text:
PhD in mathematical physics online
Do you think it's possible that in the future there will be programmes for PhD in mathematical physics all online?
As I see courses being offered online, I assume if academia is to progress, this is bound to occur.
I once graded people's HWs offline, and nowadays I am grading their work through my PC.
Though progress is rather slow in academia... :-)
I also took an exam through Zoom... what an experience!

Anything is possible, and the future has a long time span, so yes, it is possible in some version of the future. It is unlikely, though, on any timeline that might be useful for someone at the brink of doctoral study.
The experience with online education in general during the COVID crisis has not been very happy. I doubt that many people are "yearning" for that to continue. Of course, that is a result of their training and background. It could be different by the year 2424.
In principle, it might be easier for doctoral study than at other levels, but perhaps not so much for US degrees that normally depend on advanced coursework and comprehensive exams. So, a lot might need to change here. In other places it might be more possible if the entire program is research based and doesn't require lab work or experimentation. People do remote collaborative research in some fields, of course, and that could be extended to doctoral study.
Theoretical physics in general and mathematical physics is probably a decent candidate for such a program, if the kinks could be worked out and the necessary marshaling of remote sources. Lab based physics probably is not so easy. Einstein, I remember did quite well with only physical mail for communication (ah, those were the days).
But, a student might have to be content with less guidance under such a system. That would disadvantage a lot of students who need that timely guidance.
In the short term, if someone were able to get such a degree they might have problems in the job market since there is a lot of experiences they might have missed, such as an opportunity to teach. So, a mixed system might be worse than one with only online study.

Caveat: There might even be such a program now, though I wouldn't have a way to know. I would be skeptical of its quality, however, and would ask serious questions of the proposer if I had to evaluate such.

notice the title of my question PhD in Mathematical Physics, no need for labs only brains. :-)

Always in short supply.

"Of course, that is a result of their training and background." -- Not only. There is actual evidence that as a teaching strategy, Zoom-only classes don't work particularly well as far as "learning" is concerned. It isn't just a personal preference to go back to in-person teaching.

Under the traditional PhD model e.g. in Germany, you can do a PhD without ever showing up at the university or talking to anyone at the university, except for the defense of the thesis.
So yes, it is possible.
Whether this is desirable is an entirely different question.

Thanks for information.  In matter of fact, I have an interest in pursuing traditional PhD in Germany.  I learned so far is that it is better to contact professor first before starting thesis.   I am still trying to find professor.  Although I do not speak German but I do have European Citizenship.

do you have experience with it?  Is it popular in all German universities?

In the natural sciences, it is almost non-existent. I am not sure about humanities, I think it is a bit more common there. Nevertheless, what I wrote in the answer is the most extreme case: Typically, you would first contact someone, agree that they would be the ones taking the role of the supervisor (=examiner) of the thesis, and then work on it. (You are not entitled to just hand in a thesis.) In addition, note that this is becoming less common (I wrote "traditional PhD model"), and often now there are PhD schools, you have to take courses, get admitted (which means getting an advisor) etc

Sounds like a bad news for me.  Actually I am looking for PhD in physics.  When you mentioned " you are not entitled to just hand in a thesis" does that means that I have to take courses, be there, etc.....?

@Aschoolar No, I meant that even in the "old" model, you still needed some professor who would be willing to act as a main examiner of the thesis (i.e., "PhD supervisor", though no actual supervision might have happened). You can't just show up and force the department to accept your thesis. And yes, by the new and more and more common, you have to earn a certain number of credits. Except for that, "being there" is not a condition.

Thank you for answering my questions and clarifying some things.

It depends what you mean by "on line."
Some classes have been video-recorded and those vids are available on line, often for free or at least very cheap. Probably it won't be the case that just consuming recorded information will ever get you a degree. At least, not in the next few years. There will need to be personal interaction with a prof and other co-students and other people.
There will very likely be more interaction done remotely. People were pushed strongly into due to COVID, and they got a taste for it. And various software products to assist with remote work have significantly improved.
In the other direction, it's expensive to provide office space and classrooms. Even for grad students that get stacked 4 or 6 or 8 to a room. And letting people access buildings requires services like security and maintenance and cleaning and so on. Universities would be glad not to have to pay for that.
Also, more and more of the reference material is available digitally. These days a text book or journal in digital is usually cheaper. And it's a lot easier to carry.
So remote work will probably be a big part of life in the future.
There will probably also be pressure for in-person at least some of the time. So far, the on-line stuff is still a narrow window, at least for setups that ordinary people can afford and accommodate. An in person interaction is still different in character.
A friend of a friend was telling me about a "remote conference room" setup. At the end of the conference table there is a very-big-screen high-def computer screen. It's like 8 to 10 feet long. And there are really good cameras at each end. It does compression and such and goes over regular WIFI internet. So you sit at the conference table and the entire end of the table looks like the other attendees are just at the other end of the room. The problem is, it's expensive hardware and you have to buy a subscription. Most uni students couldn't afford it.
The relationship with your prof and other people in the uni is an important part of an advanced degree. It's a good thing to have for an undergrad degree also. But for a PhD it's vital. You are expected to be a contributing member of the school. You are supposed to interact with other students, your prof and other profs, post-docs, and other people. It is possible to do this to some extent remotely, but it's a lot harder.
Just as one example, going out for lunch, or a beer, or whatever, was a big part of these interactions for me. Quite often the grad students would all head to the same bar on a Friday, and many good discussions were had. There's a bar in Toronto called The El Mocambo. During my PhD, the downstairs at the ElMo was where we'd hang. And between sets of some local band we'd argue about the latest homework sets, discuss what people were doing for research, and what we were going to do after we graduated. The current state of remote interactions could never have produced this kind of thing.
So I'm going to suppose that completely remote degrees will be quite rare, especially at the graduate degree level. At least for the near future. If the remote interaction tools are improved this could start to change.


text:
What sentence is suitable for thanking a professor?
I am looking for a PhD position. Sometimes professors give me information about their projects via emails. How can I thank them for their explanation in a polite way, show my interest and impress them?

Hint: professors are people too. You can thank them just like thanking anyone else. Your email may go something like this:

Dear Professor X,
Thank you for the information about your PhD project. I look forward to submitting my formal application to your department.
Best wishes,
maryam

I am not  an native English speaker, I fear that I express my gratitude in informal way, that's why I asked such a question.

Natalie Hogg's answer is spot-on. I want to address a further aspect of the question:

How can I thank them for their explanation in a polite way, show my interest and impress them?

While impressing your potential advisor is certainly a desirable goal, the chances of impressing a professor with a thank-you e-mail are close to zero. A professor is more likely to by impressed by an applicant if the application itself is impressive, for example, because it includes convincing arguments why your particular skills and experiences will help their work group produce good research.

maybe I should have asked my question in a different way,
I wanted to thank for her(professor) explanation, and then express my interest to her project. as, I am not a native English speaker, I am look for the best sentences that show my interest and gratitude.

@maryam You are possibly overthinking this. Politeness is good, but a polite thank-you e-mail will not significantly change the professor's attitude towards you. It would be more productive to focus on preparing strong applications.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Rejecting a PhD offer after having accepted it. Advice?
I have accepted a PhD offer from a very good university to do a project very close to my interests. I have told the project supervisor I accept it. In the meanwhile I have managed to secure a PhD offer from another 2 universities much better in world rankings and with better research groups and better faculty. Additionally these 2 universities do research exactly on what I want to devote my PhD research.
My only commitment to the first university is a mail confirming I accept. Nothing else. I understand declining the offer after already having accepted it is quite dishonest but it is a huge decision that will affect my future in a very significant level.
I would like your opinion and I would also like to ask for possible consequences of such an action. As far a postdocs concerned, in the first university there is no chance I ever get a postdoc since they do not actually do research on my area (except for the prospective supervisor and even he not as much).
UPDATE
I have decided to do as I was afraid to. I have decided to choose a different university than the first one that I have already accepted the offer. My offer acceptance included:

An online "I accept" statement.
An e-mail I sent stating "I accept the scholarship and this University is my first option"

I do not have any legal commitments since I have not signed anything. The supervisor of the first university though is really nice to me and continuously was sending me mails. How do I very nicely tell her I will not be joining in the end? Additionally the place I will go in the end will be for research in Mathematics and not Physics. Can I use this as a part of a sensical excuse?
WHAT I HAVE CHOSEN AND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES WERE
I think that I should let people, especially other beginning grad students know what happened with my case. I have chosen to nicely tell the first university I got accepted that I will not be attending and will not be pursuing a PhD there since I decided I have different research interests (which is true). I had applied there in the first place since I was not sure what I wanted to do and because it was a nice program. Despite that, I got an offer from a World top university to work on 100% my research interests. I explained this to them, the first uni, and they happily let me go and wished me good luck, especially the supervisor who faught a lot secure me funding. I was lucky.

I know of a person who accepted an offer, and never showed up, never responded to emails etc. He is now a professor at a top University doing good work. However, despite all this, he will not be invited to the University he snubbed to give a talk any time soon and he in some circles has a very bad name because of his behavior. As long as you let them know now there probably won't be any problems. However, if you wait until after the deadline for acceptance or you simply do not show up, you may be forever hated by some potentially powerful people in your field.

I inform to send them a very nice and apologetic e-mail after I make my decision. The problem is that I will do this a few days after I had already told them I will accept the offer. I do not plan to just not reply or not show up. Despite that I am still "dishonest" since I have already said yes to them.

Did you continue to pursue those other PhD positions after accepting the first? If so, I am worried about your ethics. If not then I am with the above telling you to apologies be polite and be frank.

No, I had applied to all institutions beforehand. As far as the ethics, I understand it. Additionally, the second institution I want to join instead of the first one is not only much bigger and more significant but I would also be doing 100% the research I want, unlike the first one where I would not do quite what I want.

This is a great story - I have just read this now in 2017. I am curious to what your situation is now and if you have made the right choice.

@CloudChem I finally chose to go to the good, famous institution and work with a perfect supervisor. I also have had the chance, to meet some of the most important scientists of our times, actually currently collaborating with one of them. I made the right choice. I am happy.

I did that once. Deposit is lost. That's it.

I am assuming you are going to go to the better place, so asking our opinion is rhetorical.
The consequences depend on the people at the university:  if they are reasonable folks, they should understand.  But you never know.
You should do your best to make it as painless as possible FOR THEM.  My suggestion is that you should decide where you want to go, and accept there. And AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, send a very very nice and very very apologetic letter to the person you had said yes to, explaining that you have decided to go elsewhere.  The key here is "as soon as possible" so they have the opportunity to offer acceptance to someone else — that will lessen any annoyance they have.

Thanks a lot. Yes, obviously I will go to what I consider better place but I want to make sure that I will have no legal or academic consequences.

I can't speak to legal consequences (I'm no lawyer; and I don't know exactly what you replied to or what the expectations are at that school).  There could be negative consequences, esp if for some reason this person you are changing your mind on gets mad.  But, speaking only for myself, I wouldn't hold it against you.  If you never told us and just didn't show up, or waited till after the acceptance deadline and then changed your mind, we'd be more annoyed.  But some people hold grudges.  So, who knows.

Hi again. Exactly this is the problem. I have accepted already there and I will change my mind after the deadline.

Try to be as nice and apologetic as possible.  Do it asap if you know you are going to!

Again thanks a lot. I appreciate your advice.

Slight typo, “Lesson” should be “Lessen”. I’d edit myself but can’t dream up enough changes to satisfy the validator.

Most US universities with serious graduate programs are signatories to the Council of Graduate Schools Resolution Regarding Graduate Scholars, Fellows, Trainees and Assistants, which pertains to situtations in which graduate acceptance comes with an offer of TA and/or RA support. This resolution explicitly allows students to retract acceptances made prior to April 15th, but not after April 15th:

In those instances in which a student accepts an offer before April 15, and subsequently
  desires to withdraw that acceptance, the student may submit in writing a resignation of the appointment at any time
  through April 15. However, an acceptance given or left in force after April 15 commits the student not to accept another offer
  without first obtaining a written release from the institution to which a commitment has been made.

This is not to say that programs will be happy to hear that you have retracted your acceptance, only that you have every right to do so as long as you do this before April 15th.

This does not apply to me since all my institutions are in the UK. Any help with this?

@Marion Unfortunately, I do not know about the conventions or regulations in the UK.

Note that this resolution was revised in ~2020; these days, you must only "inform" program A that you will not be attending; "release letters" are not a thing anymore.

Of course this a tremendous decision, and one that will likely stay with you for the rest of your life. Trust me, while the folks at this institution are likely of a particular kind of 'good' sort, I would bet a boatload of money that each of the committee members that accepted you would likely do what was best for them should they have ever found themselves in your shoes. The worst possible scenario is that if you've paid some sort of deposit, you will likely not see this returned. Also, in the future, should you seek employment at this institution, you might find yourself in a precarious situation should one of these committee members find themselves on a search committee for a position you're interested in (unlikely). Perhaps the most disheartening impact will be felt by way of having to explain to those you might have already told that you'd be attending this particular institution about your change of mind. Rest assured, they will not judge you, and if they are in fact true friends, family, or kin, they'll unconditionally support your decision. Hope this helps..

Hello jayburg, yes it helps a lot. I have assumed all the above as well and since I will not be seeking employment at that institution (since it does not do research on what I want to work on) it is highly unlikely to seek employment there after my PhD (for postdoc) or for a higher position. I will have to send a very apologetic letter and hopefully they will not be very mad.

By the way, they made me state in my acceptance of the scholarship the following: I do accept the scholarship as my first choice and I do not have any other scholarships from other places". I stated this in an e-mail. Is it possible to have any consequences if in the end I choose a different place?

You are worrying too much. No one will remember you in a year's time.

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

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


text:
Is it appropriate to say "hi" to a professor in email?
There is a professor with whom I've taken two courses so far, and who has also agreed to write me a reference letter for graduate school when I complete my undergraduate program. I usually write to all professors "Dear Prof. [...]" or "Hello Prof. [...]", but some professors reply to me as "Hi [...]", which is OK. However, I'm wondering if it is also okay to reply "Hi Prof. [...]" in North America?

Related, but not quite the same: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/48284/how-do-junior-faculty-in-the-u-s-normally-address-senior-faculty-in-emails

This depends on both the culture and the professor I guess. In some places I have heard that you are expected to address rather formally and sometimes a long string of all their formal titles (in the correct order of priority) even. As long as you don't stop awkwardly overthinking how to actually spell profffesssor it should be fine.

In my completely unscientifically verified and possibly unjustified opinion: no, do not do this. Being formal in your greeting costs nothing whereas being unnecessarily informal could indeed upset your professor. Personally I wouldn't give anything less than a "Hello" to any teacher at any level of education.

"Hi Prof. [...]" certainly sounds awkward, mixing an informal salute and a formal title. If anything, "Hi" begs for "Hi, Doc!".

It also depends on the culture of your department and your field. In my field, computer science, in North America, it's quite normal to address a professor by first name once you know each other pretty well.

I've always used Hi in emails, because "Dear" to me always has carried the connotation of "My Dear" indicating affection. And "To" seems too flat.

Why we do not just say "Dear Professor,"?

@zdm That is sometimes a little too formal.

I think it is very situational. I have worked with many American professors from Ivy schools who went on a first-name basis with all their grad students (not even, "Hi John", but "John, ..." kind of mails).

In this type of situation I always take the lead from the person I am writing to if they are more senior than me. This means that I start off the conversation using "Dear Professor X Y" and only switch to using "Hi X" once they do.
I use the same rule of thumb for working out when to switch from using titles and surnames to first names. In most email communications I find this is normally after only one or two emails.
In other words, formality and respect are nice, but so is being friendly and saying hi.
Note: academic cultures do vary, and I am basing this on my experiences in the UK and EU. My impression is that in the USA there is a greater social distance between students and academics and therefore more formality is expected.

The interesting thing is that my professor has been writing "Hi [...]" to me in his emails, but when I switched to writing "Hi Prof. [...]" instead of "Hello Prof. [...]", he wrote in his subsequent email "Dear [...]", which I interpreted as a signal that I should be more formal to him.

I would be rather annoyed if a student, who I addressed by first name in an e-mail, started addressing me by my first name.  To make this clear, I always sign my messages to students with my first and last name.  (Using a title for oneself is gauche.)

@Buzz you would be annoyed if a student addressed you the same way you address them?

I didn't address him by first name, I just said "Hi Prof. [his_lastname]" instead of "Hello Prof. [his_lastname]".

@sequence he probably writes 100s of emails a day. I wouldn't read too much into it. As mentioned in another answer, you could always just ask him if he minds how you address him.

@sequence I would bet that that switch, from Hi to Dear, was just coincidence.

@sequence - just ask him whether he has a preference.  astronat, I suggest you remove the last sentence.  It's not needed.  Your answer is fine for all countries, because you're suggesting taking one's cue from the other person.

It's also completely acceptable to leave off the greeting all together and just start with "Professor X,"

Similarly, I take the lead from the person's signature of their last email to me.
If it's "Regards, John Smith" (formal and includes last name), then I start with Dear Dr Smith. If it's "Cheers, John" (informal and only first name), I start with "Hi John" or "Hello John". I am also UK based.

very much this I think. In both of the academic dept's I've been part of, one humanities, one engineering, there were staff who seemed to want formal business-like communication, and staff who very quickly wanted to communicate on first name terms. And where on that spectrum someone fell did not seem age or class dependent. Follow their lead. If unsure, be formal. If you misstep, don't worry too badly.

It seems that in Canada academic relationships are considerably more formal than in the UK or the US. Based on what I've read in this thread, opinions of professors vary on a wide scale: some think that "Hi Prof. X" is awkward, some think it is too informal, and yet some others think that it is okay and nothing to care about. So at this stage I cannot make a definitive conclusion. I can so far deduce that it is best to remain more formal than more informal, unless explicitly told to be more informal. Signals to switch to less formal mode should be ignored due to possible misinterpretation.

"Hi" is a standard greeting in the United States, regardless of setting, for both email and verbal conversation.
Don't over think this. Greet the professor like a fellow human.

I consider "Hi" more of a verbal greeting, which is fine in most situations.  It's too informal a greeting line for most email communication.

@ScottSeidman I've always used it in emails, at companies and in schools, without problem, as well as received it. "Dear" comes across so stilted and fake to me.

http://insidetech.monster.com/benefits/articles/9241-the-best-email-greetings-and-sign-offs -- "Etiquette experts agree that informal greetings such as “Hey there,” “What’s up,” or “Hi” have no place in business communications. They are simply too chatty and colloquial, and give the impression that the writer doesn’t understand what’s appropriate and what’s not."  I consider the vast majority of communication with my students to be business communications.

@ScottSeidman There is no reference given for that claim. Ironically, it is written like an informal blog piece so I wouldn't take it seriously.

"21.     Know your audience. Your e-mail greeting and sign-off should be consistent with the level of respect and formality of the person you're communicating with. Also, write for the person who will be reading it - if they tend to be very polite and formal, write in that language. The same goes for a receiver who tends to be more informal and relaxed. --Lindsey Pollak, career and workplace expert, e-mail etiquette consultant, and author of Getting From College to Career"  -  https://www.inc.com/guides/2010/06/email-etiquette.html

Seriously, inappropriate familiarity in emails with students is a conversation I've had many times with many faculty members.

@ScottSeidman I agree with that article. I have yet to find an instance in my life where saying "Hi" doesn't fit #21. When I was an instructor I received plenty of underformal emails, but I would never ever consider "Hi" in that category.

@ScottSeidman "I consider the vast majority of communication with my students to be business communications." What business would that be?

@DavidRicherby -- that's education

@ScottSeidman "Business communications" is usually taken to be using the "commercial enterprise" definition of "business", not the "I was going about my business" sense.

@DavidRicherby -- "business" in the sense of "business formal attire" on an invitation.  In fact, addressing a letter to a prof you have no friendly relationship with with "Hi Dr. X" is a little bit like showing up to a business casual event in dress down Friday clothes.  It may or may not get noticed, but its not great if it does.

@ScottSeidman And, if I invite you to wear "business formal attire", would you turn up in your academical robes and hood because your business is education? No, you'd turn up in a suit and tie because "business formal attire" also refers to commercial enterprise, not to "going about one's business" business. And, while I do agree that, if somebody reacts at all to an informal greeting it's much more likely to be a negative reaction than a positive one, the same is true for a formal greeting!

@DavidRicherby -- I prefer to be addressed as "HerrProfessorDoktor" ;)

@ScottSeidman I'd be happy to oblige but the @ syntax doesn't support titles!

@ScottSeidman As a native English speaker in the US who has taught college classes for years, it has never once occurred to me that "Hi" is too informal for any context short of giving a eulogy. I've also never heard of an academic who considered what s/he did to be "business," or who wanted to apply business standards to his/her interactions with students and colleagues.
On the other hand, I did know a professor who introduced himself to his students by his first name, and then got angry when they addressed him by his first name, so I guess nothing should surprise me in this respect now.

@MikeBenfield -- I'm actually fairly approachable, and spend many hours per week in hands-on exercises at the bench with my undergrads, on a first name basis.  That said, I teach our design course, that involves many emails from students to a whole slew of corporate contacts, who we consider to be our "customers".  I certainly have a business relationship with all of these contacts, and continued interactions with them are central to the success of the the course.  When students interact with them, I suppose the closest relationship would be that they are employees of my company.

Pedagogically, my experience is that students tend to underestimate the voice of communications in the casual direction.  From a failure-mode analysis viewpoint, consequences of overformality are preferable to the consequences of underformality. (By the way, business relationships described above with our "customers" are NOT financial)

To be honest, I don't pay attention to the salutation. Say whatever you want, and I won't care. However, some people do. Some people think that faculty-student communication should be formal business communication. Some of those people will get upset with you or think less of you if you don't meet that formal expectation.
If you're concerned then I would ask the person how they would like to be addressed. Doing so is not considered rude- it is especially understandable if English is not your first language. Most professors are happy to help.
Being curious, I just looked through the last 20 emails I got from students. Their introductions were:
No salutation    - 6
"Dr. X,"         - 4
"Professor X,"   - 3
"Hello Dr. X,"   - 2
"Hi Professor,"
"Dear Dr. X,"
"Hello,"
"Hello Dr. X!"
"Hello again Dr. X!"

So based on this small and unscientific sample, it would seem that starting your emails with "Hi Professor X" is an uncommon thing to do.

So do they greet you by first name, despite their saying "Dr." or "Prof." before your name?

No, they greet me with my last name. I'm just using "Dr. David" because that's my Stack Overflow user name.

I'm wondering why "Hi Professor" would be more common than "Hi Prof. X".

It's a pretty small sample... I wouldn't read too much into it. Just an illustration of the different ways my students address me.

@sequence we don't know whether the use of "Hi professor" was from a native speaker.  Even if it was, some people, realising that it's better to be a little less formal than they initially thought, end up with unusual conclusions

Am I the only one momentarily being psyched about David being referred to as Professor X?

Are "Hi" and "Hello" equivalent? If they are then "uncommon" here is 25% of the emails. Not all that uncommon.

@Brad I'm not one to ask about protocol, but my impression is that "Hello" is more formal than "Hi", but not as formal using a title (Dr. or Professor).

Rather than answer your question directly, which other answers have already done quite adequately, I'll address it at a higher level of abstraction. Sociologists define the notion of closure, which is the tendency of groups of people to restrict access to the group and its resources using various mechanisms. One such mechanism is the use of unwritten norms of speech and behavior, which have the effect of making outsiders to the group appear as uncomfortable and "clueless" when they try to operate within the confines of the group.
While I am not an expert in sociology, it seems to me that your question about email salutations is a small example of this phenomenon. The truth is that, in North American academia at least, there is no importance whatsoever to whether one uses "hi" or "hello" in an email greeting. When professors talk about whether a given greeting seems "professional", or "clueless", or some such nonsense, what they are really thinking (at a subconscious level that is) is whether the greeting signals to them that you are a legitimate member of the group - someone who has been around long enough to learn the unwritten codes of behavior. If you are perceived as a member of the group, your email and you will receive a more favorable treatment as a result.
The moral of looking at things at this level of generality is that in my opinion it's best not to waste too much time and energy about trivial things like this. It saddens me that academia uses subtle mechanisms like salutations and titles (which also get discussed a lot here on academia.se) to make people who are new to academia feel uncomfortable and ill-at-ease, but I think the best way to fight such phenomena is to not care - we would all be much better off spending our time thinking about the substance of what we want to say in our emails rather than whether "hi" is an appropriate greeting.

the best way to fight such phenomena is to not care -- Yes, this. A thousand times, this.

+1, fantastic answer. I think the word for this sort of behaviour is "gatekeeping".

Having read the Wikipedia article on "gatekeeping", I still do not understand how this term applies to this thread.

@astronat I agree with sequence, it seems that "gatekeeping" means something else. But I'm glad you liked the answer in any case.

I don't know about North America, but here in the UK I have always just used
'Hi [First Name]'
If it's my very first time contacting someone I might use 'Dear' first but I never bothered with titles apart from my first year at university where I was too concerned with proper formality as a naïve fresher.
It hasn't caused me any trouble yet, or perhaps I have just been very oblivious to subtle requests to change my tone.

@Buster As I've said in my answer, students do send inappropriate messages, and I suspect they are generally not sufficiently aware of the need to adapt to context. While this may not matter too much as a student, when they try to get a job they need to know better.

@JessicaB, thanks for your response to my earlier comment, which I have deleted. I think my language was too strong and my comment not very useful. I'm not 100% sure I agree with your response, but I'll think about it!

For what it's worth, I tend to interpret "informality/familiarity" from very young people as a sign of naivete/cluelessness. As in "oh, we're all over 21, so are peers." Or, sometimes, this can arise from a spamming effort (of students to faculty), in which case I am less inclined to be tolerant. E.g., when the email is bcc... or, even more silly, cc, with 50 names on the list.
Forms of address inevitably are an opportunity to "demonstrate formal respect". Yes, one can argue on ideological grounds that honorifics are misguided, and so on, and I have no powerful counter-argument... except on my own behalf, that if a very young person sees themself as my peer in a professional sense (as opposed to "moral" sense, etc.), then I wonder why they'd bother emailing me at all...
That is, either my (decades-in-the-acquisition) expertise is potentially helpful to them, in which case our relationship cannot possibly be intellectually "equal", or, if "intellectual equality" is an axiom, well, ok, then why involve me?
That is, I do not view my seniority merely as "gate-keeping", but as having given me the possibility of having thought about many things for a long time, and, thus, "being more expert" than people who've not had that time. That's all I have to offer.

That's the reason I asked my question about saying "Hi Prof. [...]" being or not being informal. On a side note, I'm not a very young person, being over 30, despite being an undergrad student, if this changes anything at all.

@sequence, if you'd want to sync with the viewpoint I'm portraying, then you'd use the long-ago-correct "rules" about "forms of address". Can't go wrong with that. The kids who "need" to be less deferential to experts have their own problems...

For what it's worth. I consider excessive formaily from young people or students as a sign of cluelessness, or perhaps more accurately, a damaging lack of confidence. I conider it my duty as an educator to ask my students to call me by my first name. I want my students to challenge every claim they read or hear, because that is the only way for anyone to truly  own the material. Esatblishing myself as an authority figure who requires formality and deference is utterly antithetical to that mission.  tl;dr: Just say hi.

I've known only one professor who said in his first lecture explicitly that he should be called just by his first name. So this is quite rare, but makes communication a bit more pleasant to a degree.

@JeffE, wanting students to be serious intellectuals/scientists and independently think about things is not incompatible with recognizing that older people who've been doing that same thing for decades "have a head start". Pretending otherwise is an unwise mis-use of resources.

@sequence For me (as a student) it made communication much less pleasant. I assume this is a cultural phenomenon.

Out of curiosity, how do you address an (undergraduate) student in an email?

@paulgarrett My head start does not entitle me to deference. At most, it makes it more likely that what I tell students will be useful, and recognized as such. I still need to earn the respect of every class of students I teach.

@quid, usually, in email, I address undergrads or anyone else, especially if I don't know them, as "Dear Mr./Ms. X," since I don't presume to be their buddy.

"If a very young person sees themself as my peer in a professional sense (as opposed to "moral" sense, etc.), then I wonder why they'd bother emailing me at all".
Do many bother twice?

@Buster, yes, I have the impression that some people find my advice useful. I do generally try to respond helpfully to (non-crank, non-spam) email from anyone asking about something I have thought about.

That's the important thing. I owe you an apology. Sorry.

@Buster, and, as they say, "no harm, no foul" in the U.S. Maybe simplistic, but not a bad first approximation. I'm much happier to have caring reactions than ... indifference. The complexities of varying prior context are one of the greatest obstacles to successful inter-human communication... duh... and "the solution" is not (so far as I can tell) to abandon all conventions, but, rather, to realize that different people (cultures, ages, ethnicities, genders, ...) react differently (and honestly) to seemingly-innocent, seemingly "objective" language, etc. Crazy humans...

You can probably tell from the other answers that it really depends. It depends on the the environment of the school, the culture of the department, the level of the student, and the crotchetiness of the particular professor.
Strictly speaking, there is nothing rude about "Hi Prof. [...]," but you can't go wrong with being more formal. If Prof. [...] wants to be less formal, they'll say so.

Typically you want to convey both some familiarity and some respect. The way this happens varies by culture.
In the UK I expect to usually be addressed in an email as

Dear Jessica,

until I am on more familiar terms with the sender. 'Dear' shows politeness, while 'Jessica' shows friendliness.
In North America I found I was most often addressed by students as

Hi Prof.

As a Brit I found this very annoying, as from my British viewpoint it is bordering on rude, and I am not a Prof as I use the term. But I could see that this was the local equivalent of 'Dear Jessica', which the respect and friendliness denoted in different ways.
So for North America I would say 'Hi Prof' is fine (indeed, fairly standard).
What I would warn against is going too far either towards informality or formality. I've often had

Hey!

sometimes

Hey miss

and sometimes no greeting or sign-off at all, just (typically) a demand. These suggest that the sender has forgotten either the nature of our relationship or the need to modify their behaviour accordingly.
Going the other way, I sometimes get

Dear Dr. X

accompanied by full name and number for the student. Mostly this seems to be some degree of 'I pay your salary so do what I want', but sometimes it seems the student thinks I don't remember who they are, even though I address them by name when I talk to them each week.

Depends, if they're human a simple greeting will suffice. If they're morally inclined by their title, you need to treat your message like you would your resume.
Best observation don't take the lead, wait for them to make or engage or send the first email. Look at the message's header, body and footer, the presentation of how their message is delivered. Then compose a reply based on that analysis. Just don't treat the message like you're talking to your best pal, treat it with an emphasis of student/teacher conversation. Know the bounds of moral presentations, don't just drop illegible or short case words. Use proper sentences and English to convey your point/message.
Also keep the email short, unless you're including attachments or extra edits.

I don't think morals are what's at play here.


text:
My co-supervisor wants authorship in a paper he didn't contribute
I have two supervisors, in different countries, one in home institute who sent me as an exchange student to the host institute, where I closely worked with another co-supervisor who significantly contributed to my work, taking place of the last author in the conference paper I have submitted (not published). He reviewed my work, my paper and also was a really good advisor. My other supervisor, one from the home country had nothing to do with my project except on record. His domain is completely different from what I have worked on.
Now, in my master's thesis that I presented in the home institute in front of my co-supervisor and other faculty in the institute, I mentioned that I've submitted a paper based on the work I had done. I was questioned about the authorship of this co-supervisor, and was told it is unethical to leave him out of authorship, because by default, the supervisor must get the last authorship.
Now I fear that due to ego issues, they will reduce my grades because I didn't mention this co-supervisor's name in the paper.
How do you suggest I tackle this situation and am I wrong to leave him out? His only contribution was to provide me recommendation for sending me to the exchange program, and review my final thesis and presentation which I suppose every supervisor must do, whether or not a paper is published.
P.S. In my institute, having a paper published gets us better grades and hence I decided to mention about the submission. But now it looks like everything is going to take a U-turn on me.

was told it is unethical to leave him out of authorship, because by default, the supervisor must get the last authorship — Yikes.  As many many answers here will attest, this is exactly backward.  It is unethical to include anyone as an author who did make a significant contribution to the paper, supervisor or not.  However, this ethical standard is not universally observed, and knowing that you are right may not help you navigate the situation in practice.

This is called gift authorship and is not allowed in any field that I am aware of https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12030/what-are-the-minimum-contributions-required-for-co-authorship

@StrongBad, and yet, there are many questions here that seem to imply that the practice of including supervisors is expected, even required. This seems to be especially the case in fields in which the supervisor has created the lab that makes the research possible and who sets overall direction, though little, if any, actual contribution to any given work. Whether immoral or not, it seems to be very common.

@Buffy I am sure it happens, but in many cases, I think students under estimate the role the advisor has in shaping research by gently guiding them down the correct path and keeping them away from rabbit holes.

It is under the supervision of two people. Honestly, ethical/gift authorship aside, I found this troubling that you and supervisor B could have submitted a paper, presumable generated from this co-supervised project, without supervisor A even knowing. I think that's where could have been managed more professionally. The key questions here are, was this supervisor i) informed about this paper, and ii) given a fair chance to contribute to this paper? And if he can "review my final thesis and presentation," then why does "[h]is domain is completely different from what I have worked on" matter?

Most journals have authorship policies. These are recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html), among others.
The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) has guidance on how to avoid authorship disputes. https://publicationethics.org/files/2003pdf12_0.pdf
Be factual with your supervisor. Provide the authorship guidelines and ask him to list his contribution to the research article. You can explain that the culture on authorship has changed and that automatic authorship for higher level supervisors is no longer considered appropriate by publishers (as evidenced by the guidelines of the publication). Truthfully, it would be best if your host supervisor perform this deed because they are on an equal footing and apparently had some prior connection. Clearly, it puts you in a difficult situation.

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


text:
Should I defend my PhD at another university?
I'm doing my PhD at a university in Scandinavia, it's my own project (open call) and comes with funding (PhD salary from the university). Over the years, some people in the administration at the institution has become disagreeable to say the least by causing bureaucratic problems for me and other PhD students that cost a lot of valuable PhD time, grants etc., they seem to do all they can to put a spoke in my wheel.
Up until now, I've told myself to just bite the bullet when it happens (I have complained to my supervisors etc. but I don't have the mental energy to take it further to the union or anything like that). However, the problems are now reaching a level where it is difficult to get much research done, and despite having less than a year left of the PhD which I just want to be done with, I cannot help thinking of cases I've heard of where PhD students have quit their positions and taken it up again at another university and defended it there. This surely sounds like even more trouble (which I've had enough of), but I think that by now I need to know if there is an alternative, a way out that won't cost me my PhD degree.
I do have very good contacts at the university of my home town (also in Scandinavia) and what I'm thinking is to ask them if I can defend it there ("free of charge" for them). Do you think that something like that would be possible?
Thank you so much for your help dear community.

I'm a bit confused about what the benefits of such an arrangement would be. Spite?

"Possible" is not the same as "advisable" or even "doable with a reasonable amount of work". You would almost certainly lose more time than you gain in other benefits.

First, such a step would be drastic and have an impact on more people than just you and the administrators. You would do best to talk to the academics that supervise your Ph.D. first. Second, if the situation is really that bad, then some of your colleagues will feel the same way. If you are part of a group that takes this step (even if you end up getting your Ph.D. from different universities), then your choice is more defensible.
Please take the impact on innocent others seriously. Presumably, you interacted with instructors and maybe with one or more advisors. If they lose you as a Ph.D. candidate, their evaluations and their prestige among colleagues goes down. Put yourself in their shoes and decide how miffed you would be. Also, by talking with them, you create some ammunition in case they want to get the administrators to change their ways. Alternatively, if you are over-reacting (and I in your situation would not know whether I would be over-reacting or not), they can provide you feed-back.
Finally, if you decide on this drastic step, make sure that the new place is as welcoming as you think it is. They, as well as your old set of instructors and advisors, will be the ones who at some point in the future might have defend you against:  OP could not get his doctorate at X, so he went to Y.


text:
Wearing a PhD gown with a stole bestowed earlier from my Masters
I am an academic staff member with a PhD degree. I am curious whether I can put on my valedictorian stole bestowed upon me from my masters degree (from another university) with my PhD gown, i.e. I would like to wear my PhD gown with my masters stole at future commencement ceremonies. Is this commonly done? Is it a social faux pas?

I don't think it is commonly done and few would notice. It might seem a bit weird to the (very) few who did notice, but they won't reduce your salary or fire you for such a thing.
Wearing two stoles might also be a bit weird, but why the heck not?
Caveat: Maybe in Austria or Switzerland there might be some issues. They are very formal places. But, still, more likely to generate a laugh than a frown.
If you do happen to get pushback you can decide whether to repeat the performance, of course. And, be ready to explain your reasoning.


text:
For meetings with Early Reject Notification, will I receive an email reminder if the paper enters the Rebuttal stage
I haven't received any notification from ACM Computer and Communication Security yet, I'm a bit nervous

You might want to consider explaining abbreviations.

What do you need advice on. 2. Your title is not clear ... For meeting with...

"For meetings with" With whom ??

This can only be answered by conference organizers. From my own experience, many things can go wrong with organizing a conference, which can lead to delays. Most of this does not become otherwise obvious to the participants. As many first-time contributors tend to be nervous about the whole process generating many anguished questions, some conference organizers might not be too open about explaining delays on the conference website. In general, conference organizers have experience and will ensure that submitters will be treated reasonably. This implies that you will be informed if you are asked for a rebuttal.
You should give them more time.


text:
Informing bosses that I finish my job in 10 hours / week
This question made me think about my situation.
After different academic jobs, I took a tenure-track position that I can typically do in 10 hours/week. With the extra time I do hobbies or am with my family. It is not that the job is easy, it is more that the job exactly matches my skills, and that my weaknesses do not affect my performance. My colleagues, as most faculty, work at least 40hrs/week (many work more as explained here). I am doing great and received many awards, so I am not worried at all about promotion. I also like the job.
Should I inform my bosses how long it takes me to finish the job (10hrs/week)? Please read the question I mentioned before answering. In that question, many people were very critical about finding ways of doing the job faster while not informing the boss.
More information (could add more if needed): I teach 3 classes per semester (about 7.5 hours total). For some reason it is very easy for me to just use the textbook, so I do not need to prepare my lectures (still receive good student evaluations). I have nearly 2.5 office hours per week, but virtually no student shows up, so I do research during that time. 2 hours/week have been enough to publish enough (research expectations are very low) and I am lucky enough that I have never had "writer's block" or anything like that. So far I have no service expectations. Compared to my colleagues I am publishing more, and in good journals (for a teaching institution). In the summer, I spend some time automatizing what I can. For example, I use software to automatically generate exams and the answers. I have graders, so I am equaling the "few" grading that I actually have to do to 10/hrs per week during the summer. At the end, it feels like working 10hrs/week year long (or a little more during regular semesters if you wish). Definitely far less than 40hrs/week.
I know that my service expectations will increase later, but it feels they would never reach 40hrs/week.

Fine that you can do your teaching and bureaucracy etc. in 10 hours per week. Aren't you expected to do research?

From our [help] you should avoid asking an open-ended, hypothetical question: “What if ______ happened?”

@Karl So far I can do the (not heavy) expected research within the 10 hours.

Can you be more specific about what you are expected to do in your position (research, teaching, administration etc)? If you teach; how much and how many classes? The question is hard to answer otherwise.

I am really confused by this question. What do you mean you "finish the job" in X hours per week? Academic job are such that there is always something more to do, typically on multiple fronts. In fact, 24 hours per day are not nearly enough to do the things I would like to do in a single day.

You don't have to write grant proposals, supervise grad students etc.? Don't tell us you do that plus teaching plus your own research in 10 hours!

I am definitely rounding, but so far it feels like, say, 13hrs/week during regular semesters and 0 hrs/week during the summer. So equivalent to 10hrs/week year long.

@101010111100, I admit that I could more research. However, I prefer to spend time with my family than publishing another paper. My classes are in the morning, so I basically arrive at 8 and leave at about 11 (no work in the summer).

This post smells like a troll. 3 courses a semester is roughly 9 hours of just classroom time. That's not what teaching any meaningful course is like. In a comment "So far I can do the (not heavy) expected research within the 10 hours." - This sounds like someone who has never been in academia and doesn't understand what "research" means for a professor.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because I believe it is not a serious post.

@BryanKrause, you may be right about the trolling. I myself didn't want to be tooooo hasty to judge (thinking that maybe some peoples' situations did indeed exactly click with their natural capacities), but, well, I've never known of any case of this situation... apart from people deluding themselves that they're adequately doing their jobs.

I am not trying to troll. Just like in the link I posted shows how someone can do 40 hrs of work in just 2 hours, the same can happen in other areas. I do agree with one of the comments that the amount of research required in my department is "a joke". Also, as I said before, I am not currently required to do any service (or mentoring).

Great that you can enough research to get published in 2h/week (I feel like you could write a bestseller on how you do that.), but as you are in tenure-track/academia, why don't you do more research if you have time left?

@skymningen "why don't you do more research if you have time left" I did it in the past (was VERY research active), but still could not get tenure-track research positions (by the way, I have ASD and do horribly in interviews). So, after several years of doing research and no (permanent) research job, I decided to take a permanent position for which I was "overqualified" (easy teaching and minimal research).

I am really curious about a teaching centered institute where the teaching load is so small. Assuming that op is not a troll: have you ever though about to actually shooting higher than the bare minimum?

It all depends on your contract and your professionalism. If you are hired to work the regular 40 hours/week, then you are obviously cheating really badly.
If you really have no working hours but work based on getting a few tasks done, it's really up to you and your professionalism. If you consider "your job done" by giving the students a textbook and using automated software for the exam and publishing the absolutely bare minimum required... and you spend the other 30 doing your things, well... it's up to your ethics and professionalism to know if your salary and position are justified or that job is, no offence, a joke.

No offence taken. I actually think that the research required in my department is a joke.

Is there anyone in your department that keeps you from doing more research than "required"? And are you sure that just keeping up with the bare requirements will be enough to stay competitive?

It's both a strength and a weakness of academia that it runs on people doing a lot of things they aren't strictly required to do.  It means that we have a lot of leeway to carve out our own things we want to do, but it also means we all know some people who are scraping by doing the bare minimum.
I don't see what the point of telling anyone that you feel like you can complete your responsibilities in a very short period of time; I don't see what you would expect to come out of such a conversation.
I would think a bit about whether there are other things that are important to you that you could put your time toward.  Are there students at your school looking for research projects?  Are there other mentoring opportunities you could provide outside the college?  Are you completely happy with the way everything runs in your department or university?  Is there a class you could develop that your students might need?  Do you not have any research projects interesting enough to spend a few more hours on a week?  Is there no conference on any subject you would like to see happen?
I suspect if you look around you will see productive things out there that need doing; perhaps you should do some of them.

Exactly. It is not quite defensible to take up an "I've got mine, Jack (and screw you)" attitude in any situation, much less academe. The question oughtn't be what one can "get away with", but something else, e.g., "what I have the capacity to contribute". Let's not model ourselves on vulture/venture capitalists.

I am not currently required to do any service (or mentoring). So I only have to teach and do minimal research. I might start to contribute in other ways before my contract requires me to.

@carl You can't really require people to do mentoring.  Most of us do it anyway.  I don't know about other fields or your university, but usually there are programs outside your department you can sign up for (such as: https://sites.google.com/site/awmmath/programs/mentor-network).


text:
Can a professor shout at a student?

Is there any possible penalty (from the educational institution) for the professor for disrespecting a student?
What can and cannot do a professor in terms of respect to a student?

No, he can not.

@EnthusiasticStudent well he can (it is physically possible), but he should not. Nevertheless, a penalty would seem unreasonable for a minor, isolated incident. A professor should treat his or her students just as any normal person would. With respect. Do not talk "down" to them, do not get angry, et cetera.

By reading your profile information, it seems that you are a high school student at the age of 15. There are two points here. If you are asking a question about teachers and high schools students, this question is off-topic based on the scope defined for this site. Also, answers to your question vastly differs for professors and high school teachers.

What kind of penalty are you asking about?  Criminal, civil, or imposed by the university?  (In the latter case I imagine it would depend on the university.)

@EnthusiasticStudent yes, that's right but I am not talking about high school teacher, my question is about professors.

@Moriarty I think that having a professor title does not give professors the right to shout at students. I have never seen this right in any code of ethics, instructions for teaching or any law. When shouting is unethical and it is not legally accepted in any form, they can not shout at anybody.

@AlejandroPacheco Regarding the help center, You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. As far as you are a high school student, you normally have never had any professor as your teacher at high school. So, this question is not your actual problem that you faced before.

This question is not suitable for this site.  It is subjective, and does not follow our guidelines for subjective questions.  See the [help], especially http://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic and http://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask.  Also, it is unclear what you are asking: are you asking whether professors should yell at a student, or whether they can?  in what context or situation?  If you are asking about what the penalty is, what university and what country?  "What can and cannot a professor do..." is too broad.  So, the question is too broad and unclear.

Could you please elaborate a bit and provide a little backup for your assertion?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not asked based on the of scope of this site.

So true... Also, when they're old full professors "it's just their character"...

@EnthusiasticStudent You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. The purpose of that sentence is not to discourage questions which you are not facing. See this meta question for more info.

I have nominated the question to be re-opened. The fact that the OP has not faced the problem himself is absolutely irrelevant. @D.W. it seems clear to me that the OP is asking whether a professor can justifiably yell at a student. I don't see a huge amount of wiggle room for subjectivity here.

@Moriarty In the question body, the OP used "disrespect" and "respect". Both words are somewhat subjective. So, to me, the question is unclear. When can you say a professor is disrespecting a student? The question title is also subjective. Some people speak loudly because they have hearing problem. So, how do you define "Shout"?

I agree with @scaaahu. Despite the fact that the OP hasn't faced the problem, this question seems to be too broad because in each level professors may have different reasons to shout at the students. This may be because of miss-understanding of two people, interpersonal issues, professional issues, etc. Their action changes in front of undergraduate and postgraduate students. Nobody can give precise answer unless he know what really happened to the OP and at what condition the professor shouted at him.

@Moriarty It's clear that the fact that OP hasn't faced the problem himself is absolutely relevant. When the OP's only a high school student, how had he been in a higher education environment? How is he aware of the importances of duties of a postdoc (their roles, their project's budget, etc)? Professors may have reasons to shout at their students (despite the ethical issues). The conditions differ from a high school student who only have seen a teacher (even a TA or undergraduate lecturer) who's reason to shout at students is to calm his class down to be able to teach the content for them.

Under normal circumstances, faculty should never yell or shout at a student. However, faculty are also human beings, and there is always the possibility that under emotional strain, they can lash out at a student.
I will admit to having been guilty of this once as an advisor, when a student came into my office for a discussion about his research, and made some statements that betrayed a total lack of awareness of what he was doing (and this was a "veteran" graduate student who should have known better).
In the context of teaching, students have reason to expect that the faculty member should not shout at them. However, it is unreasonable to expect that any disciplinary action would be taken against a faculty member for a single infraction.

A safety situation is an exception. And athletic coaches seem to believe they are one.

On occasion, I will shout at a student to stop writing on his or her exam after the end of the exam period (after having given sufficient warning.) It is the best way to get the attention of someone far away and stop him or her from doing something that he or she should not be doing.  (Perhaps this could be seen as a generalization of @keshlam's safety exception.)

it is unreasonable to expect that any disciplinary action would be taken against a faculty member for a single infraction That raises the question - can something be done against repeat offenders? I think the answer is no again! (In practice that is, of course the cloud cuckoo land of ethical thinking is different.)

@TheDarkSide: I mostly agree with your assessment—I think it's highly unlikely a professor would ever be held accountable for such behavior, unless there's a large pattern of such behavior in public, and even then it's not going to amount to much more than a slap on the wrist.

Students and professors owe each other the same level of respect, civility and generally adult behavior, meaning that it is wrong for one to be rude to the other. No particular significance should be attached to a professor shouts at a student who is rudely disrupting a class, since the student has no right to disrupt the class. On the other hand, it would be a significant problem if a professor were to shout at a student for quietly doing poorly on a homework, since the student does, in fact, have the right to do well or do poorly, as they choose. So you can't morally evaluate one person's conduct in a vacuum -- we need to know the full context.

Agreed. Shouting is not an appropriate response unless the student is being incredibly disrespectful (i.e. disrupting) or there is a concern for safety. However, I would probably call security to have the student removed before I would resort to shouting.

There is no reason for the professor to shout. If a student doesn't behave or has some other problem then the student will suffer (the student can be kicked out of the institution if the student doesn't pass his/her exams). What should happen to a professor who cannot suppress his/her urge to shout? I would say that such a professor should apply for a new job here, where shouting at under-performing students is compulsory. But they only teach a limited number of subjects there.


text:
Should I tell my professor of my crippling anxiety?
It's really hard to admit, but I have a crippling anxiety when it comes to criticism from people of authority, especially university professors (at least I think so). This is currently negatively impacting my performance writing my thesis, as I would rather postpone indefinitely sending my thesis supervisor anything that could be wrong than face criticism, which makes me look lazy. Especially if I have encountered something that I don't know how to approach, I'd rather keep looking for answers myself for an impossible amount of time than ask for help (as I'm irrationally scared that I should be in a position to finish said task, since it was assigned to me).
I doubt that there is anything he can do, and I don't want to impose or require special treatment, but I feel like I have to be honest about why I'm not meeting deadlines as of late. My problem is that I don't know how to remedy this issue, and even if he knows about it, it's not magically going to stop impeding my work.
In addition, in case that I get anything along the lines of "I don't care", I'm pretty sure that I won't be able to handle it and I really don't want to give up my degree.

It's not clear what you want us to tell you? It seems like whether you should do this or not depends on your own personal threshold for risk tolerance (i.e. how much are you willing to risk a potentially upsetting response). You might want to discuss this with a mental health professional who knows you better than us, and can help you work through all the potential outcomes.

All I can say is that personally, I always prefer for students to tell me if they're struggling with something, so that I can put their progress in context of that, and avoid putting pressure on them in situations where it won't be helpful. But I can't tell you whether your supervisor is a reasonable person or not - you probably have a better sense for what kind of person he is than we do.

Thank you, I guess I'll tell him somehow, what's the worst that could happen? I guess it's a too narrow question, I'll remove it.

@K.Gkinis: You don't need to remove the question. What you're describing is probably a case of "fear of negative evaluation." It's a recognized phobia, so you're by no means alone!

@aeismail is correct, OP. I had the same problem myself through my Master's degree. I definitely second ff524's advice about seeking counselling. Until then, just remember that ultimately your supervisor is there to help you when you get stuck and won't think less of you for not knowing the answer :)

Your advisor is responsible for you, for good and for bad. This also means that if you have problems that are not of "technical" nature, that he still has to deal with it. It is in the advisors interest as well to find a solution for this, as he wants you to successfully finish. Hence, if you trust your advisor well enough to talk about this, then I would definitely recommend to talk to him. Even if you think he cannot help you, he should be still aware of the situation. Maybe he knows a way how he can at least make it a little easier for you.
Independently of this, I would suggest you to seek professional help. If you are at the level where such a problem has negative effect on your life and you don't see how you can solve it on your own or together with friends, then asking a psychologist is the right thing to do. Unlike what people commonly believe, they do not usually deal with "mad" people, but mostly with people who struggle with this or that problem in their lives, that they cannot find a solution for.
Though a word of advice: a psychologist is a person that you have to trust. You will be talking of problems that you might not talk about even with close friends. Hence, if you have even the smallest doubt that you can trust the psychologist you have chosen, look for another one. Do this, until you find someone whom you can fully trust and talk about everything that you want. And under no circumstances be afraid what the psychologist might think of you when you switch to another one. This is part of the game and everyone in this line of work knows it.

Thank you very much. I wanted to see a therapist about it, but I'm very constrained on time. It's too important to postpone though, I'll see to it.

I don't want to impose or require special treatment, but I feel like I have to be honest about why I'm not meeting deadlines as of late.

I think this sentence should be the major theme of your conversation with your advisor. Awareness usually helps, and while you might not want to use the word "crippling" (at least not right away), stating that you're having anxiety that is currently beyond your control will put you and your advisor on the same page.
The rest depends on the advisor's personality. He might help you identify the best way to move forward, suggest potential resources where you can get help, or just give you some space to figure it out on your own. In any case, be reserved when sharing your concerns, but do inform him about the source of the delay & make sure to communicate your intention to complete the work.


text:
Advice for teaching older "non-traditional" undergraduate students
I will be teaching a class in my university's evening degree program. The students are undergraduates but are what I've heard referred to as "non-traditional" students. Basically, the students are all older than the 18-22 year range common in undergraduate programs and most of them have full time jobs. I have taught older students before, but only in the context of masters programs targeted mostly at students with professional experience (e.g., a part-time executive MBA program).
I'm looking for advice, or links to resources with advice that you have found useful, on teaching older working students. In particular, I am interested in techniques, approaches, or things to keep in mind that are different from teaching (a) traditional undergraduate students (i.e., ~18-22 year-old) students and (b) working professional master students.

While the answer from Jeffrey below is great, you should also do some searching. There is A LOT written on this topic.

Great Great Great question. I am one of those student (finishing BA at 27, been working full time since second year) and the biggest "shift" I found in my attitude is that I ended up loving things that included a bit of "problem solving", not just the mere remember-rule-and-apply much loved by kids right out of HS...

In my experience, you will find four things happen to various degrees. One is, non-traditional students are less distracted by issues that we know overwhelm the minds of 18-22 year olds. This means, they can bring more focus to their studies. The second thing is, non-traditional students are less inclined to believe they are entitled to something easy from you with no responsibility from them. This means, they can bring a stronger sense of mutual respect to the class room. The third thing is, non-traditional students have some lag or lack of knowledge in pre-requisite information for the course. This means, you may have to spend time to help them remember the missing background information. Finally, non-traditional students are more involved in higher-level and higher-intensity demands in their lives. This means, they can have less time to study during your course as though that responsibility is supposed to be ingrained in their full-time career path for the coming semester.
You might plan in general how to balance these changes during your course presentation and curriculum development. Then, consider how, because you know these changes are coming, you will make specific changes in such things as the pace of your lecture presentations, the number of or time scales of your assignments, and the options you will offer for off-line tutoring.
Overall, teaching non-traditional students is a different experience that can end up being a far more rewarding one than teaching traditional students.
Best regards, and have fun!

I'd just add to, perhaps, plan on them having forgotten some crucial background info and do a week or two (whatever you can spare with clever re-jiggering of the syllabus) of review at the beginning. This way you can hit the ground running, instead of having to retroactively bring students "up to speed" on a case-by-case basis. This all assumes there is some needed background, of course.

One of the classes I took had a 3 day gratis period for assignments. It meant that I could be total of three days late in the semester whenever I needed it, no questions asked, no penalties. The added flexibility was very much appreciated, because you know that your kid will get sick the week when the homework is due and you are working on a deadline at work. You just don't know which homework.

@Dennis: Yes, very sound advice. Such a "review" should also be used as a way for students to find out whether they really do belong in the course. A reasonable way can be to give final exams from the pre-requisite courses as homework or quizzes or exams in their own right.


text:
Should I scold the act of cheating before an exam?
Usually when I'm applying an exam on my students, right before giving them the questions sheet, I tell them not to cheat. I usually warn them that I will not be inspecting their every move, but I will be watchful to make sure that no communication, electronic device or consulting will be done/used.
To complement this, I always make very mean and bad comments about cheating. Stuff like "your diploma will always be tainted if you go through the University by cheating, I'd rather use it to clean my soles" or "you had all the opportunities to ask questions, consult me, the textbooks, Youtube videos, lecture notes, class monitors and myself and the other teachers before this exam. I was always honest with you and expect the same thing in return and nothing else. If you're having personal problems that are affecting your studies, there are other ways to try to circunvent it instead of cheating". I once even said (with a class that I had some liberty to say so) that, by cheating, I wanted them to look at the mirror, every day of their lives, and face how much an intellectual failure they've become.
Now, I try to make it clear that those are jokes. But I'm sure that they get that these jokes had a truth behind it. My question is: are there ethical reasons not to do so? My point is, if I can't resource to my students' conscience to be honest, then I can't resort to anything, since I can't possibly outsmart 75 or so students every time I'm applying an exam if they want to be creative at cheating.

Are the statements you say true? Do the students have all the opportunities to ask them? (Many profs believe so while it may be not true. Some profs claim students can always ask and get angry about questions.) Are you sure that personal problems always get helped in your environment appropriately?

Treat ethics seriously. Students should be aware that their actions do have consequences, and should be held responsible for their deeds and misdeeds. Jokes are inappropriate, and references about "cleaning your soles" with cheating-tainted diplomas are probably a little too hyperbolic.
That said, you can certainly give a warning to your students not to cheat on the exam. In some places, you must give such a warning as part of the exam instructions!

Summary
If you do not have to include a pre-exam warning, do not include a warning.
If you have to include a pre-exam warning, do so. But keep it short, clear and to the point.
Take this seriously
Exams are incredibly stressful for everyone, including the students who did everything right, so humour, anything else that might be misinterpreted*, or anything else not necessary for the exam, has no place in this environment.
So, building on aeismail’s comment to “treat ethics seriously” (both in the exam and elsewhere), I would say: Treat every part of the exam seriously.
That was the big ethical issue. Now, there’s the issue of you undermining your own message. Since the topic of your message is ethics, this is kind of an ethical issue too. It’s not clear from your question how seriously you take this, and perhaps it’s not clear to your students either if you either tell jokes or say serious things and label them as jokes.
Consider the good student’s point of view
Imagine you have spent the last few months trying to master the course material. And it’s all come down to the next few hours. You’re as nervous as you’ve ever been, but trying to stay calm, focus on getting the exam done and get out of there. You have no interest in what the other students are doing.
Would you like to listen to a lecture about ethics, or anything else that shouldn’t need to be covered in the exam venue? Especially if someone is telling you it’s really important, but it contains maybe-jokes-maybe-really-serious-statements and you don’t really know what’s going on?
Consider the cheater’s point of view
If you’re not prepared for the exam (except that you are prepared to cheat), a pre-exam ethics lecture won’t change that. What good do you think it will do?
Start early
The right time to communicate all relevant university policies, including those relating to academic integrity, is at the very start of the course.
Footnote
* Except, of course, if it is part of an exam question and finding the correct interpretation is part of the examinable material.

It occurred to me that the start of my answer might be a bit condescending, so I have rewritten it. I took the opportunity to add a lot more detail.

I think that many students interpret an approach to cheating that relies on moral appeals as an implicit admission that the system and the actual measures taken to stop cheating are too weak and cannot be relied upon, which can actually be an incentive to cheat. For this reason I always try to be very factual on cheating. I state the consequences and that we do whatever we can to find the cheats out. I think that that has to be enough (plus of course making a good attempt to find them out, and a strict approach toward those who are found out).

Another thing about relying on moral appeals is that it seems to be unique to academic integrity. As far as I know, no other university policy is discussed in this way. That’s probably a good thing. There are rules, and everyone is expected to follow the rules; their personal beliefs are irrelevant.

About finding out/discouraging cheaters: in my experience, nothing works better than staying in the back of the class room, where students can't see me. If they cannot know what I watch/see, it gets much harder for them to weight the cost/benefits of attempting to cheat.

You should teach academic honesty and ethics at the beginning of your course.  Do not wait until the exam is about to start.
Instead of appealing to students' emotions, explain to them how honest conduct will help them achieve their goals.

More specifically, explain to them how honest conduct will help them achieve their goals better than “dishonest conduct”, if we can call it that.

I would recommend making it clear how severe the consequences are.
Many freshmen might not realize that cheating in academia is a much more serious thing compared to what they might have been used to during their mandatory education.
In high school they might have many smaller tests every semester instead of one exam, and getting caught might only give them a bad grade for one insignificant test, not significantly hindering their chances of passing the class. They might grow up in the mindset that it's worth the risk. Or even that it's fun and exciting, bragging to each other about the techniques they used, and not even thinking about feeling ashamed of having resorted to cheating.
Students coming from different countries and cultures might also have a different mindset about cheating. Especially in countries with a very high level of corruption, cheating can be seen not as something despicable and unethical, but rather as a way to fight against an unjust system. They might also have gotten used to much less severe consequences of getting caught.
Therefore it's important to make it clear to them not only that they are no longer children and will be treated as adults, but also the grave consequences of cheating: failing the whole year (not just one test), or getting expelled, ruining their chance of getting the degree they wanted.

Echoing other answers and comments... at least in U.S. culture, any exaggeration tends to make the idea ridiculous and not serious.
Specifically, any comments (serious or joking) that make "exams" seem like a game, thus without moral/ethical attachments, are counter-productive.
Yes, to the extent possible, make cheating impossible... but/and recognize that without grossly draconian measures it is not possible to control people to the degree necessary to defeat militant cheating. And the saddest aspect would be that those draconian measures would abuse the many people who behave honorably.

The general idea of communicating expectations on cheating is a good idea, but I see several problems with your particular expressions.  Firstly, at least part of what you say is ambiguous --- the oral statement "use it to clean my soles" could just as easily be heard as "use it to clean my souls", so are you saying that the degree would then be so worthless that you clean the soles of your shoes with it, or are you saying that you wish to use the diploma program to "clean the souls" of your students?  Moreover, by making hyperbolic statements and then treating these in a half-joking manner, it might not be clear to students whether these are serious issues or not.
I have sometimes given pep-talks to my students in relation to cheating, though usually at the start of the semester rather than immediately prior to an exam.  The main things I try to get across to them are the following:

In addition to learning technical skills and subject matter for a degree, it is desirable to use university as a time to develop good character.  Circumstances where you experience stress and anxiety are times when you can develop good coping skills, and develop the strength of character required to avoid unethical shortcuts (if that has not already been developed earlier in life).  I tell them that it is better to fail an exam, or even a full course, and keep their integrity in tact.  Failed courses can be repeated, but it is highly destructive to get into the habit of taking unethical shortcuts when presented with challenges.

As a practical matter, if students cheat on my assessments then they will be caught and I will take disciplinary action against them under the university rules.  If that happens it will be a horrible process for them and it will be a big deal.  I have taught in several semesters where I have caught students breaking the rules (e.g., copying assignments or cheating on exams) and the penalties have ranged from reduced or zero marks on an assignment, right up to formal academic misconduct hearings with the Head of Department.  In the latter case, I have seen students break down crying at the damage their actions will do to their degree and career.  It is not a pleasant situation for anyone involved, but if you cheat those are consequences that can occur.

Most (but not all) of the cheating I have seen has been copying of assignments rather than cheating during exams, so I also explain to the students that there are a number of things they do when copying assignments that they will not notice, but which are extremely obvious to me.  I want students to understand that I am pretty good at spotting cheating and I take it seriously.

You have misunderstood the cultural context of the bottom of people's feet in the middle east.

Okay, so then that would be three possible interpretations.

@AnonymousePhysicist: Would you care to share said cultural context so that I can add it to the answer?

+1 Unfortunately I can’t bring this answer’s score above zero. It’s a great answer: it answers the question and gives plenty of other relevant information.

On a related note: one of my university instructors gave us one of those talks about academic integrity, and the bit that stayed in my memory was that the people who investigate cheating take it so seriously that they are scary for the instructors, never mind the students.

@BrianDrake: That sounds horrible. I am saying this as a former (honest) student, but more so as an instructor.

Just to add: the courses I teach are in Portugueses, not in English, so mishearding "soles" (solas) for "souls" (almas) is pretty much impossible.


text:
Is it a good idea to pursue a postdoc in robotics before switching to industry?
I graduated with PhD in Europe in 2023 in a very theoretical field (control systems and applied math) and have been a postdoc since. I am now convinced that I need to move to the industry, and I am also convinced that I am looking at a future in motion control/robotics. However, when I apply for jobs I'm invariably rejected due to my lack of 'hands on' experience with programming and robots. I have mostly worked so far in mathematically sound with minimal reliance on simulations, so it has been hard to sell myself.
I am not in an environment where I can do any applied research. So I am wondering if doing another postdoc in robotics will help me build these skills and get some applied experience. I am not sure if doing another postdoc will suck me into the academic world when I want to get out of it, or if industry will see multiple postdocs as a red flag or a gain in experience. Some advice here is appreciated

The number of jobs in 'robotic control systems' is a subset of the number of jobs in 'robotics' - how well tuned have your applications been to control systems? Have you applied to non-robotic control system jobs?

This seems to be about industry jobs, not about academia.

Why not explore a postdoc in industry?

@Buffy it's a question about an exit route from academia. While I agree that the focus is "what will industry want", in today's academic climate I think it's a very relevant thing to cover here. (I'm not sure this is a good question for other reasons, though ;-))

Computer science professor here. If you are certain that you want to go to industry, then you should be focusing much of your time on developing the concrete skills required for your chosen path, building your network, and applying for many jobs. In the meanwhile, feel free to secure another postdoc so that you still have income, and do carry out the tasks required of you in that postdoc job, but don't let it eat up 100% of your time.
There are many ways to get hands-on experience in robotics without a postdoc in robotics. For example, at my university, our systems courses have students working with arduino robots. The university where you are currently a postdoc probably has some of those (or, if not, a budget to buy them so students can get hands-on experience), and you could get involved. Many universities also have a club where students can sharpen their robotics skills, e.g., a RoboCup league. You could get involved as a mentor to such a group. Heck, even the local high school might have such a club.
You should also get on GitHub and share software you have written, to show employers that you are able to put theory into practice. Full-on research, leading to conference publications, is probably more than you need to do in order to showcase your expertise in robotics. Applied projects on GitHub can show the same and are much easier to carry out, even in your current role. Lastly, apply widely and for more jobs than you think you need to. It is not that easy to step from academia to industry, so be persistent.

Thank you for your answer, it is very helpful! Unfortunately, I don't see any avenue where I am currently to pursue these skills, and a contract extension is unlikely to happen, and hence considering another position where at least I can hone some relevant skills. Caveat is that there's possibly a minimum commitment time to hold as it requires securing a project and collaborating on some papers, in addition to of course teaching and administration. So it would be another few months before I can start looking for jobs, but hope that it is enough for me to get some hands-on experience.


text:
How to summarily indicate that cited references fail to address a topic
Academic citations are generally added because they explicitly support a statement. Occasionally however, it may be needed to cite references in support of a claim that they do not address a statement or topic at all. I seem to remember seeing ab silentio or e silentio appended to a citation call to indicate such a case, but can't find any example of, or reference to, this. Is my memory correct, in which case what is the correct usage and do you have an example of it? Otherwise, can some other type of citation-call prefix or suffix achieve this, short of a full explanatory sentence outside the citation call?

In such cases I don't exactly cite, but rather say something like "Previous work on foo, e.g. [12], does not address bar". Haven't seen shorthands such as what you're looking for; perhaps it's discipline-dependent.

In law there is the term sub silentio. Could that be what you're looking for? Its meaning is a bit different to how, e.g., ab silentio etc. are used in argumenta e silentio, however.

I would find an explanatory sentence easier to understand, something like @einpoklum suggests. I would cite a number of recent reviews, however, rather than research work: the latter presumably describes just one approach of many. Also, be careful: on more than one occasion, I have discovered a whole body of literature on the topic from another field after spending some time learning to ask proper questions. Understanding a question is half an answer, or so they say.


text:
Is the journal "The Winnower" scientifically trustworthy?
The Winnower is a journal that offers a post-publication peer review, meaning that reviews of people can be written after online publication. There is no classical peer-review by a scientific committee prior to publication. If there are reviews to an article posted, we cannot know whether it is a "normal" person with no scientific background or a prof. Only upvotes and downvotes can be made.
After a long search in Google Scholar I found articles in this journal that were cited by other authors.
Is this journal trustworthy?

I'm thinking it should not be considered different than arxiv as far as "trustworthy" ... that is: "no".

What do you mean by "trustworthy"?  In what specific way are you looking to "trust" the joural?

I mean with "thrustworthy" that articles in The Winnower may be accepted by scientific workers such that These articles can be cited.

Articles can be cited no matter where, or even whether, they are published.

@JeffE This bears repeating. There is a citation in a very good journal to WoWWiki, because I put it there.

"Scientifically Trustworthy" is not something with a fixed meaning. But lets break down some things that it could mean:

Is this as good as a peer-reviewed journal?: If you believe in pre-publication peer review, the answer to this is clearly "No". The Winnower is an experiment, a philosophical stance, an an extreme exercise in transparency in the publishing of scholarly material.
Does it have the reputation of a good journal in X field: Again, probably not. I do know some people who have considered fairly extreme principled stands in favor of the same things The Winnower supports - open science and post-pub peer review, who look on it favorably, but I very much doubt it carries much weight in most fields - at least the ones I'm familiar with.
Does it count as a publication?: Maybe. This will very much depend on whose reading your CV, etc.
Is it predatory?: With it being free to post things, and a DOI being relatively cheap, I think it's hard to argue that The Winnower falls in the category of a predatory journal.

But mostly, I think the question betrays a misunderstanding of what The Winnower wants. The whole stance behind the site is that you shouldn't "trust" a journal because it's The Journal of Whatever. You should interrogate what's published there yourself, and the back and forth between reader and author should be made public.


text:
Increasing the chance of being accepted by keeping a Ph.D. Co-Author
As a final year student (B.Sc.) I wrote a paper, but didn't keep my supervisor as co-author since he hadn't contributed at all (in research and paper-writing). I am about to submit my paper to a journal(single-blind peer review).
Does the chance of being accepted a paper to a journal increase if one of the Co-Author is Ph.D./Professor ?
Should one keep his thesis supervisor as co-author for above?
I mean, is there a chance that the reviewer will consider my paper a bit differently/lightly/neglectfully ?

What did your supervisor do?

Does the chance of being accepted a paper to a journal increase if one of the Co-Author is Ph.D./Professor ?

No, not under normal circumstances. Some reviewers may like a paper just because one of the authors is a great guy, or the paper is coming from a great institute - and a reviewer might suggest to accept a paper even if he doesn't understand it - but this should not be the rule.

Should one keep his thesis supervisor as co-author for above?

No, one should only keep authors that deserve authorship. There are likely reasons why you should have your supervisor as co-author on the paper. He might have helped you in other ways, and this way, made a significant contribution to your work (discussions for example). However, you should not add someone as author to please them, to make a better impression, or anything else.

I mean, is there a chance that the reviewer will consider my paper a bit differently/lightly/neglectfully ?

No (except in cases described under the first question). However, it is not unlikely that you - as bachelor student - don't have the experience and overview of the field, the methods, and the art of paper-writing, to create a publishable paper on your own. If you do - congrats.
I would suggest you

think carefully about if your supervisor didn't contribute after all, and
discuss the matter with your supervisor.

He might not even want to be on your paper (because he didn't contribute, or because he thinks it's not good enough). If he does want to be on your paper, but you don't agree with his arguments, you might want to come back here and check other, related questions, for example this one: Should you include your main supervisor as a co-author?

Are you sure in your paragraph you're describing reality rather than ideals? You start with "no" and end with "this should not be the rule". There is a huge difference between whether something should happen and whether it does happen...

I don't know the policy of your University. But I know mostly in universities, a PhD student can not conduct any independent work beyond his thesis. So if the work is under your PhD thesis, then you must have to keep your supervisor as a co-author. Not only that, but you must need to discuss with your supervisor before writing the paper. So please be confirm your university policies before submitting this as a single author.
If your university allows to do such kind of independent research during work time or after office hours or weekends, then you can submit it as a single author. Keeping your supervisor as a co-author will definitely increase the chance of acceptance if he is a well known person to your research community. Moreover, he may change the structure and write ups in your manuscript because he is experienced, so definitely it will increase the acceptance. On the other hand, if you thing neither he is well known nor he will improve the structure of the manuscript, then go ahead as a single author. By the way, single author papers have high values than the papers with co-authors.

The paper is on a  thesis required to complete the graduation.