where I have looked the format is standard. in fact bullets or numbered lists should be used more sparingly and I think the following is a good guideline: use bullets/itemization when there is a lot of text going into each. 'Lot' in this case is a complete sentence or more. Use the format you mention when you need a word or partial sentence for each item.
there are several ways to do this you can use 'i)' or '(i)' or (1)' or '(a)' etc. The choice may differ depending on what else you have in your paper. If you have figures that contains several panes, for example, a, b, c, d, you may decide to use Roman or regular numerals for your lists. if you have several lists you should avoid repeating the same item descriptor and, for example, use Roman numerals for one and Arabic for another.
This depends on the context. you should place them where it is appropriate to read them. this means before each part of the construction. In your example you have divided everything into separate sentences but I think you should make a construct with semicolons instead: "There are three things of importance: (1) thing A; (2) thing B; and (3) Thing C."

Your point 3 is a total abuse of the semicolon.

You probably want to check your sytle guide about seriation rules. The APA style manual defines rules for

sentence seriation without a hierarchy and elements not having internal commas,
sentence seriation with a hierarchy and elements not having internal commas,
sentence seriation without a hierarchy and elements having internal commas,
sentence seriation with a hierarchy and elements having internal commas,
paragraph seriation without a hierarchy, and
paragraph seriation with a hierarchy.

The previous sentence is a properly formatted example of sentence seriation without a hierarchy and the elements not having internal commas. If there were internal commas, then the comma at the end of each element would be replaced by a semicolon. Sentence seriation with a hierarchy follows the same rules except there is no line break between elements and the bullets are replaces with a letter within parentheses. Paragrpah seriation without a hierarchy follows the same rules as sentence seriation without a hierarchy except the element ending comma is replaced with a period and the list is "introduced" with a colon. Paragrpah seriation with a hierarchy follows the same rules as paragraph seriation without a hierarchy except the bullets are replaces with an Arabic numeral followed by a period.
Since each element of your example is a sentence, you would need to apply paragraph seriation and hence your formatting is not compliant with APA (and I believe MLA and Chicago).


text:
Citing ideas but extending information
Imagine the following situation: Mr. Expert writes that it is important to have A,B & C. Dr. Smart writes it is important to have A, Y, Z. As both are using the arguments to lead to different topics, their list is not exhaustive and {A,B,C,Y,Z} do not contradict.
I think all points are important, but I would also like to add that A may be red or blue. Hence I think:
Red and blue A, B, C, Y and Z are important.
But how do I cite them correctly?
Red and blue A, B, C, Y and Z are important [Mr. Expert; Dr. Smart].
This is the only form that doesn't make the sentence contain more citations than actual words. Is this a bad citation style, e.g. might Mr. Expert complain that he never said A should be red or blue or that he thinks Z is completely irrelevant? Or am I just noting that some ideas might be copied from one (or maybe multiple) listed sources?

It seems to me you should simply expand the text to provide the background that "Expert (cite year) has shown that A,B & C are important and Smart (cite year) has shown that A, Y, and Z are important. Based on circumstances I postulate that also Red and Blue A are important along with B, C, X, Y, and Z". I hope you get the point? In other words describe the findings of Expert and Smart and then add your own "hypothesis" or ideaand make it clear that (a) it is your idea and (b) on what you base the idea. It is not clear fom th equestion whether it is a hypothesis to be tested or a result of your own research. Depending on which the way you present things will be slightly different, of course.

+1 That would be the ideal approach, but due too the fact that this information is not too import (I only want a brief list of things that have to be considered, which in that field are more or less obvious, but some clever minds backing up my statement is still beneficial), and that space is very limited, I'm looking for a more compact solution :-)

+1 to this answer. You need to avoid ambiguity in your citations. The example you gave, as you noted in your question, implies that both authors said six things are important: A,B,C,X,Y and Z.The answer that Peter has given consists of a small amount of extra information that is valuable to accurately communicating your intent. The extra space required should be negligible, unless you are dealing with a tiny character limit. Though the information itself may be obvious or unimportant, accurately displaying it reflects positively on your attention to detail.

Thanks, a less extreme case where both sources do not overlap, would this be OK? A,B,C [1], and furthermore X,Y,Z [2] are important


text:
Label based in text citation
In german computer science it is quite common to use citations like [HoBo12] or [HoBo12, pp.1-4] for say, Hoy, Jane; Boy, John 2010: The great story. The rules for composing this label depend on the amount of authors and their order. Seemingly, this is defined in DIN5015-2 and ISO690, but the wikipedia page only talks about the bibliography and not about the in text references. Weirdly, there is a Zotero style named DIN1505-2 which kind of does that, but still seems to have a few bugs or the official definition (which I can't find talking about this topic) thinks that weird things are nice e.g. [HoBo12, pp.1-2, WVDE13, p.2] (notice that a ; would be nicer).
I think this style is quite nice and would like to use it for an English text. Therefore I would like to choose an accepted style from an english speaking nation.
Question: Are there any other styles in that form (maybe even defined in a Zotero CSL-format)? I still think it looks a bit big with the additional page information. Something like this would be perfect [HoBo12:1-2; WVDE13:2]. Is this an offical style?

Depends on where you're publishing. And if it doesn't exist, shouldn't be hard to modify the CSL format you already have.

It's for a book & internal documents, thus I can do what I want, but being able to argue that it is an accepted style might be benefical. Changing the CSL was done in 5 minutes, that is not really an issue. Just compared to the APA CSL the DIN5015-2 CSL quality is low.

Very interesting, I did not know that such a standard existed. Do you have perchance a link to a description this abbreviation standard? Unfortunately ISO standard are not cheap to obtain.

I can't recall ever seeing such a format being used, particularly in the context of books (as opposed to papers). Part of this is, I think, a desire to be clear. For instance, what does [WVDE13:2] mean? Does it refer to the second chapter, or to page 2? Or does it refer to a specific work? Without the clarification of "p.", it's relatively ambiguous from a first glance. As a reader of a book, that can get very annoying over extended periods of time.
Given that, you are free to use any style that your publisher allows; if it's something relatively unorthodox, then you should explain that somewhere (perhaps a comment prefacing the bibliography would suffice).


text:
How common is it to have a demo at a doctoral thesis defence session?
It is customary (at least from where I'm from) to have undergraduate and masters thesis viva voce with project demos. So far, I have never been to a PhD thesis defence viva voce which had a demo in it.
How (un)common is it to have a demo at a doctoral thesis defence concerning the fields of engineering, technology and especially computer science?
Edit:
A project demo under this context refers to the demonstration of an important contribution put forward by the thesis defender. It may include one or more of the following

Practical application of concepts
Simulation of proposed algorithms
Live usecase demonstration

Please could you add a brief explanation of what a "project demo" is, for those outside your field?

@user2390246 I've made the necessary edit as suggested. Kindly refer.

I've seen a couple of PhD defenses with demos (in engineering/computer science).
It's not common because many PhD theses don't naturally require a demo due to their subject, or because a demo would be logistically difficult (e.g. requires special equipment that can't be brought to the room where the defense will take place, or takes too long given the time allotted for the defense). Also, live demonstrations are somewhat prone to failure, and a PhD defense is not a good time for a failed demo :)
But if a major contribution of the thesis happens to be something demonstrable, and it's not too difficult logistically, then a demo can definitely enhance a defense. (If logistics are the issue, a short video of the demo can also enhance a defense.)

It was exactly what I was thinking about but just wanted to confirm. I see too many theses defenses that had a potential for a demo but was disappointed to see none.

@ÉbeIsaac and anyone doing a live demo on a defense: rehearse the heck out of the demo so it does not fail at the defense.

@Mindwin And if possible, rehearse in the defense room and with the same equipment. It should be possible to borrow the room couple weeks before the defense for 1 or 2 hours.

I have indeed seen people present videos of a demo, but never a demo live. This way there is no risk that the demo does not work, and you can fully prepare what needs to be shown in the video, which is not as easily done live especially when you have multiple different things to show.

@Fatalize indeed; however, a video is not interactive as a live demo can be (e.g. in a live demo, an audience member can ask questions about some part and you can then show that part in greater detail than you had originally planned). It's a tradeoff.

@ff524 on the other hand you can easily pause a video for extra explanation, while (in the general case) a process that has started may not be able to be paused.

In computer science, a tool demo during a PhD defense is not the default case, but also not unheard of. In some CS areas such as software engineering or computer vision, a tool can be a research contribution in itself, and, therefore, lends itself to presentation at the defense.

I also have never seen a demonstration. However at PhD level there is a difference in that there will have been peer reviewed published work as evidence. This is not usually the case in Master or undergraduate thesis [in my experience].

Not every PhD requires a publication before the defense, although most do.


text:
Use of the term 'professor' in the UK
I have been an full time appointed research professor most of my career (until 2017) in UK and Australia. I still work in  a small business as CEO working exclusively with academic clients. I also have  one 'staff' university based appointment but at senior Lecturer level to do a particular part time role. I have also been appointed Visiting Professor at 3 UK universities and adjunct professor at one Australian university. All 4 of these are current and official.  Can I use the term professor across all of my roles?  Is there anywhere that verifies or precedents?  Be glad of all and any advice.

"Can I use the term" -- you need to specify the context. Can you call yourself professor when ordering at MC Donald's? Can you call yourself professor to apply for full-time tenure-track job?

Thanks for those details and in which role(s)are you not a legitimate professor?

thanks everyone. - considering my work roles not personal   Throughout my academic long career I have been  'full professor' (not used in the Uk but I understand what it means) - through the ranks and legitimately appointed,  last post was (full) professor  A I now have several visiting Professor posts (appointed  appropriately ways-sponsorship and committee decisions. Now I also have an internal appointment not professorial -  the job description ( doctoral supervision and examination) how do people use VP titles in that situation. no real agreement, ? maybe some custom and practice

really appreciate the discussions and views thanks everyone.

The traditional etiquette is that Professor is a Rank or title, not a job. Once you have that rank, it stays with you for life, the same way military titles or royal honors stay with you for life.
The difficulty is that in recent years, universities have muddied the water by giving people job titles with the word professor in them, when the person themself is not a full professor in rank, in order to more closely mirror the situation in the US.
Prof is also a title that is entirely based on etiquette - it is not legally protected in any way, so in theory, any one is free to use it.
I would look at it it this way:

You can still be a professor, even if you currently hold a contract as a Senior Lecturer at a university. This is not relevant.
While you might call yourself a professor on the basis of a visiting professorship (and I know people who do), I think many people would look down on this.
So really it comes down to the status of your "research professorship". I'm not really sure that I know what the status of a research professorship is, it's not really a title I've come across before. If you think this was a "full" professorship, then I would feel free to use the title. Things you might think about is whether you were entitled sit on the academic senate of your university? did you have an inauguration? Would you have been entitled to emeritus status if you had stayed?  If it is something that you feel was equivalent, then I'd feel free to continue to use the title. If not I wouldn't. I'd note that there is no real right or wrong answer here, and it will be a judgement call.

If in doubt, its probably worth considering @MaartenBuis's advice that its better to undersell than oversell.

@trunk I didn't say it wasn't a real title,  just that it wasn't one of come across before.  No one walk around referring to David Strutt as "research professor". He's just 'professor'to everyone here. That probably does answer the question about the status of research professors,  but I'm not sure what the purpose of that tone is.

@trunk as DanielHatton notes elsewhere, I'm pretty sure Prof Strutts title is in part in recognition of the fact that his salary is entirely paid for by the Wellcome trust, and the uni makes no claim in his time for teaching because they don't pay him. It will be interest  to see what happens as the Wellcome Trust have discontinued their senior fellows program, i expect he will revert to being just "professor".

@trunk interestingly everyone i know locally that has a start up, is a traditional Research & Teaching staff, who have their teaching load, same as the rest of us.

Many Universities appoint Assistant Professors (~Lecturer in the UK) and Associate Professors (~Senior Lecturer in the UK), but if you hold such posts you normally do not put Prof Surname on your card, as this title is reserved for (full) Professors.
Similarly, a role of a Visiting Professor normally does not compare with actually being a Professor.
There are surely people working in industry who try to impress their peers with a fancy title, but it is quite easy to verify whether it is deserved or self-proclaimed.

But what about someone with the title Research Professor?

I never heard of rank, post or title of Research Professor before. I have no idea what this particular job involved and how does it compare to a traditional full Professor at a University.

@DanielHatton In this case one can be a Research Professor in the UK for the duration of their Research Fellowship (1-5 years). One normally can't be appointed as a Research Professor indefinitely.

A research professor is what is formally called "Professor (ASR)", i.e. a professor with primarily research responsibilities, see here

I would look at it from the point of view of what happens if you get it wrong.

If you choose not to use the professor title and someone finds out that you are entitled to use it, then pretty much nothing happens.
If you choose to use the professor title and someone finds out that you are not entitled to use it, then that is embarrassing.

I was in a situation where it was unclear whether or not I could use a professor title. I chose not to, and a colleague in the same situation chose to use the title. A couple of years later, the situation was clarified and the colleague had to remove all mentions of her/him as a professor. Consensus among colleagues is that (s)he acted in good faith; the law was just unclear. Still it is embarrassing and I am very happy about my choice not to use the professor title.

It's not a protected title... Ronnie Pickering could call himself Prof Pickering if he wanted to.
Tradition would dictate that once you've held a full profressorship in any role, you keep the title for life regardless of what role you currently hold.
However, in my experience, using this title in a non-academic context would be a bit of a faux pas and just come off as pretentious. Most people with doctorates don't insist on being called Dr Jones in a professional context anymore, they just use their name and that is an actual, protected, title.