text:
Professor says, "I am an especially harsh grader". What does that mean?
So I'm taking an architecture class and there was a word limit for the essay of 500 words. I was wondering if I could go over the 500 word limit and in the email tagline/heading I wrote:
"How strict are [assignment] guidelines?"
And then in the email I asked if I could go over the 500 word limit. He said "yes, it's fine". All is well and good, I thought that was the end.
But then he sent a follow up email after that saying "Oh to answer your email tagline question, as a former architecture and project manager, I am an especially harsh grader." I didn't intend to ask him if he was a harsh grader with my headline, just if the assignment guidelines are strict, but I see the implication now.
I can't tell if he's joking to scare me or if he's being serious. What do you think? Is this something you've done before/joked about? Personally, I'd never ask a professor if they were a harsh grader or not so it's a really new response to me.

Maybe he built some ambitious buildings on really harshly graded plots. :)

Please don't write answers in the comments. In this case, a (now deleted) answer-in-comments led to some extended discussion, which led to an argument; this has all been purged.

So you didn't actually ask "will i be marked down for using more than 500 words."

What is in your email tagline that might have prompted that response?

@Barmar my exact email tagline is that in my post, except instead of [assignment] it was the assignment name

Then it seems like he may have been misinterpreting, since his response doesn't really address it. "harsh grading" sounds like it requires you to give precisely the correct answers.

Student perspective: a professor that describes themselves as a harsh grader may simply give needlessly hard assignments, or be comfortable failing an enormous portion of the class. You might ask around or check their reviews before the withdrawal deadline...

I stand in agreement with Anonymous M's answer. As someone who has worked in architecture offices in the past, I interpret the professor's statements as meaning:
"Yes, in this particular instance it is OK to go beyond the 500-word limit, but do not assume you can ignore or circumvent any other guideline without good reason, and without checking with me in advance. Also, even if you are allowed to go beyond the 500-word limit, this is not an authorization for you to go overboard, rather it means for you to stick to the limit as much as possible, but you will not be penalized if you go slightly above the limit. However, if you go significantly beyond the word limit simply because you are incapable of masterfully summarizing your arguments, and you are just adding words without stating anything of significant value, or even keeping a good level of quality, you will almost certainly be penalized for it."
Since you mention that you are in an architecture "class" (rather than a course) and that you are doing an "essay" (rather than a full-blown architectural design project), this suggests to me that you might just be taking an architecture class as part of another course, or that perhaps you are not particularly familiar with the way things go in architecture as a business practice or in academia.
Without exaggeration, architecture is certainly in the top 10 list of the most cutthroat and merciless environments you can find yourself in. Clients are often ruthless, stingy and nasty, profit margins are razor-thin unless you work for a particularly large office, there is little tolerance for incompetence and laziness, everybody adopts an attitude of no-frills, no-nonsense, and are brutally honest in their criticism of your work (say, "Steve Jobs-style" level of honesty).
Even though this particular professor may (or may not) be more gentle than the average architecture instructor (hard to tell without more information), I would advise you to quickly develop a thick skin for criticism (if you have not done so already), do not take it too personally (even if it may seem personal) and be careful to not deviate from the guidelines without good reason, or without making sure that your final work is actually really better because you were allowed to go beyond the word limit.

I for one am glad architecture has such a reputation for hash critiques - I'd sort of prefer a building didn't fall down because "well, Kevin is a nice guy, but he always screws up the L-beam calculations. Still, let's see if he can do better on this one"

I don't know where you and the OP are, but in the US "class" and "course" are often used synonymously, and I can't read anything into choosing one of the other in the context of the OP's question.

"Without exaggeration, architecture is certainly in the top 10 list of the most cutthroat and merciless environments you can find yourself in. " And this filters down to their programs -- w/o exaggeration I have never seen anyone work harder than architecture grad students.  Maybe the  program at the uni I went was way harder than average, but... Lots of grad students say they put in 60+ hours a week when really half the time they are just goofing off online. Architecture grad students put in those hours (and more!) and were working their ass off the entire time.  The env was indeed brutal.

@lupe isn't that more the structural engineers' job?

Not sure if this applies, but being a "harsh grader" often goes along with letting students know there's a lower curve. Your best assignment is marked down to 75% which feels horrible, but the cut-off for an "A" will be 60%. Put another way, along with "I will take off lots of points so you learn" often goes "but your final grade will be fair".

@OwenReynolds I've seen things go in the opposite direction in STEM topics.  Professor says "I don't grade on a curve. You don't get an A because everybody else's building collapsed within 10 seconds and yours lasted a whole minute." These days many students regard not grading to a curve as harsh, or complain that the grade doesn't reflect how many hours they spent rather than hearing the message that a failed design is unacceptable, period.

@pjs I suppose my real point is "harsh grader" has 2 aspects. One is how assignments are graded (lots of "good jobs!" or lots of red ink). This answer covers that.  The other is how final grades are figured. A "harsh grader" could be harsh on one, the other, or both.

@OwenReynolds No argument on your two points, but I think there's a third point - how the grading is perceived by students. Many years ago I taught a course with a prerequisite that was taught by two other faculty in alternating semesters.  One of those professors regularly won teaching awards based on his popularity with the students. The other one was viewed as a "harsh grader" and had significantly lower course evaluations, but handed me students who were far better prepared for my course. (That's when I became cynical about course evaluations.)

@pjs Maybe perception is a factor when other students tell you someone is a harsh grader, but in this case the instructor said it, so probably doesn't apply.

Here's how I could -- fairly easily -- see myself writing the same thing.
It's the start of the semester, I've very busy, with lots of department issues and students asking questions as they have difficulty on-boarding to my several classes. One student writes to me about parameters for the first assignment. It seems fairly minor and I quickly write a couple-word response to get it off my plate and get to a dozen other emails:

Yes, it's fine.

Within the hour I start regretting that. I recall from the start of other semesters that when I let students break rules on the first assignment, they inevitably start assuming all the other rules are optional, and I wind up with a firehose of problems and/or students challenging me on more, and more important issues. Dangit, I say to myself, I told myself I wouldn't let that happen again and I'd stick to the rules firmly at the start of the term as an object lesson. I've literally written that down on a post-it note and still forgotten it half a year after I wrote it. Also, the primary complaints the department gets about me, and also what it shows on RateMyProfessor, is that students perceive me to be a "hard grader" (per RMP tag language) relative to other instructors. On the other hand, I certainly can't go back on the allowance I just gave; that wouldn't be fair. But I feel like I need to warn against extending that expectation in the future. So I write a follow-up after this further thought:

Oh to answer your email tagline question, as a former architecture and
project manager, I am an especially harsh grader.

(I'm not a former architecture and project manager; but rather a former senior software engineer, and the same principles about hyper-awareness of how certain fine details interrupt the workflow in the actual business world apply.)
I'd say it's a point in the professor's favor that they were reflective enough to think about you later, and write again with more nuanced information/advice. Many wouldn't bother to do that.

I think he's trying to give you a hint, you can turn in whatever you want, but realize that it should conform to the instructions or it will be marked down.
If the assignment was to make an office space utilizing only 500 square feet, then would you ask if you could go over 500 square feet?
Instructions were pretty clear, and he may actually be trying to get you to actually explain your answer without all the fluff or waste his time with a 1500 word essay that could have been 400 words.
Also, harsh grading often means that little things matter and if minor things like a spelling error or formatting occur, you can definitely expect to get marked down.

I think this would be easier to answer knowing what the other guidelines were. Assuming they are things like "make sure you use good grammar" and "your analysis should be correct," I suspect this person is saying some version of, they expect you to be careful in your work and pay close attention to the details. As a former project manager, they are probably used to reviewing work, spotting errors, asking hard questions and expecting good answers. If this is a relatively new person to teaching, it is also possible they are trying to avoid a reputation  for being a softie.
I wouldn't worry about it. Of course, don't slack off in their class, but also don't expect them to be unreasonable based just on that comment. Just be a good student and focus on learning and adapting to the feedback you get on your work. Don't sweat a very generic, off-the-cuff remark.

You have 500 words: use them to clearly express the required theme.
If you spend more than 500 words, you are only increasing the chances of being less clear and of introducing errors in your essay.
Since the professor said he/she is an harsh grader, unless it is a joke about building on steep slopes, you have more to loose from introducing errors in the additional words, rather than gaining from it.
And if you can express yourself perfectly in 550 words, you can strive to show perfect synthesis skills contracting your essay down to 500 words.
I would seriously focus on condensing well-written thoughts in 500 words, instead of showing off all my knowledge in 550 words.


text:
How to deal with a toxic academic supervisor?
I am a person who does not have an "invisible personality". I talk, help around and friendly with everyone. It took me a great deal of efforts to be finally able to open up, which let me make many connections at workplace and otherwise. This attitude helps me learn from their experiences too. Recently, I was slut shamed in my absence, in front of everyone (in a meeting) for being able to talk and hangout with the guys (majority of lab mates were guys). I was even accused of many things and the professor insulted me which stripped me of my dignity (again, in a meeting with the entire lab). I believe everything was blown out of proportion based on some baseless rumors. The PI even commented about my personal life. I could not stand being insulted and left the lab.
I would be soon starting my PhD and I do not want to face a similar situation again. What are the Do's and Don'ts that I should be taking into consideration while entering into a purely professional environment for smooth sailing of 4yrs of PhD? What if my superior at the new workplace is equally toxic? Is work environment at research labs generally so toxic? Since many people normalized this behavior?

Are you in an environment where you can meet (and perhaps take a course with) potential advisors? Or is it a blind process? Also, the frequency probably varies around the world and even by field.

Run, run for your life. First red flag, change your advisor

@looktook, yes, that is a given. But what next? The OP has already, wisely, left the lab.

Could you clarify: Did the slut shaming, accusing and insulting all take place in the same meeting, or in separate meetings? And by the same person (professor), or different people? As you say the slut shaming happened in your absence, but the other two happened in a meeting with the entire lab. Also, have you raised this issue with the professor? And if applicable, the other 'perpetrators'?

I believe this documentary may provide some insights about the topic of the question but surely doesn't answer it.

Which country? I do think that today, in most western countries, you have a wide arsenal of recourse. If there are witnesses, you can bring a rain of fire and brimstone on the perpetrators. Such behaviour on the side of your superiors and colleagues is utterly unacceptable.

Addendum: if you are in a male-dominated field, you will find that some of them will try to put down a (to them) unavailable woman in the spirit of "sour grapes". This is not a reflection of you, but of them. Nonetheless, you may want to reconsider the distance you keep between yourself and the colleagues during worktime (and group-relevant outings) in the future. Whatever the case, the group leader/prof is gravely at fault for not putting the foot down, and even is part of the cabal for adding fuel to the fire. If you do not wish to report them, leave and do not look back.

@CaptainEmacs, and some "boys", whatever their age need to be taken to the woodshed.

@Buffy I am not in favour of woodsheds, but I agree with the epithet "boys".

@CaptainEmacs, how about if woodshed = dean?

I only have partial information, so can only offer general/partial solutions. The correct way to deal with a toxic advisor is to move elsewhere, even if it means changing universities. If you can do so safely (to yourself and your career) report them to university authorities. Whether it has any effect or not depends on how widespread are the poor attitudes.
These things happen and when they do, a sort of whipsaw effect seems to magnify them, so where they exist they can be very intense. But they don't exist everywhere. Oddly enough, all of my doctoral students were women, somewhat like yourself. The other women in our program mostly all seemed similar (outspoken, contributors, ...) and were taken for their skills and knowledge. So, the opposite thing can and does occur.
The way to avoid it is to first look closely at any environment you are jumping into, either for a degree or for a job later. Try to meet people before you make any commitments. Try to meet some of the students. Evaluate. If you sense creepiness or other poor attitudes keep looking. This is actually true for other issues as well as for sexism, but for this case, try to find other female students (or graduates) and get their advice on what it is like to work with a given professor on in a given lab.
If there are other women around, collective action may be possible, for protection, even if it won't change the environment.
Don't get chased out. Your "personality" is perfectly fine.

+1 Make sure you get a chance to communicate with current and/or former students on their own, in a reasonably private venue, not in the presence of the supervisor (e-mail can be OK, although face-to-face is best for picking up on cues)

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it possible in Mendeley to jump back in a pdf after clicking an internal link?
I'm using Mendeley for reading my PDFs. Is it possible to click an internal link in a pdf, and then use some shortcut to get back precisely to the position where I started at?
For large pdfs, this might save quite some scrolling time.
Alt+Left, Ctrl+[ did not work, and also nothing else I have tried.
If this doesn't exist, do you know a different reference management system with an embedded pdf viewer that can do this?

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


text:
Do I have the right to work in the UK?
I'm a graduate student in the United States in biomedical sciences applying for a postdoctoral research associate job at a university in the UK. In the online application, it asks "Do you have the right to work in the UK?"
I have tried to look into this, but don't totally understand the results. I don't currently have a visa to work in the UK, but wouldn't anticipate any difficulties with getting a skilled worker visa. If the question is just asking whether I would be able to work in the UK, the answer is yes. If it's answering whether I already have the authorization to work in the UK, the answer is no.
Any insight would be appreciated!

Further to the answers below, your host institution should have a department that can answer these and other question with significantly better confidence than we do.

In short - no, you do not have the right to work in the UK and should not say you do on the application. That question is asking about your situation currently. There may be other questions on the application that ask about if you need a visa to work in the UK (or a text box may be provided that you can use to explain you require a skilled worker visa to work).

Thanks for the quick reply!
The only questions on the form regarding ability to work in the UK are "Do you have the right to work in the UK?" followed by a comment box "If YES, please note any conditions attached."
It seems like I should just select "No" and hope that's not a disqualifying answer then.

Correct, you should check no there. Many research institutions (such as universities) are able to sponsor visas for international people hired there, and so they are very used to getting international applicants. There shouldn't be anything immediately disqualifying about being international (unless the company/institution says they can't sponsor visas).


text:
Can I use text from my conference poster in my manuscript?
I presented a poster at a conference last year to gain some feedback on my research. Since then, I have made significant findings and am beginning to write a manuscript. I would like to use some of the text that I wrote for my poster in my manuscript. Since only my abstract for the conference was peer-reviewed, can I use some text from the body of my poster? Or would this be considered duplicate publishing?

Was the poster published? Typically, poster presentations are not published - so no risk of duplicate publishing.

This is totally fine. Similarly there’s no harm in using the same text verbatim in a paper and a talk you give about that paper. As long as it’s all clearly part of the development of the same paper there’s just nothing to worry about.

I agree - this will be absolutely fine, unless the presentations given at the conference are to be published as a collective and you are required to publish in order to attend. This is more common in some than in other fields and would be always good to check before you commit to presenting at a meeting.


text:
Referencing previous experience in unrelated field in cover letter
I am planning on applying for PhD positions in Europe (both open calls and cold emails). I have two publications from the lab where I did my BSc. Of course, they are listed in my CV but I am wondering if I should mention them in the cover letter? They're my only publications so far so I thought it might be relevant but they involve a completely different set of techniques/model organisms than what I'm hoping to work with during my PhD. My master's thesis research topic and experience as a research assistant in a different lab are more closely related to what I want to do for my PhD but no publications have come from those yet. So far, I have been highlighting my experience in the last two labs and not mentioning the first lab and the publications.
The main advantage of mentioning the publications is that it shows I produce good quality results that can be published in peer-reviewed journals (the one I'm first author in is IF >6). However, since the field is quite different, I'm concerned it could detract from the overall message of "I want to work in X field/topic" and that it could seem like I'm just padding (see a similar question here where they were advised not to mention undergrad experience).
So I'm wondering if I should mention the publications on the cover letter/the email or not at all?

While I agree with eykanal that a cover letter is supplementary to the CV, it is also good practice to draw attention to the main strengths in your CV.  For application to a graduate program, any peer-reviewed academic publication in any field is helpful.  Even if it were a publication on 14th century French poetry, it still shows that you have experience with academic writing, you are able to conduct research up to a publishable standard, and you have successfully navigated the peer-review process before.  That is a strength of your application and you should make sure it doesn't get missed by the admissions panel.
Your concern that this publiction will cause people to believe that you are less interested in your new subject is highly misguided.  Academics understand that people are not robots in an assembly plant --- they have varied interests and may be interested in multiple subjects.  Many successful academics have publications outside their main field ---sometimes way outside--- and that is not seen as a negative.  (Prof Noam Chomsky is a linquist by trade, but he also writes plenty of books on foreign policy and politics.  Prof Thomas Sowell is an economist, but he has written a book on late-talking children.)  Your slight variation in techniques and methods within the same general scientific field is not even close to the kinds of varied interests held by many successful academics.

In general, the goal of a cover letter is to provide context & color to your resume. The resume is the facts, the cover letter conveys intent, motivation, and fit. As such, you can definitely reference your publications if you think it helps convey why you're a good fit for the position.

Some good examples of cover letters for PhD programs are at the end of this doc.

The examples here appear to be for cover letters for post-PhD programs.


text:
At what point is an offer official?
Every research job/position I've ever had, I have had some sort of "informal" (verbal, via email) offer, followed by me showing up the first day of work to sign the contract and start. This is in Europe, where salaries for such positions are regulated and public knowledge so there was nothing to negotiate.
However, in conversations with people outside of academia, they view this as highly irregular. So I was wondering at what point an offer becomes "official"? At what point would you start thanking your references, rejecting other offers, looking for a new apartment, ..? When you get the "informal" offer, when you get a "formal" offer letter, when you sign the contract?
For me, the moment there's an offer ("we would like to offer you the position") and an acceptance (regardless of the form), it's "official" and I will start the process of notifying everyone and making arrangements if a move is necessary. Is this naive?
PS: I'm posting here rather than over at the Workplace StackExchange because I think this is an area where academia might differ from other jobs. If working in industry, I would never consider anything official until a contract has been signed.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99663/how-secure-is-it-to-receive-a-verbal-offer-for-an-academic-position-in-uk

To me, this seems very irregular in the academic setting, too. Nodody that I know would reject other offers before an official and legally binding contract is signed. The same is true vice versa - no academic institute would settle the candidate search before a contract has been signed. I am writing this from a central Europe perspective (Germany, Netherlands, Austria) - apparently there are differences across regions and maybe even disciplines.

@LuckyPal I had a German university already listing what courses I'd be teaching on their website at a moment where I hadn't signed anything yet. As a postdoc in the UK, I didn't sign anything that really looked like an employment contract to me during my 4 year position.

@Arno interesting. This confirms that there are large differences. My experience is mainly with medical universities. At my current institution it is not possible to start working within ~4 weeks after signing the initial contract, as you need a medical examination and a confirmation from the staff council (which you are only eligible for with a signed contract :) ) before you receive an email account, network access, etc. Of course, informally, people may already start writing grants, preparing teaching material, etc. but in now way does this guarantee that they will actually get the job.

@Arno anecdotally, I was also listed at a institution's website as their statistician before the contract was signed. Then, the start of the position got actually delayed by 6 months due to some adminstrative issues. If I would have trusted the oral agreement, I would have been screwed! Probably, the listing on their website is kind of a legally binding job offer, but I highly doubt it is fun to sue an academic institute for the equivalent of a few months salary.

@LuckyPal funnily enough, my experiences have also been in central Europe so I guess it varies a lot. One was even a medical university as well. I actually got the mandatory medical examination before the contract and only signed the contract on my second day. I had to move cities for this and I didn't have an official contract

When you write "official" (in quotation marks or not), do you mean "legally binding", or do you mean "considered official by whoever makes the offer (i.e. they won't give it to someone else)?

I mean that they won't give it to someone else or rescind the offer for whatever reason. The question was sort of to gauge at what point it's reasonable to start rejecting other offers/making moving arrangements/sending out thank you notes to references..etc

This is essentially a legal question, relating to when binding legal relations exist between an employer and a prospective employee.  If you would like to understand this well, you should have a look into the basics of contract law, particularly in the context of workplace law.  Contract law generally recognises a legally-binding contract to exist once there has been an offer and acceptance, even if this has not yet been formalised in a written "contract".  So as a general rule, if they have verbally offered you a position and you have said yes, that is a legally binding contract.**  Often the communication of an offer/acceptance is done by email, in which case there is also documented evidence of offer/acceptance.  The purpose of a formal document is to set out the relevant terms of employment, and to act as evidence of the agreement and its terms.
So, your general position that it is "official" once there is an offer and acceptance is correct.  The only potentially naive part about this is to consider whether you have evidence of the offer/agreement, whether the other party will be honest about this in the event of a dispute, and whether the terms of the agreement are sufficiently specified to avoid too much wriggle-room on the other end.  If there is a dispute over the agreement, and it was purely verbal, are they going to admit that an offer was made?  Will they characterise it accurately?  Will they assert that it was conditional on anything?  Can you prove your asserted position?  For that reason, when I am dealing with these things, I will generally ask them to send me an email with their offer and I will email back with acceptance; that is enough to ensure that there is a binding agreement that I can prove.
You should also bear in mind that some offer of employment come subject to various conditions (e.g., background checks, probationary period, etc.) and their verbal/email offer might refer generally to conditions that are not yet fully specified until you see the formal "contract".  For this reason, it is generally a good idea to wait until you see this formal document, to ensure that you are in agreement with them about any required conditions, etc., for your employment.  If you are unsure of the legal status of your agreement, contact an employment lawyer and they can assist you.

** Even before this, if the employer has led you to believe you have a position with them, and then you don't get it, they can sometimes be liable for misleading or deceptive conduct.

While the first two paragraphs seem factually correct, only the third paragraph is actually relevant to academic practice.

In universities, if you do not have a contract signed by yourself and the appropriate university official, you do not have a job.
This is more consistent in academia than it is in "industry" because "industry" includes the informal economy where contracts are not written.

Oddly enough, my experience is the exact opposite. I suspect that your answer is not widely applicable and would benefit from more context: Legally, a written, signed and countersigned contract is ironclad. In Europe, a verbal contract (or acceptance of an email offer) is as binding, even if the employer's representative can't extend the offer (but the candidate may reasonably assume they can). Verbal is harder to prove, so whether the point is worth litigating is another topic entirely. This is likely to depend on the local legal framework. Which will affect the incidence of withdrawn offers.

@MvZ My answer is about academic customs, not law.  Legally, a verbal contract is binding in most cases, but that's not relevant because academia does not do that.

In your answers, you sometimes make sweeping generalizations that may not apply to the complex variety of the academic world. For instance, for this one, I don't have a contract signed by myself, but this notwithstanding I have had a permanent position for 22 years now, receiving regular salary. How is this possible? Because I've been hired by a so called rectoral decree which does not require the signature of a contract. This has somehow the unpleasant consequence that when I have to hire an apartment, if I have to go abroad for long periods, I don't have anything to show that I have a job!

@MassimoOrtolano Sounds like you should post your own answer.  It's true all my answers are limited to my personal knowledge.

@AnonymousPhysicist What I'm suggesting is that you simply modify your answer to sound less as "it's like this and it's universally set in stone". Adding the corner of the world of your experience, or using adverbs like frequently, typically, in many cases etc. would help a lot smoothing certain claims.

@MassimoOrtolano To some extent, this is also true as a civil servant in Germany (i.e. professors in most German states): As a civil servant, you get appointed, rather than signing a contract. Nevertheless, you do get an appointment certificate, which you can show whenever you would show your contract otherwise.


text:
How to mention your work in a peer-review?
I am a coauthor of a critical paper published in Nature. We showed that a common calculation is not reliable without considering new factors. Obviously, this applied to the majority of research on this specific topic. The paper attracted sudden attention in the literature but no wonder that some authors have not yet heard about it.
I receive numerous peer-review request and in many cases the authors are not aware of the new considerations. They appreciated this suggestion during revision.
I have no intention to promote our paper but my concern is that the editor may consider this as a flaw in my peer-review service by mentioning my own paper again and again. I tried to explain it in the confidential report to the editor but felt it is not appropriate too.

If your paper is a relevant factor, then by all means mention it in peer review. I understand your concern about appropriateness, but in the situation you describe it seems unambiguous to me that you should recommend your own paper.
If you are worried about it, there is typically a "confidential comments to editor" section where you could note that you're recommending your own paper but it's for a good reason. I wouldn't bother doing so unless, say, you've made four reviews in a row for the same journal and every one of them has the same recommendation.

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


text:
will having a different academic name than official name hurt?
My academic name school+B.Sc. is Rajesh without a surname, and in passport and all other docs it is Rajesh Lobhani that has the surname. I live in India and wish to work and do phd in Australia.
Doing M.Sc. currently so do I change my name(for M.Sc) or let it be? The procedure involves changing Xth and XII standard school name, and it very difficult.

In what context? Are you concerned about application to PhD, or publication?

@MJeffryes about phd in Australia and also an academic job as a professor.

I would expect that, when you apply for Ph.D. studies in Australia, you can use the version of your name that appears on your passport, and you can explain in your cover letter that your B.Sc. and M.Sc. documents are under the shorter version of your name.  Once you get your Ph.D. under the long version of your name, you should have no difficulty using the same version when applying for jobs --- at that point, it's unlikely that anyone will care about your B.Sc. or M.Sc. documents.

I don't really know how that bureaucracy works, but you might find this site useful: http://www.researcherid.com it's an interesting tool to solve this kind of problems.

@AndreasBlass hi, what do you mean "cover letter", and explain it to whom, I doubt they will listen to me.

I meant to explain it to the admissions committee, but I suppose my mention of a cover letter is just out of date. You'll probably be applying through some web interface, which gives no room for a cover letter.  So ignore "cover letter" and put an explanation in whatever the admissions committee will read --- perhaps a footnote in your statement of purpose.

Many academics have had multiple names because of marriage, immigration, or other changes. I don't anticipate this being a problem in your case. As AndreasBlass suggested in the comments, just mention it in your application materials somewhere.

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


text:
Downloading books from websites that allow book upload but promises to remove ones that violate copyright
I know of some websites that make it possible for anyone to upload books on their website and then whoever wants to download that book can but the website says they respect copyright and if they found any book that breaks copyright, they will remove it. Some of these websites look into newly-uploaded books to see whether they break copyright or not. Other just allow books to be downloaded but if someone reports that this book is in copyright, they then respond and remove it Others allow upload of books as well and have a message like "if this book is yours and you don't give permission, contact us and we'll remove it" and they do. So I want to know whether downloading books from such websites is legal or not? My main focus is to know whether what these websites do is legal or not, not whether me downloading a pirated book is legal or not. I wanted to search for this but I didn't know what such websites were called.
So in summary:
*Is it illegal if a website allows others to upload books for download but if the author contacts the website or some people report that the author doesn't give permission/the book is copyrighted, they remove the book from being downloadable?
*Is it illegal if a website allows others to upload books for download while regularly checking whether new books are copyrighted and removes them(but before they figure out that this book is copyrighted, downloading is possible)?
*What if the website claims to regularly check books and remove the copyrighted ones but I don't know whether that's true or not, is it legal to download that book in countries that consider it illegal to hold a pirated book?
(I'm asking about whether it's legal to download a pirated book for the last question while the other two questions whether what the website did was legal)

You probably have to show that you genuinely believed the download is legal because the website checked for copyright violations. It will also depend on jurisdiction.

This is not an academia question; it's one of how copyright law works in general.

Does this answer your question? How does LibGen/SciHub affect researchers' research and publishing process?

If a work is protected by copyright, that means no one, neither the website nor you, should be making copies without permission.  Making unauthorized copies of copyrighted material is called copyright infringement and it is indeed illegal.
Lots of websites claim they respect copyrights but in many cases, all that means is that if you are the copyright holder and you send them a takedown notice, they'll remove the copyrighted material.  It's possible to sue for copyright infringement but lawsuits are expensive (and may not be practical depending on where the site is hosted) so authors are often satisfied if the material is removed.


text:
Too many academic references for grad school applications
I am applying for graduate school and asked three of my professors to write me reference letters to all 3 schools I'm applying to. Turns out, one of the programs is a professional program and only needs one academic reference. How can I nicely tell two of my professors that I actually don't need them to write me a reference? I know it means less work for them, but I don't want it to seem like I don't respect them or value their time.
Thank you!

Unless it is a few days before the deadline, they most likely didn't write the letter yet. The faster you act, the better.

When I had a similar situation, I reached out to my references, copying them all on the same email (so they all knew who they were) to let them know I had just learned I didn't need as many LORs as I had thought and offered that if they hadn't yet written the letters and anyone was really busy, I could let someone off the hook. I later learned they talked among themselves to decide who was busiest.  One of them was really backed up and delighted to know his to-do list just got shorter.

I'd only email all of them in one email if I knew they were comfortable with everyone else knowing who they are.

@user151413 Why would you be uncomfortable with other colleagues knowing you are writing a letter for someone?  It's pretty common to ask people who's writing their other letters (though maybe not at the undergrad level).

@Kimball I don't know, and it depends on lots of circumstances, and "they won't mind" is a good default, but the cost function is also asymmetric, as there's more to lose (in the sense of upsetting someone) than to win. I just think it is important to keep in mind when you email several people that this reveals things about them about which they might be more or less comfortable, and you never know for sure.

Since you've already asked these professors for references, I would just let them proceed with sending all three references to all of the schools.  That way you don't have to decide which referee is your "favourite" and risk offending the other two.
Having the school receive additional references ---beyond what they've requested--- is unlikely to cause any serious problems in the application; at worst the school might decide to ignore two of your three references for fairness to other applicants.  If you're concerned about this case, you can contact that school and explain to them why they are receiving excess references, and let them know that you're happy for them to ignore two of the three references if they want to.

As a potential letter writer, I'd much rather be spared the work than do useless work because someone was trying to spare my ego...

Some schools may automatically discard the application for not following the rules, so it isn't completely safe.

I'd second Marc Glisse's comment: I'd be rather annoyed if I learned that I had to write a letter though it was notn needed.

Question specifies that referees are lready writing their letter for three schools (only one of which is subject to the referee limit in question).  So the only useless work is sending a letter that is already written as a reference for two other applications.

If you have completed all the requirements for the program you have applied for, I don’t, sincerely, understand your concern.
If you have received more than one letter of recommendation, that’s excellent and you should save that in your files for later pursuits.
I do not feel it would be in your best interest to actually tell a professor or a scholarly individual to not write you a non-confidential letter of reference because it more than likely
will not hurt you.
However simple  direct communication with them would not offend them (in my opinion.)
Simply explain your circumstances and they will have empathy with you.
As a professor myself I can attest to this directly.
All these answers are simply opinions, and I have brought you mine, succinctly and truthfully.
Sometimes it is simply lack of communication that gets us into troubles.. and can inculcate somewhat irrational worries.

I don't think the OP has received any letters. Usually letters are sent directly.


text:
Editorial manager system and Firefox password manager
This is maybe a rather special specialist question... I review and hold Associate Editor positions for various Elsevier and Springer journals that use editorialmanager.com (actually I believe both publishers have journals that use this, but it could be that Elsevier and Springer normally use different systems but the problem happens on both of them - the old Springer one that is, before transferring to Springer Nature Snapp, which comes with its own problems, therefore isn't used yet by every Springer journal, but has this one solved). Each time I'm invited to review, I get a new account name assigned. I can't memorise all these accounts and passwords, so I use Firefox's standard password manager, but this doesn't really help, because Firefox doesn't memorise the specific journal. It apparently only memorises editorialmanager.com (should be editorialmanager.com/specific_journal_webpage), so all these different accounts and passwords are saved, but whenever I have to log into a journal webpage, Firefox doesn't know which account is the right one and will offer me all of them. There are 10 or more now and I never remember which one belongs to which journal, so ultimately I have to reset the password to access my account.
Is there any way to get Firefox to memorise where exactly an account and password belongs (as works on other web pages)? What's wrong with editorialmanager (and/or Firefox) that this kind of thing happens? Do other browsers do a better job with this? (Otherwise I really like my Firefox though.)

Maybe better to ask at the Web Apps stack.

I talked to my local IT department for the same issue. Apparently there is no solution to this.

Mozilla decided long ago to not do this as it would likely break the password manager on more sites than it would help. Using a browser plug in for a separate password manager with autofill and more detailed URL filtering functionality is probably the easiest option for these sites.


text:
Using acquaintance for admission in Ph.D
I am a Ph.D. student at an institute in maths department. This year my brother also has applied for Ph.D. in the same institute in Civil engineering department. Now he has to face a written test first to get qualified for the interview. The syllabus of test is given on the website but no information about exam styles or paper pattern is provided. My brother has told me to ask the professors about the paper pattern. Personally I do not think it is a good idea because this way my brother will get advantage over others and I am also worried about my impression on the professors. So should I ask my professorship this? If not how should I convince my brother that it's not proper way?

I can't judge but it is possible that the question you want to ask might be open to anyone, including your brother, to ask directly. It depends on whether the format of the exam is intentionally held secret, which seems possible but implausible.
You could first ask your advisor whether it is proper to ask about the format. If you get a yes, then ask, or tell your brother to ask.
Some questions that could be asked simply aren't for various reasons.

It is not improper to ask for information.  Your brother does not gain an advantage by asking for information, either with a direct or indirect request.  Any applicant can ask for information.
It is up to the department that has the information to decide if it is proper to grant the request.

Except he did not ask the department. He asked relative in the department who is not on interview panel and who clearly has a conflict of interests.

@DmitrySavostyanov That's not true.  The asker is a PhD student who is not in the civil engineering department.  There is no conflict of interest for the asker because the asker's only interest is in helping the brother.  The asker, as a PhD student, has no interest in the proper testing of PhD students.


text:
Is it normal for students to ask for summary statistics of exam grades?
I'm a tutor for a university course that has just had a midterm exam marked and returned to the students. One of the students emailed me asking for summary statistics of the midterm exam: the maximum score, minimum score, and average score of the class. He says that in previous classes this information had been available, though I'm not exactly sure how he got it.
Is it normal for students to have this information? Am I obliged to give out this sort of summary data, or should I seek permission from the course coordinator first?

Many learning management systems (LMS) such as Instructure Canvas provide this information to students by default.  If you are using an LMS you might check to see whether the information is visible to students.

If you do end up releasing statistics, note that, for an exam the median is probably a better measure of central tendency than the mean.  And, if you release the stats, be sure to release them to everyone in the class.

You are probably not required, although it is usual practice if statistics are meaningful and anonymity can be maintained: there is no sense of reporting statistics if you are teaching 5 students who all know each another well.
In my larger classes, I would also distribute a  histogram for the grade distribution so that students could assess the general performance of the class: the disappointment of an underperformance or the elation of an overperformance is soften or sharpened when you can place your performance on the histogram.
Such reporting is something the instructor should do, not the tutor, although I realize that might be dependent on the culture of the institution.

As a tutor, yes, you should ask the course coordinator before releasing such information. And yes, it is pretty common for students to have access to limited statistical measures of exams. It isn't universal, but common enough.
Some professors would even post grades for exams, though not with the names of students attached. One prof in my memory would post them outside his office.
But, rules vary. You shouldn't post enough information that the grades of individuals can be found out, but summary statistics are fairly benign. Some students will get a sad, of course.
Whether you are obligated or not depends on the rules in place at your institution. So, yes, ask.

In my opinion, students should have access to their relative performance, but relative to the course standard, not relative to the grades of others. Grading, IMO, isn't a competitive game, but a measure of learning. I'm aware that others will contest that idea.


text:
What are some good techniques for reading a textbook?
I'm a newly admitted grad student for computer science. I've always had an extremely difficult time with taking notes, reading, and retaining information from reading. I find that I'm only able to read a few paragraphs or so before I start to unintentionally skip words or get distracted by my thoughts. Even while reading these paragraphs it does not really feel like I'm "reading". During my undergrad I was able to get by without reading and taking notes since there was a lot of video content. Unfortunately the topics being covered are only in book / paper form. I'm finding it extremely hard to keep up since it can take me up to a week to fully read a chapter.
So far I've tried making linked notes with obsidian. This has helped a lot with retaining information since the notes are in a short form. I've also tried skimming and looking at headers, subtext, and etc but, any time I try to really read on the topic it really becomes hard to focus. I've been trying to make some kind of framework to systematically read but, I've yet to find anything that really helps. I've always wanted to be a good reader so, I have tried to consistently read things daily but, I have not really improved. Any advice would be wonderful.

Welcome to academia stack exchange, Concerned Grad Student. Some previous questions connected to this, that you might find useful: How can I improve my ability to learn [from longform text[? and How to take notes when reading a textbook.

Have you ever explored whether you have some form of attention deficit disorder? If you do, then a medical professional can probably provide the best advice for managing it. (Note that you need not answer my question here.)

@Buffy that is a possibility. I'm just a little scared about the medications.

Talk to a professional. Explore the options.

up to a week to fully read a chapter

That's actually a pretty good rate. Reading textbooks is hard, and you just have to struggle with it.
A few pieces of advice:

To stay afloat in fast paced graduate courses, learn in a "big picture first" manner. Look at a map of the earth before studying a particular neighborhood in great detail. You have the rest of your life to master the details.
Try focusing on the problems or on programming projects that you can do that will force you to learn the relevant material.
Try reproducing the important ideas on paper with the book closed.

Some of what you say suggests the possibility of a form of attention deficit disorder. I'm not a medical professional, so don't treat this as any sort of diagnosis, but it would be useful to talk to a medical professional and get advice, if only to rule it out. Some universities will provide a way for you to get such advice.
Absent that (or maybe even if that is the case), taking notes as you read is a good way to capture things. In fact, writing them out by hand on paper (or index cards) is efficient and helpful. With index cards it is possible to carry around a a few, including a few blank cards. They are easy to reorganize, discard, update, etc. Don't write too much on any one card since you might want to add to them in the future.
See The Art of Changing the Brain by James E Zull for how such reinforcement is helpful.
Also, textbooks often come with exercises. The more such exercises you do, the more likely it is that the information in the book will be settled into your mind. Try to get feedback on your solutions also. Reinforcement and feedback are important to learning.

Underline, highlight or circle the important passages and, even more helpful, write notes to yourself in the margins summarizing the important points.

If you underline and such, it is even more valuable to do so on the second reading than on the first. I've seen books where nearly everything is highlighted/underlined.


text:
Baseline result is much better than state-of-the-art model
I am researching about Deep Learning based Intrusion Detection System. I found a paper on a well-known journal, which is considered as a state-of-the-art method in this research area, because it got many citations. In the paper, they proposed using Inception Resnet v4 to solve the problem and got the lowest error rate, compared to other studies.
I am developing a new method using their data pre-processing idea. First, I built a baseline, which is a very simple and shallow CNN. However, it produces a very good result, which is much better than the study using Inception Resnet (approximately 1-2%).
Note that: we are using the same dataset as well as data preprocessing as they described in the paper.
In addition, I am worry about that there maybe some mistakes while preprocessing data. Therefore, I re-implemented their proposed network and run it. The re-implemented results is not much different to the reported results in paper. So I think, my preprocessing step is correct.
The paper did not compare their results with a simple CNN model. They just compared with other architectures like LSTM, ANN, and basic machine learning models.
I am quite confused now. What should I do now?

I don't work in machine learning either, but my first guess would be did you overfit the data? For example did you split the data into a training set, a cross validation set, and a test set?

It sounds like OP is using the same data split as the original paper. In this case, I would recommend implementing one or more of the “basic ML models” from the paper and verifying that you can reproduce those numbers as well. It would be surprising if you got their number for, say, a random forest, but a much better number for a shallow NN. (But this seems like a case where content answers will be more helpful than process answers; consider moving to [datascience.SE]).

What should I do now? Publish.

Thanks all. I checked the training and validation error. There is no sign of overfitting, I think. Because the graphs of training loss and validation loss all decrease beautifully. I think, it is suitable to ask on Data Science as @cag51 suggested.

Ok, I see you have posted it there, so I will close this one. I also reiterate my advice above; that’s definitely what I would do next in your situation (though asking your advisor is the best move, if you have one). Good luck


text:
Does it look bad that I am leaving my unfunded PhD after 4 months to start a new funded PhD?
Long story short, I started this course because I was told I could apply for funding during my first year which would cover the remainder of the PhD. This has since turned out to not be the case, and I’m now applying to other institutions for funded places with the aim of withdrawing from my current course if I’m successful in securing a place with funding elsewhere to start in September. My current supervisor not only endorses this but has told me she will give me a stellar reference, as she knew me during my masters. I didn’t think to mention I was currently registered on a PhD course to these new universities because it didn’t seem to be relevant. I’ve been able to do very little work because I’ve been working to support myself with no funding, and I’m not leaving because I’ve done anything wrong. A friend has since raised the question that it may be considered an issue to my potential universities, and that I should have disclosed it. I didn’t because as far as I’m concerned I’m only really technically enrolled on the course due to errors in advice and through no fault of my own need to leave. I don’t want to deceive but I also don’t want to be appear less desirable as a candidate for something beyond my control.

I'm not sure what your friend thinks you should disclose, but no, it doesn't look bad that you are taking care of yourself. You will, as you suggest, probably be more productive in a funded position for reasons that will be obvious to everyone.
If you fail to disclose that you are currently in a program then that might be an issue, but it is unrelated to funding. A new program will probably require transcripts from all of your educational activities, though you may not have been in the program long enough to have generated any.
Your current supervisor writing you a letter will probably make the situation clear and if you are asked, be honest.
People leave one program for another quite frequently for lots of reasons. Lack of funding is probably one of the best reasons.


text:
Two positive reviews, One negative review - should I ignore the negative reviewer?
So I recently submitted an article to a journal and turns out, there were three reviewers involved. It was accepted with major edits. The editor said she is going to send it to the first two reviewers only. The first two reviewers were keen, provided almost the same set of reviews. They accepted with major edits. The third reviewer, however, rejected it and said a bunch of things that the first two did not point out.
Moving ahead, should I take into consideration what the third reviewer said? Or should I just work based on the comments of the first two since they the ones who are going to re-review it?

If the third reviewer provides negative feedbacks that are somewhat valid, then perhaps, at least, should you take those valid points and apply them to improve your work ?

Why would you not?

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/145158/paper-accepted-subject-to-minor-changes-should-i-comply-if-i-do-not-consider-t/145167

I guess the third reviewer signaled to the editor that they were not available to further review the paper. The editor told you about the two reviewers, probably to save you the time of engaging in a discussion with the third reviewer. Still, ignoring tout-court the reviewer comments looks very bad, you should at least address the critical points in your response to the editor.

The goal of peer review is not just to accept or reject the paper but to improve the quality of the paper, future work and the field in general.
Every review comment is an opportunity to improve the work and the paper and as a scientist and an author, you are supposed to take the responsibility of improving the quality of your paper according to the review comments and any other possible means.
It is not unusual that the reviewer does not understand the paper and thus his/her comments are not relevant. However, this should trigger the need to improve the readability and understandability of the paper. Furthermore, different reviews -in my opinion- should be considered a healthy phenomenon in academia as those reviewers are coming from different sub-communities and schools.
In summary, despite the third reviewer won't receive the revised version (which I find strange), it is highly recommended that you tackle and answer his/her comments. In addition to improving the quality of the paper, it gives a good impression to the reviewers and EiC.


text:
Withdrawal of Accepted Paper
So, I think that I'm in quite a mess here.
I recently submitted a paper to an IEEE conference and got my paper accepted. I submitted the camera-ready paper and the copyright form but weeks later, after the submission, I found out that all the authors including me were assigned the job of conducting exams for undergraduate students and as of such we were not allowed to decline. So I sent a withdrawal request to the conference organisers and got a reply today saying that our paper was removed from their 'list'. We had already registered the paper in the conference as well.
Now, since we had already submitted the copyright form but the work was yet to be presented in the conference and published in IEEE Xplore , is it possible for us to submit the same paper in another conference knowing that the paper has been removed from the list?

It is not clear to me what is the problem. Why the fact that you were assigned the job [...] lead to withdrawal of the paper? To answer your question: if the paper has been completely removed (and thus, will never be published) you can resubmit it.

Obviously your "university" does not value its research very much - I was often called to take invigilator's places for invigilation when they had to go away on official business - and I was happy I got paid they didn't... The university was happy as well... The value of the research was worth paying me...

I would write in to the conference, explaining your situation and that this is - as you far as you are concerned - a case of force majeure.
First, you could ask for the registration payment back if they still decide not to publish it (not many chances you'll get it, but if you ask in a professional and nonagressive way, who knows).
Second, you confirm with them (in writing) that your understanding is that this means the paper is now free and can be resubmitted elsewhere (i.e. a confirmation that the copyright transfer is void under the given circumstances).
They cannot get the money,  remove the paper from the proceedings and also expect you not to submit it somewhere else.


text:
Over reliant on supervisors?
I'm at the stage of my project whereby I need to perform some task that I have 0% background on originally. Hence I need to read papers and books to understand what I need to do.
So after burying myself in manuscripts, I got horribly confused and decided to email my supervisor some questions to help me understand. He has done the analysis before and is quite well versed in it.
Can this be seen as a bad thing? meaning I'm not independent? In the meantime, I'm worried that I understood wrong thing prior to start of the analysis and end up completely screwing things up and wasting time.

Isn't this, like, (almost) exactly the point of having an advisor?

Email your supervisor. This is perfectly fine, it's one of the reasons you have a supervisor.
Having to perform a task that you have no background in happens all the time in PhDs - it is a brilliant way to acquire more knowledge. But it is not useful or enjoyable to get stuck in one task for too long. So you want to figure out the quickest way to learn about this analysis.
For some people, learning about something new means immediately reading lots of literature on it. For other people (such as me and, by the sound of it, you), learning about something new means asking other people how they've done that. This could be your supervisor, it could be another student, or you can start by searching examples of that analysis on the internet.
Whenever I have to do a new task, I immediately search for people who already have experience with that. If that exact problem has already been solved, then I'd very much like to know since there is no sense in reinventing the wheel. Usually, however, they can help me a little bit but cannot solve the full problem for me. Finding the rest of the solution is how I show I can work independently.


text:
Has anyone had an offer rescinded after accepting?
A few days ago I asked when an offer is considered official (see here) and the consensus seemed to be that nothing is official until a contract is signed.
Therefore, I was wondering if anyone has had an offer rescinded after accepting it via email? Or why the "distrust"?
Please don't take this as a judgment, I am genuinely curious about how pervasive this is.

Occasional and not pervasive. Generally would require a serious cause. Changes in available funding. Misconduct by applicant discovered late. But not chaotic. Occasionally a complete department is eliminated, though hopefully with more notice.

https://theprofessorisin.com/2012/01/03/job-market-horror-stories-part-i-the-rescinded-offer/

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/03/13/lost-faculty-job-offer-raises-questions-about-negotiation-strategy

The offer is independent of the contract being signed. Signing a contract is accepting the offer. I can't imagine anyone accepting an offer via e-mail. How would they know all the details of what they are saying yes to? You need to see a complete contract for that.

I had a grad school colleague who accepted an offer from a corporate lab some months before they would defend their thesis, signed and everything. Some months went by, the company reorganized/changed priorities, and the group they were hired into was axed. They got a nice letter from the company explaining the situation, that there was not job to come to, as well as a check (in essence, severance pay). They restarted their job search and found another position. Wasn't during Covid though...

@Sverre Many of us in the US do not have a "signed work contract". I don't have a piece of paper that states that the offer I had accepted has actually been converted to an actual job contract. I do have an employee card and the university pays my salary every month, so I am legally an employee, but I don't have a piece of paper that says so.

@Sverre in some countries in Europe (Netherlands, Belgium, Germany (partially), Denmark), a lot of jobs in academia have standardized conditions (wages, vacation days, bonuses) so there is nothing to negotiate. All the details of standard contracts are publically available. And accepting an offer via email is also not uncommon.


text:
Priorities in a PhD: techniques vs topic
Trying to decide between PhD offers got me thinking about the goal of a PhD. I don't mean in a general sense (see here for an example), I mean about which area of research to prioritize. Of course, ideally, in a PhD you'd have an interesting topic AND you'd be using techniques you're interested in. However, if given the choice, I would choose to focus on mastering a technique I'm interested in (which can later be applied to other topics), rather than focus on a topic I'm interested in (where different techniques can be used later).
My thinking may be naive, but I believe if you gain the necessary experience with the techniques you're interested in, it will be more useful in the future than to specialize in a niche topic because changing topics after the PhD is easier/more common than finding a job using a technique you may be interested in but have limited experience with.
So I was wondering which made more of a difference in your experience: the techniques (lab skills, programming skills) you learned during the PhD or the (sub)topic you specialized in?

You should be looking for the thing that glimmers. I know that may seem a bit weird. But you should be looking for the thing that sparkles and engages you. Whether it's a topic or a method or a question, it should hold you rapt when you think about it. It should be something you would be working on in your spare time even if you were not able to do a PhD in it.
You are going to be spending some years on this. Usually at least three years, often more. And usually it means your future will at least to some extent be influenced by the thesis.
So the thing you do in your thesis should hold your attention without you having to do anything about it. Don't be especially concerned about whether you are concentrating on topic or technique. Look for the glimmering, the glistening, the things that fascinate you. If you can find those then you will not have to force yourself to work. You will just want to work because the harder you work the more fun it will be.

However, if given the choice, I would choose to focus on mastering a technique I'm interested in (which can later be applied to other topics), rather than focus on a topic I'm interested in (where different techniques can be used later).

You haven't named a field (which is fine), but in mine, certainly both of these types of PhD students exist, those that become experts in technique X and those that become expert in sub-field y. The grad students in my department are perhaps one-third "technique experts," with the faculty somewhat less.

My thinking may be naive, but I believe if you gain the necessary experience with the techniques you're interested in, it will be more useful in the future than to specialize in a niche topic because changing topics after the PhD is easier/more common than finding a job using a technique you may be interested in but have limited experience with.

I am not so sure - although this would of course differ by fields - and at any rate, I doubt the correlation is high enough to plan your PhD around (that is, the idea that the more of a technique-expert you are, the higher your chance of getting a job).
For me, when you say "technique," I think "statistical technique," and unless you are in a stats department, you aren't going to graduate without a substantial contribution to the field you're "in".
In summary, becoming an expert in applying technique X to field Y is just as valid and needed as becoming an expert in sub-field y, and I would echo Dan's advice to follow what you like best.

Most people learn best (and retain knowledge best) by doing
It is certainly valuable to develop your base skills in your field during a PhD candidature, and so the more you can develop your "techniques" in a broad range of areas the better.  Many people find that they are better able to develop their knowledge/skills/techniques (and retain this over the long-term) when this is done in the course of solving some applied problem of interest to them.  You might be different to this, so develop your knowledge/skills/techniques in whatever way suits you best.  In any case, you are certainly correct in your observation that developing your core skills is useful in the long-term, and possibly even more important than mastery of the particular topic on which you do your PhD dissertation.
In regard to what is required for a PhD program, one of the most important elements of research is that you are able to take a problem and then investigate that problem using whatever skills/methods/techniques are necessary.  This may involve learning new things and it may require a great deal of tenacity in dealing with topics and methods that are unfamiliar to you at first.  Consequently, there is a kind of "meta-learning" that occurs in a PhD candidature, where you learn to learn.  Of course, this is something that people outside a PhD also do, but in a PhD candidature and other academic research activities it is particularly pointed, since you come into new topics where you have to go to a high level of mastery in a relatively short time.
It is worth noting that the output of your PhD candidature will ideally be some research that is valuable in its own right and not merely an exercise to strengthen your skills.  The usual expectation in a PhD candidature is that you will produce some research that is sufficiently novel and valuable that it can be published in a scholarly journal, where it can contribute to the totality of scholarly knowledge of the world.  So while you are correct that your skill development may be more useful to you in the longer term, you are generally still required to produce something in your topic area that is valuable in its own right.  Most people learn and retain knowledge best when it is developed in the course of solving a problem of direct interest to them, so there is often a natural symbiosis between progression of a PhD dissertation in a topic area, and general development of knowledge/skills/techniques, and retention of that knowledge.


text:
Letter of Recommendation from Former Employer for Graduate School?
I'm a fourth year math student who's beginning to look into PhD schools. I worked at a math tutoring center for about three years, and I'm wondering whether it's a good idea to submit a letter of recommendation from my former employer along with those from my professors. I think that I can get one or two solid letters from my professors and one generic one, but I'm afraid that those won't be good enough.


text:
How can I convey my concerns about a University graduate program to the director without sounding like a know-it-all?
I'm in a graduate specialization program. It's expedited and it's a year long. There is an equivalent two-year Master's program for which I didn't apply. The classes are held twice a week in the evening. They are four to five hours long. There are Powerpoint presentations which the lecturers email the students a few days after the lectures.
(I was surprised the lecturers didn't provide us with their contact information (email) and so I had to contact the secretary of the program and ask her to email me their info).
Situation:
You'd think that some students would save some of their questions either for after the lecture or for a private communication via email.
There are a few students - usually the same ones - who constantly interrupt the lecturers to ask a question or to share an experience from their workplace. Most of the students work or have some sort of experience in the field of study.
I understand this is normal and expected to some extent. However, these questions lead to more questions, comments, chatting, arguing, even talking about politics with the lecturers, to the point that the lecturers can't finish on time. So far, none of the lecturers have complained about this. It seems that they want to accommodate us by finishing earlier and taking shorter breaks.
One of the lecturers had this to say:

if you guys had not been working in [field of study] and were just undergrads, you
  wouldn't have all these questions...blah blah....I'm
  just going to answer this last question and no more for tonight
  though, so we can move on with the lecture...blah blah...

Yeah, right. It turns out that the guy who asked that last question happened to ask another question later on, and the lecturer kept answering questions the entire time.
Long story short, the classroom feels more like a chat room, or a cafe and the lectures feel like listening to a bunch of people talking about their negative experiences, bitterness and problems they are facing in the field, even politics (unfortunately it's relevant).
(I'm not saying this has not been valuable to a degree. I have found out interesting things.)
However, my goal is to either email the director of the program or meet with him and talk to him about my concerns without telling him or the lecturers how to do their job even though it may seem that way.
I'd like to be able to suggest (if it's a good idea) that the lecturers:

either accepted questions towards the end,
or ask those same students, who ask multiple questions to save the rest of their questions for either after the lecture or for an email.

Perhaps it's me and perhaps this is how graduate level classes are but most of the time I leave the classroom having a headache because of the constant asking-answering (I also find it hard to concentrate).
Question:
How can I convey my concerns to the director of the program, without sounding like a know-it-all? Is it even my place to make suggestions? I also want to be polite.
Clarification:

I don't want to approach the students or openly complain about it during the lecture.
The director of the program, who has given one of the lectures, had a very casual style himself and spent most of the time answering questions and/or giving us professional insight about really controversial topics which may or may not have been relevant to the specific field of study. (He's supposed to give more scientifically relevant lectures later on).

I'm wondering, why did you propose to go to the director before talking first to the lecturers themselves? Have you already spoken to them?

@MarkBeadles I thought about it but since this happens on every single lecture, I thought I save myself time and go straight to the director of the program.

I think you should communicate the problem directly to the lecturer. That's a single conversation and it should lead to a prompt resolution. Communicating with the director wastes time, since the director has to relay the message to the lecturer. Any resolution via the director is likely to be slow, moreover, the lecturer might well be annoyed that they weren't consulted directly.

@user2768 So basically approach each lecturer separately is what you're saying.

@Tycho'sNose I hadn't noticed you were referring to lecturers. That said, no two lecturers are the same. So, presumably the issues exists in a lesser extent in some classes and is more problematic in other classes. I'd still recommend speaking to the lecturers directly. (Unless there are too many to make this feasible, then I'd suggest talking directly to the director.)


text:
Process of self-funding PhD in the UK
Some professors I emailed enquiring about a PhD (in CS/statistics) showed interest in my research idea and qualifications etc., but said they may not have the funding to take on a graduate student next year.
While my preference is of course for a funded PhD, I'm willing to take out a loan to self-fund if I don't get funding (either via the supervisor or research council funding).
So I have a few related questions:

When applying for a PhD, should I apply for funding, or will this hurt my chances of admission? (i.e. if I apply for funding but don't get it, will I be offered a self-funded position or be rejected entirely?)
Is it hard to get a loan for a PhD in the UK (for international students)? I would assume that student loans are fairly secure, but I've almost never seen student loans discussed in reference to self-funding e.g. here on stack exchange.
When would be the right time to start looking for student loans? I.e. how quickly can a student loan be secured, and when will I need to show proof of funding to the university?

You may not be eligible for a government loan as an international student, the requirements are available here https://www.gov.uk/doctoral-loan/eligibility I'd strongly recommend reading through the whole thing though.  After fees, there may not be that much to live on.  There may be private sector loans for this sort of thing, but I doubt the terms would be attractive (it would at least be a substantial risk).

I don't recommend self funded doctoral study unless  you are independently wealthy. But a  grant or loan in your own country (not UK) might be possible for some. It is probably better that you keep looking for a properly funded position, actually.

Sorry, but my intention in the above comment was to see if you can get funding from your own country for UK study - or, foreign study in general. It was not to suggest restricting you to universities in your own country. Some countries are happy to do this (or were, in any case).

First of all, I and many others in the field would caution against doing a loan-funded PhD in Computer Science. On the one hand, there is enough funding around (in general, not necessarily for any particular combination of student background/target university/preferred topic) that a promising candidate should have decent chances of getting some, on the other hand, paying for a PhD definitely isn't a good financial investment. If we consider paying for a PhD instead as luxury expenditure, financing it with a loan becomes questionable.
Details of how the application process will differ between universities. At mine, you either apply for a particular funding opportunity (and get either funding+admission or neither), or you apply directly for admission (and are responsible for your own funding). You could apply for multiple things with us in parallel, and this wouldnt count against you. Other universities (eg Cambridge) include some funding applications as part of overall admission, and you can get admission without funding from that process.
As pointed out by Dikran Marsupial, the rules for government-backed student loans are found here: https://gov.uk/doctoral-loan/eligibility As a non-resident, you are probably not eligible. For private loans, you might ask on https://money.stackexchange.com/, but I would guess that your chances with UK lenders are bad (if you just leave the country after getting your PhD, they'll struggle making you pay).

"there is enough funding around that a promising candidate should have decent chances of getting some" from my limited experience, it is very hard for non UK/EU (pre-brexit) students to get a funded PhD position in the UK.

@Andrea That's covered by the remark in the parenthesis. "A UK university" is a significant restriction on what target universities one is considering.

I understand that the remark could also cover the specific instance. But if the question is "I'm an international student in the UK, how do I fund my PhD?", I don't think that answering "You don't need to self fund if you're good enough" is correct nor helpful, if that doesn't apply to OP's case.


text:
What would be the best search method to conduct a literature review on anatomical variations?
I'm currently conducting a literature review into anatomical variations of the portal vein. I'm using OVID and just wanted to check whether this is an efficient search strategy.
This is the Search Strategy:

Portal Vein*.mp.
Portal System*.mp.
1 OR 2
Anatom*.mp.
variat* .mp
variant* .mp
5 OR 6
3 AND 4 AND 7

To break it down: I used 1 and 2 as a way to capture any mention of the Portal Vein (or more general mentions of the Portal System)
Then 4+5+6 are to capture any way that an anatomical variant could be mentioned, and 7 and 8 summate this.
(mp = mentioned anywhere)
Is this an efficient search strategy? I fear that I may accidentally be missing relevant articles using the search strategy, although the number of articles that has been turned up is quite high. Are there any unnecessary clauses?

Go to your local research librarian and work with them - they know more tricks of the trade than you could imagine.


text:
Communication change from pre-application to post-application for admission
I reached out to a contact listed on a department graduate page at a university two Fridays ago, expressing my interest in the program and asking questions. I was amazed that not only did he reply two days later on Sunday, but his answers were very detailed, and he took the time to provide a lot of information. We communicated three more times that same Sunday and offered very lengthy responses again. His answers seemed to make me think he was very interested in my application and encouraged me to apply.
I emailed the following day again to let him know I was going to apply, to which I submitted my application on 02/28. On 03/01, I emailed him and a department administrator (that he had included in one of his earlier responses should I have questions about the application process) giving them an update on one of my application pieces. There was no question in the email, so I didn't expect a response, and as such, I did not receive one.
On 03/07, I emailed the department administrator with another update on a piece to the application. I asked if he had everything for my application to be reviewed or if they needed official scores for something to begin the review process since they had my unofficial scores. I have not heard back.
Yesterday I emailed the department head and asked the same question about scores, and I have not heard back.
The status of the application is shown as "recommended for assessment", which is the third step in the application process. The fourth step goes to the Graduate Admissions for final review before a decision is made.
My thinking is since I have not heard any responses since I applied on 02/28, they reviewed my application and have lost interest in me. Am I overthinking this, assuming that the change in communication means I won't be accepted into the program, or is there some weight to that?

Yes, you are probably overthinking. Admin process takes time. There are others in the pool as well. You will hear when there is something to tell you.

Admissions processes go through several stages between submission and acceptance. I would suggest letting the process take its course and not overthinking responses or nonresponses for inquiries.
For instance, here is a typical admissions process for a graduate school:

the department will accept materials, either on a rolling basis or until a specific deadline
a departmental committee does an initial review of applications
if necessary, the committee sets up further reviews - requests for more materials, interviews, a second level of review - whatever their internal process is
tentative selections are approved by higher ups, including a director of graduate studies, a department chair, a vice president or dean of the graduate school, or the relevant department for fellowships or financial aid
the school prepares offers and sends them out to people selected first
the school then works down a waiting list, sending offers as they become available

These steps will vary from school to school and are US-centric, but the general point is that multiple points of approval are typical. It is common to wait weeks if not a couple of months before hearing more.
Within that context, it's not surprising that the department head hasn't written back. They probably have to handle all the usual departmental business as well as inquiries from 100+ applicants. They're likely too busy to write or they're waiting for the process to proceed before they can answer. Just give them space.


text:
Improving ethics in Theoretical Physics - looking for an association
I am a postdoc doing Theoretical Physics in Europe, and I would like to know what a person at this stage in his/her career can do to actively promote ethical standards in its community. Precisely, is there any association in Europe for postdocs that are interested in this and works on it? The reason behind my request is the desire to do more for my present and future colleagues and it is rooted in my personal experience. Despite my young career, which so far has been judged as very successful by my peers, I have been exposed for years during my PhD to constant and several unethical dynamics by my supervisor and close colleagues. For example, while working together, I have been asked on several works not to reference the equations we were using and to present them as originals; I have been asked to lie during talks and not to cite the colleagues we should have cited only because they were judged as "not close"; etc... The list could continue. The main issue is that this was not the act of a single person, but the main ethic of the group I was working with. A group, which has to be said, is recognised as extremely influential and respected by the scientific community. To be honest, it felt as if I was working at Theranos, a nightmare for a young researcher full of hope. I have tried in good faith to oppose these dynamics during my PhD, but as a result, I have found myself isolated and tagged as "difficult". There are even colleagues that I have met for the first time, who simply judged me based on these rumours and treated me as someone to avoid. This hasn't stopped me from going forward and keep up with my research but my reputation is getting hurt by the words of these people and the objective unfairness of this situation is getting difficult to deal with. I feel I have to do something because these dynamics could affect everyone and can have the harmful effects of damaging or even ruining the career of young researchers. It would be extremely helpful if any of you could give me any advice on the best way to react. My sincere hope is that nobody else will have to go through what I have been through, and that's why I feel I need to do something about it. Moving on, pretending that nothing happened, possibly exposing new people to the same fate...I can't do it. So here is again my question: are you aware of any association in Europe for postdocs in physics that are interested in ethical issues and works on it?

Welcome to Academia.SE. I recommend that you [edit] your post to introduce paragraph breaks. You may also want to review our policy on shopping questions: we can't recommend particular organizations (though there's likely a question here somewhere that we can answer).

I'd guess most professional societies have groups that deal with ethical issues in the field.

In case you're not doing this already, you may want to keep personal records with full details of some of these incidents. For example, in the case of references to equations not being included -- specific individuals communicated with and the dates of communication, mode of communication (email, in person, etc.), paper being worked on in which the equations appear, papers/books which you think should be cited but were told not to cite, etc. This is simply because over time you'll forget things or not have the desire to fully fill in the details. Details like this might be important later.

Regarding my previous comment, I strongly advise you to keep all these details to yourself to prevent burning bridges. I'm simply suggesting that you have access to most any detail or nuance that you might be challenged with if, for some reason at a later time, you wind up having to defend yourself. Ideally this would never happen, and you simply diplomatically distance yourself from the problematic researchers and don't look back.

@DaveLRenfro OP doesn't want to just distance him/herself from them and not look back: "Moving on, pretending that nothing happened, possibly exposing new people to the same fate...I can't do it."


text:
How can someone build their early-stage career without help from their advisor?
A PhD student I know is having trouble with their academic advisor.  Their advisor is very hands-off (to the level of being neglectful) and has a very sink-or-swim mentoring style. To be clear, the advisor gives next to no mentoring advice and is unwilling to help their students with anything that doesn't directly benefit the advisor (e.g., a paper where the advisor is a co-author) or is something that otherwise of direct interest to them (i.e. might lead to a paper for the advisor). This leads to a recurring problem in the lab where students graduate...and they don't have the skills necessary to survive on their own in academia. The student has been with their advisor for their undergraduate, Master’s and now their PhD (which feels rough – I was always urged myself to attend different programs for each of these steps, not work with the same advisor).
To top things off, the advisor has very narrow research interests and has a very rigid idea of how they want things done, so students are often trained to work on very specialized topics that don't lend themselves to further study and the advisor isn't willing to change projects if the initial concept doesn't work out. The advisor is not open to novel ideas or avenues of research unless the advisor came up with it. The advisor doesn't do anything that feels illegal they just...provide the bare minimum of assistance. This has led in the past to students burning out or quitting without completing their projects, including PhD projects.
The student is starting to feel that they aren't going to get their lab environment to change, and it's not worth burning their academic bridges, so the best thing to do is finish their degree and get out. On the side, they’ve been working on a number of smaller projects in the hopes of broadening their research interests and experience in the hope that once they graduate they will not be stuck in the hyper-specialized field their advisor is in, which has very limited opportunities for funding and advancement.
In this process however, the student has run into a number of problems essentially trying to build their career on their own:

The advisor has done next to no work in helping the student make connections in the field or help them identify job/grant opportunities, etc. The advisor has been using their students to perform research, write papers, and nothing else. The student has tried to make academic contacts on their own, but without the advisor introducing them most researchers and even most grad students won't talk to them.

The student is trying to circumvent some of these issues by working on small papers on their own, to try and build up a healthy CV. However, to complete the research they need grant money, but most of the available small grants for graduate students require letters-of-recommendation from their advisor. Similarly, research in our field may require visiting archives, libraries or museum collections that one needs advisor recommendations to get access to research material, which the student often cannot get from their advisor (Again, if it doesn’t track into an output for the advisor, the advisor doesn’t care).

The student is in a position where they cannot easily leave the lab group. The student especially cannot afford to burn bridges, in our field if any student parts from a lab under unusual circumstances it is almost immediately assumed the student is damaged goods. The student has been in the same lab group for an undergraduate and a graduate degree; leaving now is challenging at best.

The student has tried to work out the matter with their advisor and made no progress. They also tried to let other faculty at the university know and made no progress. The department basically knows what is going on but doesn't want to say anything. Part of this is because while this lab's atmosphere isn't healthy, the advisor hasn't done anything illegal or overtly abusive.

I've been providing a sounding board to this student for years but even I find this quandary complicated. I realize there's not much I can do on my end besides be supportive and provide what little help I can, but I'm more wondering what someone should even do in these kinds of situations. How exactly does one build a career when they can’t depend on assistance from their advisor yet can’t simply go somewhere else?

How exactly does one build a career when they can’t depend on assistance from their advisor yet can’t simply go somewhere else?

I hate to be pessimistic, but maybe it just can’t be done? The situation you’re describing seems almost maximally stacked to ensure the student failing. Well, it’s hard enough to build a successful academic career even under the most favorable circumstances — many who try even that will fail. Why would you think that there is some trick that makes it possible to do under the least favorable circumstances?
If the student wants to be successful, they need to find a way to put themselves in a position that’s conducive to success. Being in this lab, under this advisor, sounds like the opposite of such a position. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that’s the picture I’m seeing here. And best of luck to the student.

I am leaving a very similar situation. The way I got out was elevating the topic to the director of the graduate program. Even better I did it in a way that what I told the director was seen by the advisor. Nothing bad, just the pure truth about lack of direction to progress, etc. We three met and they simulated that I would be looking for a different advisor. At the end, the one advisor I identified would not take me either (once I showed he would not be able to profit from me as the previous one and that he would actually have to give a serious thesis topic). So my old advisor took me back, provided a silly thesis topic which I have finished.
Ultimately, this kind of people won't do anything if it's not in their benefit. But it's in their benefit that you graduate and it's in their benefit that you don't talk openly about their behavior.
The second key thing is to build "any" connection outside of that lab and university. I've heard stories by very top guys in my field on how they actually found their thesis topic on an internship, came back, defended thesis, then came back to the same internship place and built their career from there. In my case, I have previous education location were they know me. But this does not apply to your mentee.
A last piece of advice that worked well in my case. As Dan Romik puts it, your mentee won't get much out of his advisor. Following my strategy he will get a thesis topic to get out. This means the advisor knows something about the topic (to get rid of the student). Publishing a couple of papers on the topic will show something that it's ultimately more important in a career: people know that your mentee now knows a bit of what his advisor knows. Since knowledge is power it matters little whether he got that knowledge from a good and wise advisor or from an idiot.
One thing my mentor told me that helped me a lot (in particular in pasting the name of the advisor on my papers) was, do you think people in your field don't know how your advisor works? And indeed, of course they know.