text:
How do I inspire my students to work through problems on their own?
I recently took up a job at my Alma Mater as an adjunct professor teaching an undergraduate embedded systems course. Due to the nature of the school, and this being my first teaching assignment, I work in conjunction with a more experienced professor; he handles the lecture and one of the lab sections, I handle the other lab section.
I find that my students seem to grasp the concepts discussed in the lecture, but fail to connect what they have learned to actually, practically writing code to solve the problems presented to them. It is as if they can describe what needs to be done, but they can't actually do it on their own. Now, I did some tutoring as well when I was an undergrad, and I saw a similar effect. I know the students are capable, because I have seen them do very similar things before, however as soon as they get stuck on something, they freeze up and even the most basic, prerequisite concepts (programming, in this case) seem to leave their heads.
It is very frustrating, and I have to resist the urge to just hand them the answer, but I feel that as the semester progresses and we encounter more difficult topics, we are going to have issues completing the labs. How can I inspire my students to realize that they do possess the knowledge to solve the problem and that they do not need me to take them to the answer one step at a time? It seems callous to just say "You know this, I'm not helping you" (obviously with less harsh words), but I really don't know how else to get that point across.
Other Thoughts:
Based on some of the answers (which are great, by the way), it seems like I may be mistaken in my assumption that my students know how to program, and that may be related to the fact that this course spends a lot of time trying to teach the important parts of embedded systems, without stressing the programming piece as much, because hey, the students already took a programming class. They already know how to to it.
This is actually something I plan to discuss with my dept. chair. Unfortunately, since I basically handle the lab section for now, and the semester is under way already, I can't exactly modify the course curriculum.
I think we as an institution need to alter the course to have more general, thought provoking programming assignments in addition to the "easy-code hard-implementation" of embedded programming. For example, have the students write a prime number generator in C (for a homework assignment), even if this week's lab is as simple as blinking an LED. Or maybe not even a direct programming assignment, something more like "Explain what could happen if a function that declares a variable calls itself from within itself (recursively) 1 million times?" Its open ended, but with a little research and critical thinking it should be apparent that you'd eventually have a stack overflow/stomp on memory somewhere else. Its hard to make programming assignments that are compact and can't be found on Google.
Thank you all for your answers.

The problem with undergrad courses is they don't instill solution design,and often focus solely on syntax. Some good methods I've seen to work around this includes starting the students with some pseudocode to give them an idea of how to design a solution for the problem.

Are you sure they can actually program? http://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/

That's an interesting blog post @Kimball. Perhaps they do not actually know. However, I would almost expect it from the EE students, since the last "real programming class" they had was in their freshman year, and this is a junior level course. My concern is that the computer engineering students also seem to struggle the same way, and they are currently enrolled in a number of programming-only classes.

While on the other hand, I've had job interviewers reject literal textbook algorithms as not possibly correct: http://www.madmath.com/2015/12/that-time-i-didnt-get-job.html

How do I inspire my students to work through problems on their own?

By giving students assignments that they truly work on their own, with minimal hand-holding, then assigning the appropriate grade. Some students will be upset enough with their less-than-desirable grades such that they become "inspired." The other students who fail to keep up with the pace of the course will earn the grades which truly reflects their lack of ability/skill/etc.
Sitting down with the under-performing students, and explaining that they may benefit, for example, from retaking the necessary prerequisites may be in order. It's not easy to tell a junior/senior that they should probably go back and retake a sophomore-level class, but that's life, and it's better for everyone in the long run.
Although I've not been in my current faculty position for very long, I've already seen the consequences of dumbing down the assignments, and the effect that it has on the quality of the follow-on courses, both in student capabilities and my ability to teach the things that need to be taught at the appropriate pace.
The way I see it, you can either make your assignments easier, or be tough: I have (somewhat reluctantly, at first) grown to prefer the tough route.

Let me give you a student's perspective on things. This may make you very sad to hear, and it may be different elsewhere but, like Kimball touched on, perhaps your students may not know how to code.
It's a sad truth that most of my peers do not know how to program basic tasks, much less more difficult concepts such as linked-lists, binary trees, etc. For most lower level programming courses a lot of the course work can be found online. When I attempt to engage my peers with group study sessions or peer programming I find that most of them seem to be content just copying source code from online and posting it as their own.
Now, professors of higher level programming courses check the source code and grade you on format, structure, readability, variable and method names, and so on; but, many professors for my lower level courses simply checked to make sure the output was correct. My peers are having a very hard time in upper level CS courses, and many of them simply do not understand what is meant by "multi-threading," "dependency injection," "listeners," "interface," "abstract class," "visitor," etc.
I fear that there will soon be a generation of programmers who simply will not know how to program and will have simply skated by in university. I'm interested to hear other people's thought and opinions on this trend. Is my college the odd-man out? Or is this a trend elsewhere as well?

I fear that there will soon be a generation of programmers who simply will not know how to program - I think that generation is already here, and they are reproducing.  Unfortunately, based on their programming acumen, I worry their reproduction method will just be copying pointers to their own DNA rather than using an evolutionary algorithm.

Sounds like you need to train problem solving strategies, like those described in Pólya's "How to solve it" (dated, but very relevant; problems discussed as examples are easy to grasp with minimal mathematics knowledge).
Perhaps the question How to teach perseverance? is also relevant.

I agree with bss. As an almost computer science grad I can attest to how many people can skate by the first few years of classes.True, the answers can be found online but another big issue is that so many people can luck into the solution. Something isn't work? Keeping changing a variable in a while loop until poof! It works. Or they get a hint from another classmate or TA or friend and after that they can piece the pieces together. Then they get to higher level classes and even if they genuinely want to succeed, they don't have that basic understanding, yet they got an A or B in the class. It's a big problem.
However, back to your question. Assuming you know they can get there (or really believe they can) and they are just doubting their abilities (something I have a terrible habit of) I would suggest the Rubber Duck Method. I'll leave the wiki link below but the gist is: you talk to someone/thing explaining what the issue is. So often just talking out loud going step by step of what is happening can result in a "ah ha!" moment. Even writing out the issue on sites like overflow can result in figuring out the solution just by taking the time to specifically lay out the problem.
I do have to say, the worst thing you can do is tell them "come on! It's easy, the answer is so clear!" They are already frustrated and annoyed they can't figure it out and telling them it's easy just discourages them even more. If it's so easy why can't I solve it? Do I really just suck at this? I'm not saying you, OP, are doing this. This is just in general for anyone else in a similar situation.
Good luck!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_duck_debugging

For me all inspiration comes from my internal drive for knowledge. At the age of 12 I was told, and I learned, that the best way to learn is to teach. Have your students tutor other's in their class and to ask for help. Most people believe they must do everything completely on their own or simply were taught that asking for help is weak.
Please contact me with any questions.
Gracias,
Juan Weaver

Hi, and welcome to Academia.SE!  Can you please clarify your statement a bit, as I find it quite confusing.  Your request that people contact you also does not fit with the curated Q&A model of this site.


text:
Currently with a research group for my Master's degree, but am receiving no directions. Is this normal?
I have recently become a Master's student that is in a research group on theoretical elementary particle physics. The program lasts for 2 years and I am expected to have a Master's thesis written up by the end of it. However, I have been told that the research has to be done completely on my own and have received pretty much no instructions or guidelines as to what is expected of me throughout my Master's degree. At the same time, I feel like there are unwritten and untold expectations of what I should be doing, with the peer pressure suggesting that I should figure it out on my own instead of ask someone else.
Despite this, I have asked some of my peers and also my professor, but my peers have told me that everyone goes through the same process, and my professor just tells me that I have to do my own research by myself. As such, I am at an impasse as I feel like I do not know enough about the field right now to embark on any original research. I do have an idea of how broad it is and the sort of prerequisites that I have to study, but there just seems to be too much ground to cover in 2 years, not to mention that I do not have a concrete idea of what are of high energy physics I would like to do my Master's thesis in.
Is this a normal situation I am finding myself in? If so, then is the only solution to just "deal with it"?
Any advice will be deeply appreciated as I find myself feeling extremely lost right now.
P.S. I am in the same institution and research group as I was when I was doing my Bachelor's degree, and had the experience of writing up an original research Bachelor's thesis in the span of 2 months whilst being supervised by a Post Doc in my research group. However, I do not feel like I had a complete grasp of what I did, and though it is quite specialised within the field (String Phenomenology), I do not think I have enough knowledge to even do research surrounding the topic I researched for my Bachelor's thesis.

This sounds either wrong or like an university specific oddity. Did you check with study/course coordinator (not your "supervisor") how much guidance you should get? If that doesn't fit what you get in this group, you could ask to be set in a different group or your supervisor might be informed how to supervise master students.

I find it odd that you have been given absolutely no guidance whatsoever. That doesn't quite sound right. While your advisor may not give you step-by-step guidance to getting started, a little bit of a start by explaining a problem to tackle or suggesting some recent review articles to look at would be the least an advisor could do to get a student started.
When you're done with your higher education, the goal of it will be to enable you to become an expert in a field in which you haven't studied or explored. Learning how to learn is the most important skill you can develop—and your advisor should help you to build those skills!

To me this sounds very wrong. I started my PhD in theoretical high-energy physics (before changing track and becoming a pure mathematician researching geometry, still with some string theory inspiration).
I did a 1-year Master's in maths/theoretical physics without a thesis in the UK before my PhD, so I was in a similar position as you are now when I started the PhD -- and I think it's pretty clear that in theoretical physics the gap between what you do in any of your lecture courses and actual research questions is huge.
My view is: As a Master's student in this field, you can absolutely not be expected to invent your own research project completely on your own. Even as a PhD student, it is a crucial part of your supervisor's role to suggest research projects and guide you on what material to learn to be able to make progress (although if you do come up with your own ideas, that's great).
What about students in other research groups? How is it going for them?
My advice would be to change supervisor, to be honest.

source: Stack Exchange

license: 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/

sort: votes


text:
Stating that my research hold less value compared to another topic. A good idea?
In a couple of days I have to present my master's thesis, which is on a topic of Information System (IS) implementation in a small organisation.
I conduct a study of critical success factors, but during my research I found that the organisation has deeper problems like readiness, culture and knowledge gaps. Therefore, I think that a study on these aspects would give them more value.
Do you think that I should mention this during my research presentation?
Thanks for your time.

What is IS in your post? I would guess internet security.

If you do mention this, be sure to do so respectfully and professionally.  It could come across poorly if you seem to be saying "Here are some thoughts about IS implementation, but it doesn't really matter since the rest of the organization is hopeless anyway."

Your research doesn't have less value simply because you uncovered problems broader than (or different from) what you chose to focus on. An equal way of stating the outcome is to say that your work has opened a door to at least one promising additional line of research! We as researchers are facing the unknown; we necessarily do not know what the results are going to look like ahead of time. Scientifically speaking, as long as the study is well-supported and well-designed, an unexpected outcome is precisely as valuable as a result that looks as expected and/or upholds a hypothesis.
Your presentation will be better if it is self-assured. Confidently and straightforwardly, lay out what you did and how you went about it and what you have discovered, and put in a few slides at the end conveying some excitement about the potential inherent in the interesting things that your work is pointing the way towards. Every study has limitations, and good scientific practice is to acknowledge these transparently but not apologetically. No study can do everything. Knowledge is a collaborative effort, and we can build on each other's findings if we have a good sense of what has been done how.
My MA thesis, in retrospect, had a lot of things in it that I now know to have been oversimplifications. I didn't have a full sense of what was going on; there was so much more to it than that! But I couldn't have gotten here from there. A master's thesis is often a stepping-stone; I'd say that's both natural and usually inevitable. If you feel as if there are signs of you needing to look beyond the scope of a master's paper - I spotted some in mine as well! - that's what I'd call a sign that you're ready for a Ph.D. (if that is your aim).

No problem. Good luck with the presentation!

Just an update. I aced my thesis, receiving the highest mark. The reason for that was that the professors had the exact same remark regarding the paper. This resulted in a very fruitful discussion with a lot of questions and good answers. thanks once again.

Congratulations! I'm delighted to hear it. Happy to have been able to help!

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


text:
Should I let a bad mark from 10 years ago discourage me from taking on a TAship?
10 years ago it was my first year in University and I bombed a course in programming. I had no programming experience and was competing with people have been programming since 10. I felt stupid and my confidence crushed back then.
Since then I have done much more programming in a variety of settings, worked in industry on software projects, and created many projects using various programming languages often under deadline.
I have now returned to school and I am deciding to TA a course on the very same subject I bombed in 10 years ago.
However, I feel discouraged given my bad performance in this course. I feel like I still don't deserve to help to teach young people. I feel that other people are much more qualified than me even though they may be much younger. Plus I am also questioning if I actually know the concepts. Logically, a lot of the things I know and done are transferable, but I can't get over my self-doubt.
In this situation, should I decide to TA this course or not?

That you did the course badly should not discourage you - it appears you learned something since then. Can you somehow find out (ask a prof) if you know the concepts?

What might the connection to the dublicate be?

This is ultimately a personal decision for you to make and it's likely that the question will be closed.
I assume that you now have adequate background to be a TA for this course, so you've overcome the difficulties that you had when you first took the course.  Let me suggest to you that your experience in struggling with this course as a beginner is something that can help you in working as TA for the course because you'll understand how the students are sometimes struggling with the course.

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


text:
can I take parts from my thesis (different language) to be used in a paper without paraphrasing?
My PhD thesis is in French, can I take parts from it, just translate them to English (without any paraphrasing) and use them in my next paper? would this cause any plagiarism issues?

I'm at a loss to explain the down voting on the answers. No one has expressed any views contrary to what was written. Both of the answers at this moment are valid. Cite your old work to avoid self-plagiarism. The concept of paraphrasing is immaterial here. Maybe one or more of the voters would like to comment or provide an alternative answer.

I also wonder why the down voting? I prefere some written answers that can help!

@Buffy be good to see eloquent comments from a downvoter, but I may have to wait a long time.

If it's properly attributed, then it's no plagiarism and with a PhD thesis there should also be no copyright issues (You should check whatever you signed to publish that though, just to be on the safe side).
There are a lot of papers that effectively start with something like "This article consists of material that first appeared in the authors PhD thesis [..]" and "This article is an English language translation of [...]". Assuming that you intend to publish parts of the thesis as a paper, yours would just be a combination of the two.
A slightly different thing would be to only reuse some paragraphs or smaller sections, e.g. a literature review or descriptions of an experiment. Again if attributed, this is no plagiarism, but generally this is a bit frowned upon. Personally, I'd see it as a sign that you are either too lazy to adapt the section to the specific context of the new paper or that the new context is identical to the old one, which then begs the question why there is a second paper in the first place. Even there, there are however times where doing so is reasonable and a translation of material otherwise unavailable to non French-speakers could be one of them.
Edit: Also please don't just "translate without any paraphrasing". There are always some formulations and sentence structures that work in one language and not the other. Those should be adapted.

yeah, language and sentence structures would be respected, what I meant is that the original text is my text so I don't think that I have to paraphrase it again.

Reference them as normal - plagiarism is not limited to words but ideas so proper attribution is the way to go.

I would use the word "cite" rather than "reference", but the intent of this answer is correct.


text:
How can I ease in to the research arena?
I'm a first year graduate student and my age is 24. I got a degree in statistics, but it was not that interesting. I barely got into a below average grad school program in mathematics. I want to eventually publish some research in mathematical-physics in a few years but I doubt it'll be any good, because everything up to this point has shown me otherwise. I didn't "shock" on the SAT's. I've never been at the top of my class.
I want to look into special and general relativity, quantum information, gravity, and entropy and quantum mechanics. Relativity and quantum mechanics describe our world in very different terms. In quantum mechanics, events unfold against a fixed backdrop of spacetime — while in general relativity, spacetime itself is flexible. What would a quantum theory of curved space-time look like? These are the questions that interest me.
So here I am, in a mathematics grad program. Thinking about leaving and quitting math and science for good. But I think I want to give it one more go. Maybe research as a hobby. I do want to publish a paper in the next 3-4 years.
So, what's the best way for someone in my position to "ease in" to the research arena while maintaining a healthy work life balance?

This might help:  https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11765/ive-somehow-convinced-everyone-that-im-actually-good-at-this-how-to-effect

You don't say why you want to do research in mathematics, and you suggest that it doesn't interest you. Are there subjects that do interest you like health or criminology? If so, you could use your quantitative skills to do research in those fields.

So you're saying you are not particularly strong in what your doing, be it for motivation or any other reason, yet your goal is to tackle one of the biggest open questions in physics, where great minds have a hard time making progress. Maybe you should rethink your expectations?

Find an advisor and shadow them. That is, do the sorts of things they do; emulate them in reading, writing, etc.
With the help of an advisor find a problem that interests you. Plug away constantly and incessantly on that problem. Read a lot of related work. When you get some results decide, along with your advisor, what to do with them? Paper? Thesis? Repeat as necessary.
Once you have some success, replace/augment the advisor with other colleagues. Repeat.
It is actually what about 90% (maybe more) of grad students do. There are a few that don't need the advisor, but I've not met any of them. The advisor is at least good as a sounding board.

What is "shadow" supposed to mean?

@user151413, follow in their footsteps. That is, do the sorts of things they do.

I see, thanks. In German, "shadow" has more a connotation of always following them, physically rather than in spirit. That felt a bit weird ... :-o

@user151413, edited to clarify (I hope).

"Emulate" still sounds a bit scary ;)


text:
How do we solve the problem about bad behavior (unfair evaluation) in lab?
My undergraduate student told me that he had some problems when he attended the lab session in our department. This lab session is mandatory and one of the components of the course evaluation.
The source of the problem is the lab assistants. They asked him many irrelevant questions about their student union, like the name of the chair, secretary, etc. Unfortunately, he is not a member of this union, so he could not answer. Therefore, they failed him and he has to retake the test.
I want to help my student.
Previously, I considered reporting this case to the chair. However, I remembered that my chair once said that he did not like students who do not join the student union. Hence, I did not report to him.
Do you know the best way to solve this problem with minimum effort?
For further information, the university is located in a developing country in South East Asia.
Note:
The union is a student organization. Historically, the union were the response for the repressive regime. To become a member of the union, the student should attend some orientation activity. Most of the activity is hazing.

Is there a "Director of Undergraduate Studies" or similar person whose role is to oversee undergraduate teaching?

The chair is responsible for the undergraduate teaching. However, the chair dislike non-member of the student union.

Do you know the best way to solve this problem with minimum effort? Sorry to sound pessimistic, but I doubt that the problem can be solved even with maximum effort. You are effectively asking how to solve systemic political corruption in a country rife with it. That seems to me to be beyond the powers of this forum. The only practical suggestion I can think of is for the student to join the student union in question, but I'm guessing there are some strong reasons why he does not want to do that.

Unions, the gift that keeps on giving.  Wait, shouldn't all that information be freely available somewhere?  I mean, a student union should have to register with the school, therefore the school should have all the information on file.  If you were to be able to learn this information and disseminate the information to students in case they run into this situation in the future, problem would be solved.

@DanRomik: One of the reason why he does not want to join the union is hazing in the union's orientation.

@NZKshatriya Thanks for your suggestion. Although, I am not sure that I will get the information in detail.

@testes well good luck to you and him both. Maybe you can contact the press, or find some allies within the university who oppose this corrupt system? Anyway, sadly my skepticism remains. You are facing an uphill battle, and unless you are willing to dedicate your life to fighting this injustice, it is likely that nothing will change.

Is there anyone at a higher level than the chair who might be sympathetic?  If yes, you could go to that level, but it will probably negatively affect your relationship with the chair, which could potentially harm your career.  If not, then I think Dan Romik's comment applies.

There is the slim chance that while the individual might not like people who don't join the union they might still find it ridiculous that, say, chemistry exams or similar are including large numbers questions on irrelevant topics like details of the union. Of course that depends on how strongly the individual feels on the issue and whether they're a generally reasonable person.

@NateEldredge I will ask the advice from senior faculty, but I have to be careful to tell the right person. Most of the faculty is the alumnus of the union. I was not an undergraduate student in this university.

@Murphy There is ``nonsense solidarity" among the members of the union. My student also told me that the participant of the lab session did not want to help him.

Hang on, it's not clear that everybody is on the same page here.  Could you please edit your question and explain what you mean by "union"?  Who is part of it (just undergrads, or what?), what's it for, what do the members do, etc.?  Also, could you explain why your student couldn't just answer the questions, and then just quietly not join the union?  If this has all been written up somewhere, then just post a link.  Thanks.

A more specific title would be a good idea, too.  When you say "discrimination", most people are going to think race, gender, religion, etc.  Discrimination based on union membership is also a problem, but the solutions are likely to be quite different.

@NateEldredge Sorry for my bad english. I have edited my question.

@aparente001 I have edited my question. The student could not answer the question because he is not a member, so he did not the detailed information. The student should pass a selection process (include hazing),  to become a member of the union.

Thanks, the edit is helpful.  Hmm.  I'm starting to think "union" might not be an accurate description.  I'm sorry, I wish I knew more about your part of the world.  Maybe we should ask for guidance on English SE (ELU) or politics or something having to do with international stuff.

If they quizzed and graded him on campus matters as part of a science lab, I think that's ridiculous. Can they provide a list of questions that he failed to answer related to the subject he was being quizzed on? Did they give him feedback on how he could improve his performance? It's also possible that the student gave you an incomplete account of the quiz, i.e. maybe the silly questions were asked but did not count towards the grade. I'd start by investigating the bad grade, i.e. find the evidence that the lab assistants are using to justify giving the student the grade that they did.

@aparente001 While I've not heard of this particular issue before, I've certainly heard about other cases of abusively powerful student unions linked to political parties.  This is not hard to believe in certain countries.

@jakebeal - Links?  Examples?  I've only been to Europe and Latin America.  I have some gaps to fill in.

@aparente001 Communist parties frequently have student unions associated with them; when the Communist party is a powerful governing organization, it is not unusual for its student unions to be quite significant players on campus.

@jakebeal - Thank you.  But why is it called a union?  I'm getting the impression it's a misnomer.  Is there a better term?

@aparente001 I don't know about the OP's specific case, but in many cases it is very much a union in the traditional labor sense; communist parties frequently explicitly fuse labor unions and political/governmental organizations.

@jakebeal and aparente001: Recently, I got some information about the history of the student union. Initially, the membership of the student union was given to all students in a particular major (without selection). However, around late 70's & 80's, the repressive government restricted and banned many students organization in this country. The students reacted this repression by keeping their organization in secret and making new type selection of union's membership (including hazing). Some students did not want to join the union because of this selection.

... Other students felt that these students did not have ``solidarity/friendship sense". This caused a division and hatred among students in their daily life. This tradition last from 80's until now, although the repressive government was overthrown in the late 90's.

It strongly depends on which country. As jakebeal referred to, various political organizations do various things that people outside those countries can hardly believe.  There has been a large amount of political change in the region lately, and various groups are, well, making changes. You should be exceedingly wary of this situation. You should seek advice from somebody you trust who is knowledgeable about the local situation.

From what you have written, it appears that the fundamental problem is that you are dealing with a nakedly corrupt organization. You describe your student as having been failed for blatantly political reasons that have nothing to do with their education.
Such an action is obviously unethical, and should not be tolerated. The key questions that I see, then, are these:

Is there is anybody who you can work with in order to effectively oppose this corruption?
Does your student want to be a test case against corruption?

You describe your chair as being in favor of the current regime. You may wish to discuss in any case, as even if your chair doesn't like students who don't join the union, they may still be opposed to naked abuse of power by union members. If the chair will not act, are there deans or such who might? Are there other faculty members or student organizations who feel the same way as you? What about outside groups that might bring pressure, such as local or international media?
This does sound like an important fight to fight, but also remember that it is not only your fight. If their power is strong and you directly oppose them, the student union may choose to make life very difficult for your student, so before taking any direct action in opposition, it would be important to discuss potential consequences with your student. Since they did not simply take the expedient path and join the union, they may well be willing to fight; equally, however, they may have circumstances that make it problematic for them to do so, and it is not your right to make that choice on their behalf.

Thank you for your suggestion. I try to consult to senior faculty.


text:
From these two options, which one is better toward becoming a Professor in a high-ranking university?
Let's say you've just finished your PhD.(EECS), your ultimate goal is to become a Professor from any high-ranking University (world top 100). You are presented with two main options.
Option 1: Starting at once as an Assistant Professor in a low-ranking University (world top 3000), with clear options to become fast enough an Associate (after 4 or 5 years) and then maybe, try to apply to a better ranked University of your likeness.
Option 2: Enrolling in a Post-Doctoral 2 or 3 years in a high-ranking University (world top 100) and then try to apply for an Assistant Professor position at a simlarly high or slightly lower-ranked University.
In short, Low-ranked Professor position vs High-ranked Post-Doctoral position?
What is the way to go toward a High-ranked Professor position?

You are trying to predict the future, which is impossible to answer.  You could go to a top or low ranking university, but failed miserably due to many factors.  Yes, top universities  have more prepared students, but say they do not want to work with you.    Same with resources, more $ but more sharks too.

Actually, neither is better, or worse. The goal, while extremely unlikely to be met (statistically), can be achieved in either scenario, but will depend on other things, not the particular choice here. And two of those factors are just timing and chance.
Even if, statistically, one could be shown to correlated more highly with the goal than the other, the numbers of entry positions in a given field in those top 100 institutions in a given year (or short time span) are so small as to make the stats meaningless. And you don't speak the language for lots of them, I expect.
And even if you could get such an offer, you might not want to take it based on other factors such as place (country/city/language), likelihood of success there, and other personal things. Cambridge (Massachusetts, or UK) is a great place, but not for everyone.
It is good to have goals and to shoot high, but if you want to be a success in top (i.e. research oriented) universities then you need to do a lot of research, produce a lot of quality papers, probably with a lot of collaborators. If you do that, and can also teach effectively, especially upper level students, then you might have a shot along with millions of other aspirants with more coming along every year.
Note that each of those top 100 institution, not unlike all the others, has its own goals and, while they overlap a lot, aren't the same. Some, I know (been there) put a lot of emphasis on undergraduate education. Others just treat it as a necessary task. Still others don't deal with it at all, I'd guess.
Take a look at the current world ranking of universities to get an idea about the diversity of universities. Those around a ranking of 2500 or so are so vastly different from the top 100 that starting a career there would make it quite difficult to move to the top just because of the much lower opportunity (not zero) to do quality visible research.
But Srinivasa Ramanujan moved up from the University of Madras (currently around 2000) to Cambridge. It isn't impossible, but there was both luck and the sponsorship of Hardy involved. And few are the equal of Ramanujan in any case.
And, you don't indicate the perceived level of the university from which you just graduated. If it is in the top 50 or so, then you have a better shot, just because, if you played the game wisely, you have a lot of professors who can predict your success. That itself can be a big factor, even if it wasn't the top 50. If your professors are known and can vouch for you then you have a shot.
tl/dr: Other factors dominate. Think more broadly. Think more about your overall quality of life than about the ranking of the place you will work.

Ramanujan lived in a very different world. Today's world is so hardly strucutred and bureaucratic (with the final goal of increasing productivity) that whatever merit is killed at the very beginning.

@EarlGrey, perhaps, but he wasn't given much of any advantage in his situation, different, perhaps, but not better.

He had the huge advantage that he could speak at the research level with peers before he could speak with them about formal stuff (employment, etcetc). On top of that, in that time his peers were strongly involved and responsible for hiring new faculties. Nowadays there is a selection comitee, where quite often the math faculty has the same weight as the person responsible for the estate property management. Nowadays, even the sponsorship of Hardy would not be enough.

Ramanujan is probably a 'god' level example.  There many other examples whereby a bright student from a developing country gets plucked out of obscurity into a top university.


text:
Is "e.g." ever needed in parenthetical citations?
It seems to me that "e.g." is rarely needed in parenthetical citations because readers assume that the works listed are examples taken from all works on the topic. For example:
"This theory has been disproved by numerous researchers (e.g., Jones, 2012; Kelvin, 2022; Stone et al., 2019)."
Why would "e.g." be needed in that citation? "Numerous" already hints that there are too many works to list them all and thus the three works given are examples.
Is there any authoritative source that addresses the use of "e.g." in parenthetical citations?

There's nothing wrong with "e.g.". I use it intentionally whenever I'm citing an intentionally selected subset of the relevant papers. I have never been told by an editor or style guide to get rid of it.

Some people may take 3 to be "numerous". Adding e.g. makes it clear that it's more than 3.

You're right that it isn't a requirement. It's an option you can use. In general, I think the "e.g." is used more for clarity in "citation signaling". Its presence clearly signals that there are more examples, whereas its absence is silent on this point. The choice of sources can provide another level of signaling. If they are review articles or textbooks, the reader might get a different idea of the size of the literature on the topic than if the sources are primary research works, etc. So think about what you want to signal with a given citation, and phrase it accordingly. Parenthetically, I seem to remember an answer on this site mentioning using "e.g." in some citations to discourage reviewers from suggesting additional papers to cite...

"This theory has been disproved by numerous researchers (e.g., Jones, 2012; Kelvin, 2022; Stone et al., 2019)."
Why would "e.g." be needed in that citation? "Numerous" already hints that there are too many works to list them all and thus the three works given are examples.

(Emphasis mine.) That's not necessarily true. Without the "e.g." or "for example", the cited works could be, e.g., review articles cataloging the literature or listing the "numerous researchers" claimed to exist.  If you don't mind that being a possible interpretation, leaving out the "e.g." is fine. (I suppose they could be review articles even with the "e.g.", but in that case I would prefer "see, e.g.,".)
Also, consider the citation without the mention of "numerous researchers", i.e. "This theory has been disproved (e.g., Jones, 2012; Kelvin, 2022; Stone et al., 2019)." vs "This theory has been disproved (Jones, 2012; Kelvin, 2022; Stone et al., 2019).". The former implies there are more sources disproving the theory, but the latter could be interpreted in several ways. Is the list of sources exhaustive, is it just a selection, or is it perhaps some authoritative treatments of the literature?

Following your logic, it seems that a large number of citations would need "e.g.", since authors don't usually read or cite all works on a topic. In fact they can't even realistically be aware of all works. Wouldn't this then lead to overuse of "e.g."? That is the problem I'm trying to resolve.

@Eggy I expanded the answer somewhat. In my opinion, the "e.g." is an optional signaling tool. Like with other devices, I would encourage judicious use.

I find that the overuse of "e.g." is characteristic of specific authors, more like an individual habit. (I am a faculty editor.) In my experience, the norm is to not use "e.g." I wish I could find an authoritative source on this to direct authors to.

@Eggy I write like this, and it's a habit I invented myself, via a first-principles justification similar to the one described in this answer. If an authoritative source said not to, I would just do it anyway. If your intention is to discourage authors who do this habitually, I doubt you'll have much luck.

My intention is to find a credible source that states the accepted scholarly standard for using or not using "e.g." in parenthetical citations.

Another alternative to consider could be adding "etc." at the end if you like the style better. Of course, whether that is appropriate will depend on the specific scenario.

@Eggy: I think the reason you’re not finding such a source is because there isn’t a fixed standard for this.  I fully agree with you that some authors overuse it, and that that’s bad style, and when giving advice/reviews I might well suggest removing it sometimes — but that’s just like how some authors overuse “In summary…”, “Indeed…”, “…the abovementioned…”, and many other words or phrases.   As this answer explains, there are some circumstances where it’s quite appropriate, and the upvotes and comments show reasonable consensus support for that.

I've accepted Anyon's answer and upvoted PLL's response as well. For a definitive answer, I contacted the editorial expert for the APA manual. She essentially confirmed what Anyon and PLL state, that "e.g." is sometimes appropriate and helpful and there are no rules about this. I will continue to weed out "e.g." where it serves no purpose.  In answer to Michael Mior, there is no academic style that allows "etc." at the end of a parenthetical citation. Thanks to all who contributed thoughts on this!

@Eggy I have looked around a little bit to see if I can find any resources weighing in on the topic, but I've basically only found an APAStyle tweet confirming it's an option. There are also detailed guidelines specific to legal writing, but that field is rife with idiosyncrasies, so I don't think they generalize.

Thanks for your efforts, Anyon.


text:
How to balance lecture participation and not being considered a show-off?
I am a student in a rather small (20-40 students) lecture. This lecture is mandatory for the students of this subject in this semester. In the course of the lecture the professor regularly asks students questions or encourages them to theorize about possible solutions to a problem before revealing the proper solution. Usually only about five of the students raise their hands and give answers. I am one of them and maybe the one who participates the most. I partly studied this subject before so I have a little more knowledge than the others but I am also genuinely interested in the subject while most of the others seem to find it boring and are only there to be able to pass the exam.
I often hesitate raising my hand or don't do it at all because I feel like I answer most of the questions and almost get into a dialog with the professor while all the others sit around me, bored and maybe a little annoyed (I didn't notice any negative reactions). I also usually wait a bit after a question was asked and only raise my hand if nobody else did in order to give the others a chance to participate.
I feel like I am constantly restraining myself from showing to much enthusiasm in fear of appearing as a geek or a show-off. What can I do?
Possible duplicate: How not to come off as boasting or arrogant, if you are one of the few active students in a class?
(only found this after posting)

Be a proud geek ;-)

A good instructor will know how to manage this. You're part of the usual suspects who answer. One way for an instructor to get more participation is to give the class a few minutes to answer the question, to write the answer down, and mention before that she'll call on someone at random.

One genuine issue is that the class is "required", so that people will be there who (probably misguidedly, even about their own welfare) don't want to be there. Unless you imagine that you can "re-educate" them, there is simply no way to "cause" them to participate at a reasonable level... For that matter, there is a bizarre (understandable in human terms) culture of feigned indifference or hostility to the very thing one is studying, to pre-empt the stigma of failure... Don't get sucked into that. Be polite, but don't collapse to the swamp of unresponsiveness that may be popular...

I've been there!
In hindsight (I wish I had thought of this at the time) -- I suppose the mature thing to do would be to visit office hours, and put the problem in the professor's lap.  The most polite way to do this would be with an I-message (e.g. I feel bad monopolizing the airwaves by responding to a large proportion of your questions to the class) rather than something that could be experienced as an accusation (e.g. The other students don't seem to be comfortable answering your questions).
The professor might at this point say, I've been frustrated about the low participation rate of most of the students -- do you have any ideas for how to encourage others to participate more?
Be prepared with suggestions, in case that question comes -- but don't offer any if it doesn't.
If you have a general tendency toward this thing that is sometimes called overparticipating:

Try to fit your level of participation to the level of the other 4-5 active students.
One way to do this is to put three small, smooth stones in one pocket, and transfer one over to the other pocket each time you participate.  When you're out of stones, that's it for today, look forward to next class!
It is easier to inhibit yourself from raising you hand to be called on (or speaking, if it's an environment where people just jump in) if you have something to do with your hands (Rubik's cube, some tedious homework, some elaborate doodling or sketching, some knitting or mending, designing or solving a maze, etc.).
Perhaps you could respond to some of the questions with a question of your own that will hopefully elicit some productive mental gear turning on the part of those students who are somewhat following along.  Ex: "I wonder if there's a way to reduce the three-dimensional problem down to a two-dimensional one...."

One possible outcome of the conversation with the professor is to agree that you won't call attention to yourself be raising your hand, but are willing to respond anyway.  This allows the professor to manage how often they call you and/or save the harder problems which no one else is volunteering to answer for you.

I have often marvelled at the fact that two students can enter university at the same time, take the same classes and both emerge four years later with a degree; but one of them will have learned very little, whereas the other will have emerged equipped with a huge amount of valuable knowledge.
It sounds like you are one of the lucky ones who will really get their money's worth (or their parents' or government's money's worth) out of your studies. You do not just sit in class as a passive spectator, but you actually take an interest in the material and actively participate in the learning process. That is the only way in my opinion to achieve true learning and acquire real knowledge that will stay with you not just for a few weeks or months but for many years after you have taken your exam.
So, you ask: What can I do? The answer is, do not worry what people think, but instead just keep doing precisely what you're doing. It is not you, but the other students in the class who should be coming here and posting concerned questions like What can I do to get more out of my degree? My answer to them would be: do what @problemofficer is doing!


text:
I am an assistant professor. In an email, how should I address an associate professor in a different university with no prior contact?
I am an assistant professor outside the US. I want to email an associate professor in another university in the US, who I haven't talked to before. He's American. It's just because I want to discuss his paper. I agree with his paper, so the discussion will be most likely "nice".
Which is better? "Dear Professor {last name}" or "Dear {first name}"?
Does your answer change if he's a young assistant professor or an old almost-retiring full professor?

The better greeting probably comes down to personal preference, and I doubt either will cause issues in the US. I'm a PhD student, and I always address people with their first name when I first contact them. This has always seemed to be received fine.

From a CS perspective: if I see "Dear Dr ... " or "Dear Professor ..." in the first line of the email I assume the person is either an undergrad or otherwise completely unfamiliar with academia in the English speaking world/that its likely spam.

"I agree with his paper, so the discussion will be most likely "nice"." I am not sure what you meant with that sentence. Is their "paper" a statement of political stance rather than a research paper?

@Stef I think the OP just means that they are not intending to criticize the paper's findings, but are just trying to learn more about the topic. Basically, they aren't sending a message like "I think your paper is wrong for reasons X, Y, and Z", which if not phrased delicately could offend someone.

"Hi Bob" - It's 2021, honourifics are outmoded and shouldn't generally be used unless you're writing for something very ceremonious

I am French and it would always be "Cher Dr ", or "Monsieur/Madame". @Oxonon - if someone used my first name I would assume complete unfamiliarity of the French academia world or spam :)

When in doubt, play it safe.
Addressing the professor using "Professor (lastname)" will do no harm to anyone, while some may take offence to using the first name. In any first instance of communication, I always advocate the formal tone of "Dear Professor", and keep an eye on their articulation of the salutation. If they write
Email content bla bla ...
Best regards,
First-name

then that is your sign to start addressing the person by their first name (in case they are superior/senior). If they do not, continue with the formal tone. In the other case, if you happen to be senior, use the common tactics in military: address an unknown junior officer with a formal tone, then when they reply, start using their first name to show that the seniority has been established.

The last comment may vary by service. When I was a junior officer in the Navy, both enlisted personnel and senior officers called me Mr. Guyer or LT Guyer. I called senior officers by their title ("WEPS", "ENG", "XO", "Captain"). I called enlisted by their rank and name ("Petty Officer So-and-so" or "Chief Hooziwatzitz". The only people I was on a first-name basis with were other junior officers (and not them either in duty situations/in front of other ranks).

@jeguyer. Thanks for the clarification. I still read that the form of address for someone above vs. below is clearly different.

Other thoughts: (1) the probability that someone expects to be addressed with a title/last name by an academic stranger may vary with field (in pure math, pretty low); (2) some people don't actually like to be called by their legal first name, even if they use it for publishing.

Note that 'Dear' is already toned-down formal, the 'proper' formal (that I have used in the past) may replace 'Dear' with 'Respected'. I do not recommend that unless culturally normed or if you're addressing a Nobel laureate.

"Culturally normed", indeed.  I have never seen a letter addressed to "Respected ", nor previously even been aware of that particular formalism.  But I agree that the "Dear" salutation is of medium formality.

I'm in CS, and my exchanges are always like this: I start with "Dear Dr X, my name is First-name Last-name, and here's who I am and what I contact you about. Best regards, Firstname". This is both respectful and, at the same time, sets the tone that you aren't interested in pointless formalities. Without exception, the exchange continues like this: they reply with "Dear Firstname, ..., Regards, Charles", I reply with "Hi Charles".

In the US, the only time "Dear {first name}" is appropriate is when communicating between established friends, coworkers or family. It is never appropriate in any professional setting -- academia or business -- until you actually are established friends.

@Foundling I think your suggestion misrepresents Stack Exchange's rules. Comments are ephemeral and meant only to request clarifications and improvements to the question. Any attempt to reply to the matter at hand should go in an answer, even if it is short. People don't always respect these rules, but that's how the system works.

That's probably location specific (and the question is indeed about someone in the US). The UK seems to be a bit more relaxed in that respect (it may vary depending on the circumstances).

I think you're entirely incorrect there for many, many countries. It's perfectly acceptable in most settings in the UK (and a lot of the rest of Europe) to just go "Hi Bob", even if you don't know them

@Persistence The question specifically addresses the US, but I will edit to clarify that.

@CareyGregory - I'm not even sure that's true in a US context, I've worked with people in the US plenty and never found them to expect anyone to use anything except their first name

@Persistence In this context I'm afraid you are wrong. I'm a US citizen who has spent 35 years in business and academia here. I think I have a wee bit better sense of this than someone who has worked with people in the US "plenty."

That may well be true but your anecdote is no more valid than mine when you're making statements as absolute as "never appropriate"... Clearly it is appropriate in some settings otherwise I wouldn't have had the experiences I have had. In all likelihood it varies heavily from state to state, business to business and industry to industry. I really doubt you'll find silicon valley tech bros referring to eachother as "Mr X"

@Persistence We're not talking about tech bros. We're talking about writing a formal letter to a professor you've never communicated with before. In the US, the only polite way to address that letter is "Professor Jones" or "Doctor Jones".  Go ahead and try addressing it to "Yo Dude!" and see where you get with that.

You literally said "It is never appropriate in any professional setting -- academia or business"... Silicon Valley contains businesses in which tech bros work. Clearly, that is a counterexample to your claim.
I'm willing to accept your claim that it's usually better to go with Dear Title Last Name but I'm not willing to accept your absolute aspersion when I know of clear counter-examples

@Persistence You're being pedantic and arrogant. I'm a tech bro and have been for over 30 years. I would never write a letter to a professional with whom I've had no contact before and address them by their first name, and nobody else I know in the tech bro world would either. If were employees of the same company I might, but that's entirely different.

Indeed! Yes, I'm a relatively senior citizen, so maybe culture has drifted, but I myself would never address someone by their first name if I didn't know them! In "my culture", being "on-a-first-name-basis" means some acquaintance: perhaps extended family, perhaps friendship, perhaps work-related. The only people you'd address by their first name without prior acquaintance would be children. :)

@CareyGregory - I'm not being pedantic, or arrogant, I'm suggesting that you should be accurate when giving answers here and your answer isn't accurate. I'm also not convinced you understand what I mean by tech bro, but that's by the by. My point remains, there are plenty of situations where it's acceptable to just use someone's first name. I'm willing to accept your claim that it might not be the norm, I have no evidence to the contrary, but it's clearly not as absolute as you claim.

Prof.
In my experience this is the standard academic address to someone you don’t know. E.G., This is what journal editors tend to use when asking for reports. No one is likely to be offended. Even in countries where more complicated/formal titles are the norm.
Of course, “Hi” or “Dear” are mostly fine too. But I have heard of (older?) people being offended on occasion.


text:
Is it necessary for a grad student to respond to phone calls, as long as they're responsive on email?
I am asking this for a friend who hopes to enter grad school for a PhD next year in science.  This person has a cell phone but almost always turns it off and has no voice mail (meaning there is no way to leave a phone message). I think not answering phone calls or being available by phone would make it difficult for my friend to be successful as a grad student, esp. as a RA or TA.
My friend has a variety of reasons for not wanting to have phone on or voice mail set up that I will not specify here.
So I am looking for thoughts from grad students or professors.

What is this "telephone" thing you talk about. I only do e-mail communications. That being said, there is such considerable variation amongst advisors that this is an impossible question to answer in general.

You answered your own question and then ask us to endorse you?

Is your question about responding to phone calls or about receiving phone calls on their private cellphone? Those are two very different things. For instance, I have never handed out my cellphone number to any work contact, and yet, I regularly (albeit not overly frequently; maybe once or twice a month) receive phone calls on my office phone.

a) Phone calls from who(m)? Supervisor? Department? Admin? Students (esp. if they're TA)? Coworkers? Non-academic people? It makes a huge difference. b) Which phone line? Their own cellphone? An office line? Shared or private? Voicemail or live call? Not all offices have landlines. Not all office-mates take messages. Do we assume they consented to giving out their cellphone number (e.g. to students), or not? As to TA interactions, it depends on departmental policy on how, where, when and how much TA's interact with students, inside and outside office hours.

It would be interesting if you mention some of his reasons why telephone is not his preferred communication device.

Anybody who wants to participate in scientific life, even as a grad student, needs to have some way that they can be reliably reached in a timely fashion. They also need to provide that information to those who need to reach them (e.g., their professor, students if they are a TA).
Whether their recommended best means is by cell phone, by email, or by instant message, however, matters much less.  In fact, the current generation appears to be moving away from voice calls, so cell phone availability is less likely to matter in any case.
Thus, as long as it's easy for people who need to reach your friend to do so, the particular choice of not having a cell phone on should not be a problem.

Being a TA or RA is not being a receptionist, secretary, or personal assistant. It's also not taking pizza delivery orders. Answering phone calls is not part of the job requirements in the vast majority of cases.
Now, that being said, it's possible that if the desk where your friend sits and the office where their supervisor works are physically separated by some distance, the supervisor may try to call before they come looking for your friend or to ask your friend to come to their office. My supervisor's office was 4 floors up and then he moved across the street and 6 floors up---he called before coming over to the lab to chat.
So, if your friend has a phobia or other problem related to telephones, it's possible they may have to work out an arrangement with their supervisor so that they can be contacted via SMS, instant message, or email quickly when their advisor (or anyone else, really) is looking for them, but otherwise, it will be fine.

In the particular case of "advisor or collaborator wants to find out if student is at desk" the school-provided hardwire phone should be perfectly adequate.  Of course, it doesn't help so much for discovering "When will you be back at your desk?"

@BenVoigt, I'm reading between the lines, but I feel like the friend has a phone phobia. This probably isn't about not having a phone or not wanting to give out a personal number, it appears to be about not wanting to interact with a telephone at all.

I, as a grad student, have never in my life used my phone for work/research/teaching purposes.
In my field (Maths) and country (UK) handing out phone numbers to students or advisors is completely unheard of. In fact, if you do so then people will think you are weird!!

It is definitely not weird. With some colleagues from Sheffield it is normal to use the phone to arrange things/discuss things, including the mobile phone. In my Leeds department it was less common but again depending on the situation was an option.

Disagree. In Ireland, where the scientific culture is very similar to the UK, most researchers tend to have their superiors phone number (and vice versa). This is not about socializing, some times urgent matters come up. Since this was also the case for the British people in my institute, I would be very surprised the UK culture regarding this issue is as you mention. As a matter of fact I have the phone numbers of a couple of UK-based collaborators.

I find the same, especially if it is a personal phone number.

I think this is generally just going to come down to your specific situation. Some advisors will want to communicate by phone, others won't. In the case of my advisor, getting him on the phone was the only reliable way to get a quick answer because he was quite busy and often forgot to respond to e-mails. For others, though, e-mail only may be perfectly fine. Of course, if you need to have any sort of discussion, it's much easier with the phone than with e-mail, since the reply latency is on the order of seconds rather than minutes or hours.

No, using the phone is not a requirement to be a successful grad student. It may depends where you work, on your advisor, on your field, etc. But personnally, during my studies in Canada, I have mostly communicated by e-mail with my supervisors and other colleagues.  In terms of phone, I have answered the phone at the lab a few times, but it was not a requirement. And I did not have a cell phone either.

Is your friend me? :)
Having been a graduate student for years, I've never had anyone call me for professional reasons (except perhaps to ask for directions when meeting up at a conference or social event), and I've never seen this happen to any grad student I know.
The closest thing that I can think of is stories I've heard of naive TAs giving out their cell number to students, who then incessantly call at inopportune times (such as 1 am in the night before an exam). Avoiding this "responsibility" cannot possibly impair a graduate student's success, since TA orientation workshops tend to recommend it.
Academics almost exclusively communicate with email. When face-to-face communication is necessary, it usually happens through a pre-arranged Skype session. I think due to the nature of most office arrangements in Academia, the disruption and break in concentration caused by phones is unwelcome. Often there are conferences, classes or meetings where phones are muted. On top of this, if the person in question does much lab work, they may often be physically unable to answer the phone.

"most office arrangements in Academia" - could you concretely describe the office arrangements you are referring to, please? I am used to one office for two to three people, so it is still well feasible to work as usually at most one person in an office receives or conducts brief phone calls, takes part in longer (up to several hours) online audio conversations with project partners, or is discussing the progress of work with their students. Your statements are certainly very reasonable, but they do not necessarily apply to "most office arrangements" I have personally experienced.

@O.R.Mapper In my experience, you often end up with 2-6 people in a room with adjacent or very close desks, or otherwise up to 10 people in a cubicle layout. In either case, whenever you have a conversation everyone can hear. Though perhaps my own experience is not as representative as I thought.

One issue that has not been mentioned is administrative matters.
Usually when you start as a grad student, your department asks you to fill out a form with contact information, typically including a phone number.  (You may have a similar form for higher echelons of the university.)  If you put a phone number on that form, the department's administrative staff is going to expect that calling that number will reach you.  The vast majority of administrative matters are handled by email, but occasionally there can arise something urgent where someone needs to speak with you right away.  ("We need this form signed today or your stipend will not be paid."  "Another TA is sick, can you take over her class in 15 minutes?"  "Your office is being flooded with sewage.")  In those cases, they may very well try to phone you - and it's not so good if this results in them leaving a message you will never hear.
And if you don't put a phone number, it's likely that you will have to explain why you don't want to be called, and hope that your department's staff are understanding and willing to be flexible.  Note that administrative staff members tend to conduct much more of their daily business by telephone than academic personnel, and may find it much less convenient to try to reach you by text message, instant message, etc - so keep in mind that your preference is having an impact on other people.
If your friend's reasons for avoiding phone contact are reasonably compelling (hearing impairment, stalkers, etc) then I would expect that accommodations can be made.  But if they are frivolous or appear to be personal eccentricity, this may lead to friction with the administrative staff.  (And that's not good, they have a lot more power than you may realize.)
I would actually expect this type of contact to be a bigger issue than with your advisor (who is probably fine with contacting you via other means) or your students (who should not get your personal phone number anyway).

Great points, just what I was about to write. Another exception would be if the TA is accompanying students on a field trip – then the TA should have all the students' numbers (and the students should have the TA's number) in case of problems.

Every office I've worked in has had a land-line telephone. If the admin staff want to call me, they should be using that, not my personal phone.

@DavidRicherby: Arguably.  But grad students don't always get offices.  And every department where I've ever worked has asked me to provide my home / cell phone number to the staff.

@NateEldredge I've also always been asked to provide a personal number, but only as an emergency contact number.

I have supervised several graduate students. I don't recall a single phone conversation with any of them. I don't think I ever had any of my student's phone numbers.
When I need to contact one of my students I send them an email; if the matter is pressing, I might walk to their office.

So what? Not everyone who might contact the person in question would be on-campus, or local. Not everyone is a university professor, you know. Would you expect e.g people from the admin block or from a different campus or institution to walk over?

Yes, you are right. Only university professors have access to email these days. You really expect people in academia, these days, to not use email regularly?

Not what I said, Martin. People from the admin block will not walk over, people from off-campus will not walk over, people from other institutions will not walk over. Answering the phone for important messages is basic social behavior. By, the way, your flippancy is also misguided, because there are still many people who use postal mail or phone for communications, not email. Also, emailing the admin block in most non-US universities is notoriously useless since they a) don't publish staff directories, so it takes 3+ days to find the relevant person b) respond much faster to in-person/phone

If you believe students should emerge functionally unable to communicate with the 99% of the world that isn't in academia, and that that's somehow good preparation for life, that would be the way to go. Have you ever processed a speeding ticket or tax issue by email? Almost surely not.

Yes and yes. And I communicate often with administrative offices on my university via email; every single administrative unit in my university lists the email addresses of all its staff in their contact web page. In any case, the question was about graduate students, not about life. A graduate student can and will be successful without a phone.

It's one thing how things work at U Regina, but the question was not about North America. (No, you generally can't appeal (as opposed to pay) a speeding ticket by email, and it's unwise to handle sensitive issues on someone else's email.) Outside N America, things work differently. There are still some admin employees who only raise invoices on carbon paper, don't have computers, and only do phone or face-to-face. My university had several, and I needed to communicate on their terms, not mine. Unless you prefer to attack public-sector union work practices instead of getting your form signed.

Since no North American context was stated, assuming the rest of the world works like U Regina is wrong.

@smci: And the question was about phones and graduate students but you keep diverting away from that. By the way, I did all my undergrad and grad school on a third world country, so maybe I know more than you do. On my eight years as a graduate student outside of North-America, not a single time did I use the phone to communicate with a bureaucrat nor my advisor, nor I know of other cases.

Martin: no diversion - I've been responding to you and the question repeatedly that picking fights with university departments about refusing to communicate via the standard basic socially-accepted methods (viz. telephone) is foolishness, let alone antisocial behavior. If I had behaved as you suggest at my university I would not have gotten my grant authored, my invoices approved, software license purchase-order raised and approved, my research done, my thesis submitted and approved. The fact that you managed to in two universities without using a phone is not generalizable and is bad advice.

And moreover, by learning to deal with people by their preferred communication method not mine, I became aware of lots of interdepartmental politicking, nuances, rivalries, relationships, opportunities, which if I had simply hidden behind a keyboard I would not have. So, you're offering truly terrible career advice. There is no chapter of Dale Carnegie titled "If someone can't or won't use email, they're an asshole and can safely be ignored".

I don't see why the experience in my two universities is not generalizable but yours in a  single one is? And, you seem to claim that a deaf/mute person cannot do graduate studies?

Of course that having people's skill (including dealing with people over the phone) is an asset; but not an essential one. Many antisocial people succeed at graduate school and academia.

Several points I believe other (fine) answers have not addressed:

Quid-pro-quo for getting an office: If my department gives me an office (which I actually use), and it has a phone, it's reasonable to expect I be somewhat available on that phone. (Not on my cell phone though, that's personal).
Teaching duties: If you're a TA or otherwise teaching, and you have reception hours, it may (or may not) be reasonable to expect you hold them in a place with a phone, since in some situations students can't always be expected to physically visit that space, and might want to talk to you rather than converse in writing. It's possible that no-one will formally require this of you but I think you are obligated that way. Regardless of whether voice calls are more or less popular, a not-insignificant fraction of your students may prefer/need to make them and you should be obliging that in my opinion.
TA-in-charge: If you're the TA-in-charge for a larger course, then you definitely need to be available on your cell phone, and the lecturers and TAs need to have the number. I wouldn't say you need to be available 24/7, but be highly available when it matters (e.g. days before an exam).
Lab work: Some lab work (especially in the life sciences) is very time-critical. This situation is somewhat similar to being a TA-in-charge, since researchers and technicians might need to coordinate what-to-do-when or who-replaces-whom in watching the Petri dishes. Phone numbers are often shared in this situation.

I could very well be your friend. The only reason I got a mobile phone in the first place was because I was coorganising a show with experiments with about twenty contributors and an audience of over 500. As you might have guessed, this was an entirely voluntary thing.
Since then, I activated my mobile only twice for university-related reasons other than pure convenience, once to tell a professor that I may be late for proctoring an exam due to a puncture and once in case a professor might not make it in time to an exam. Both cases were obviously exceptional and even if I had no mobile phone, it would not have been a big deal.
The point I want to illustrate here and that has been missed by the other answers so far is this: If your friend’s attitude to mobile phones is a problem at all, it’s even less so, as he has one and is only reluctant to use them. In those rare cases where there is actually a call for it, he might agree to use them (if I understand you correctly).

An aspect hardly mentioned in other comments and answers is the syndrome of interrupting face-to-face interactions to answer the phone, or at least see who's calling, etc., ... thus giving the phone-call higher priority (at least for a moment) than the people right in front of you, and at the very least interrupting the face-to-face. I ceertainly don't like that when other people do it to me. So I tell people that I will very possibly not pay attention to a phone call in my campus office, because I'm there to talk to people face-to-face, or teach a class, or a seminar. Phone calls don't fit in to that. The subordinate point here is that (e.g.) email or text messages allow asynchronous communication, while phone calls insist on at-that-moment response, etc. I tell people to send me email anytime, and that I'll almost always respond within a few hours at most, but I have never given out my cell phone number (nor home phone). Most phone calls to my office phone are wrong numbers, besides, so caller ID doesn't tell me who it is, etc.

Surprisingly, this is actually culturally dependent!  In a more polychronic culture, an interruption is much more likely to be acceptable and even expected.

@jakebeal, ... not interpretable as disrespect to the person who took the trouble to show up in person, etc?

I know, it surprised me too, when I learned about this.

@jakebeal and paul: I'm used to working that way. I'm in an office with two other colleagues and we experience interruption every 10 min or so, from phone calls, or students and other people dropping in etc. I don't find this an issue, I've always been able to switch quickly between tasks or to work and study in a noisy environment.

This was bumped to the top of the queue when I happened to click on Academia just now, and the answers and comments I'm seeing (which I don't think I've seen before) seem just astounding to me in the generational changes. I didn't have a phone from Fall 1977 until Spring 1990 (2 undergraduate stints, 4 graduate stints) aside from a dorm phone (the 4 years -- 1977-79 and 1982-84 academic years) and TA office phone (1982 onward, except for Jan. 1988 to Aug. 1989 when I was not in school, and while I taught HS full-time 1988-89, I didn't have a home phone). (continued)

Pretty much the only phone calls I ever made or received had to do with setting up tennis partners/times/places (thus no need for paying for phone service, especially important on my budget), an activity that took 15-20 hours of my time weekly year-round for  well over a decade. As for people trying to reach me "professionally", they and I did what most everyone else back then did (at least, those at the graduate student or very early assistant prof. level), namely leave messages in the person's departmental mailbox, which we were strongly encouraged to check two or three times a day.


text:
Referring to previous literature review
How valid is to refer to previous literature reviews in other papers to 'create' a thorough review?
The thing is that I am working in a new methodology, which I will compare with the current state-of-the-art (published in 2017). In there, the authors have done some literature review, which is not thorough. Hence, I want to focus only on the work that they didnt cover. In addition, there is older work what has been reviewed by others. Putting my literature review contribution, together with the paper from 2017, and together with the two oldest papers, then we have a 'thorough' review. Is this a valid approach?

I would suggest that you include the work you have read, as well as the works that the other papers mention. The purpose of the literature review in a paper is to describe related pieces of work, and showcase how your work complements, surpasses and stands out. This strengthens the narrative of your research and helps the reader understand what makes your paper valuable, compared to other approaches. In order to achieve that and build a more complete image, you need to include as many related papers as you can find and study in the literature review part.

I am also including some of the work that others have covered, but only if I have a different opinion or angle compared to what others have said. However, there is couple of papers that have covered older methods in such a deep and clear way that I cannot find a new insight into those methods. Hence, I feel like it is better to point the reader to that work.

If the issue you are referring to is important, then it really is worth tracking down the original work to see what was really communicated, as opposed to what some review author offered.  I would not consider anything less to be thorough.
Too many times, the message gets garbled in the process.  If you misinterpret the original work based upon a flawed interpretation of the review author, that's on you.
One possible exception is if you require a costly translation.


text:
Is this possible to drop an author from authors' list of a paper after revision?
Recently, based on my collaboration with someone else in our department, we submitted a paper to a highly reputed journal (IF ~ 8) and we received a minor revision a couple of weeks ago. My name in this article is the second author. The first author is a PhD student, who would be graduated next month, the third author is a professor from a national laboratory, and the last one is the PhD adviser of the first author.
From beginning of this project that lead to the submission of this article, I was involved in modeling and its details, input data preparation and output information interpretation, as well as reviewing the draft paper before submission. There was no problem at all before receiving the revision and the first author and his PhD adviser acknowledged and my contributions.
Today, I was informed by the first author that my PhD adviser that has nothing to do with paper at all, accused me that I didn't have any contribution to this paper and I don't deserve to be on the authors' list despite the fact that I had contribution in developing the model, gathering the input data and interpret and discuss the outputs as well as reviewing and revising the draft paper before submission. Even, the initial idea of the whole project was mine and I proposed it to the first author due to the fact that first author's area of expertise is not modeling or computational science.
I'm so angry (again!) and I don't know how to respond... The first author and his PhD adviser are in my side and they want to prepare a summary of contributions for all authors including me to close this case, but still I'm going to lose my mind. So my question: Is this possible to drop an author from authors' list of a paper after revision? What are my options at the worst scenario? Is it normal (of course it's not!) that somebody that has nothing to do with a paper question the contribution of a paper that is not published yet even?

This is very serious that it is your advisor making this claim. I think your only option is to deal with them. Other possible solutions, if there are any, are likely to do you more harm than good. Pretty hard to build a starting career if your advisor is a sworn enemy.

@Buffy Deal with who? My adviser? I'm really embarrassed in front of the first author and his PhD adviser that it is my my adviser that accusing who contributed what to a paper that has nothing to do with him... By the way, I'm not going to give up my legitimate right cause I think it's a really unethical act.

Deal with your advisor. Convince him that you are a contributor. Or, if it is a question of resentment that you are working with others then you have a still bigger problem. It might require changing advisors. But this is a personal issue that you need to resolve.

Sorry, but I feel the need to vote to close this since the issue seems to be purely personal.

You need to go speak with your adviser immediately.  It sounds like you and the person who should be most intimately involved in your academic progress are on completely different pages, which is very strange.

Is this possible to drop an author from authors' list of a paper after revision?

Perhaps, but very very unusual. This should really never happen - the only case I can see reasonable is if someone was included as an author but either found their own contributions to be insufficient or disagreed with the publication and requested that they be removed from the list. It should definitely never happen when that person has a legitimate claim to authorship.

What are my options at the worst scenario?

I don't think it makes much sense to consider the "worst" scenario. The best scenario probably involves you finding a new advisor.

Is it normal (of course it's not!) that somebody that has nothing to do with a paper question the contribution of a paper that is not published yet even?

No, it is not normal for someone with no involvement in a paper to concern themselves with authorship issues for that paper, at any stage.

I don't see any reason to bother convincing your advisor. You cannot reason with someone to change a position that is not based on reason in the first place.
Given the pattern of issues you have had in the past (for example: Is this violation of academic integrity if I ask a question on Github public repository and post it as an issue? How to deal with an adviser that wants to force you to get his desired results?), your next steps should involve getting out of this situation in whatever way you can. This advisor is an advisor in name only, I cannot see a positive outcome if you stay with them.

Dropping an advisor without a conversation seems too extreme. The OP could be giving up years of work. You are making assumptions without sufficient evidence.

@Buffy I'm basing it on the OP's question history here, too, which maybe I shouldn't do but it provides some pretty important context. This advisor seems to think they control all the behavior of their students and now when they have contributed to another project think they can deny them authorship.

Ok. Thanks. I've withdrawn the vote.

The change of author should be possible, because there is a legitimate case. A revision might reduce one author's contribution to the point where an acknowledgement is more appropriate than co-authorship, but that sort of change would be with the agreement of all authors, and is not the case here.


text:
Finding papers that report results on a dataset
I am doing a literature study, and I would like to identify published research papers that report results on Reuters dataset RCV1-v2 (as comprehensively as could possibly be expected). The results should preferably be comparable (i.e. use the exact same subset of this dataset, e.g., some tend to use only a smaller subset)
How should one approach this problem?
So far, this is what I did:
The dataset was introduced in this paper: Rcv1: A new benchmark collection for text categorization research.
I went to scholar.google.com, found the paper, clicked on "citations", then marked "search within citation", and used keywords such as "results", "comparison", "evaluation". Is there a better way?
There are 1651 citations (according to Google scholar...), at what point should one feel reasonable comfortable that one has (comprehensively) identified the papers which have reported (comparable) results on this dataset?
The goal of the literature study is to motivate my choice of method (I want to inform myself of what methods have been applied, and how they compare to each other).

In principle, I think your approach is good, but I have a few suggestions to make your search hopefully more feasible:

Rather than using Google Scholar, I would use a more focused scholarly database that also tracks citations. In general, Web of Science is best for these purposes, but since this particular article is available on the ACM Digital Library, then that might possibly be a better choice. If you're interested in computer science and related literature, then ACM Digital Library is the way to go; if you want to be more broad in your range of disciplines, then I would go with Web of Science.
There are two advantages to using a more focused database rather than Google scholar:

Practically speaking, you have much fewer citations to deal with, and so the task is more feasible. Yet, these focused databases have fairly stringent quality standards, and so although most citations are not included, those that are are widely recognized as high quality. It is a compromise for the sake of feasibility, without meaningfully sacrificing quality. To me, this works for your particular purpose because surveying methods doesn't require an exhaustive search; a comprehensive search is sufficient.
These focused databases usually have much more fine-tuned search options than Google Scholar (e.g. abstract only, keywords, etc.). Thus, you can more precisely focus your search to exclude the articles that you consider irrelevant. (The reason that Google Scholar is not as fine-tuned obviously has nothing to do with their engineers' capabilities; I guess it's probably a matter of copyright licensing to archive and search the journal databases. Google Scholar is free, whereas the others have to pay the journals, so I guess they place a limit on what they consider "fair use" for Google. This is my speculation; I'm not certain.)

Thanks! That is really helpful. The topic is on text categorisation (a.k.a. text classification), which has been studied in: information retrieval, linguistic computation, machine learning. This may be a separate question on its own, but given these fields, should I also look at some other scholarly database than those two you mentioned?

I think ACM Digital Library is the ideal database for your purpose.

Wikidata has the ability to describe datasets and scholarly articles that use datasets. The annotation has been used sparingly and is far from complete.
An example of a scientific article that annotates with a data set is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q62428109 It records use of MNIST, ImageNet (as well as the programming libraries PyTorch and TensorFlow).
The Wikidata Query Service can be use to query this data across pages. You will see an aggregation of the data in Scholia. Here for MNIST: https://tools.wmflabs.org/scholia/use/Q17069496