text:
What should a candidate with no publications mention to professor for PhD admission or research position?
I want to apply for PhD admission, but I have no research experience; never published any research paper or had any research assistantship during my Master's (although I did have a course assistantship for a semester and finished it 1 semester earlier). The professor I am intending to ask for supervision and research is involved around coding and I can make a good portfolio of projects about it (i.e. industry experience after Master's, GitHub profile, etc.).
Questions:

What should I mention in my email to professor to convince them that I would be a good fit for their research and fellowship?
Should I contact a professor first and then apply to the program, or should I apply first and then contact professor about it?

The university I am intending is a private university in central US with very high reputation (one in top 30 in Forbes US list).

Why do you want a PhD? What suggests you'll get one? How will your PhD help the professor? To convince the professor to supervisor you, you need to be able to mention those answers (and more) to the professor. To get a better idea about what the professor wants from you, start with an email that shows your interest and ask for a meeting (or telephone call) with the professor. Use that meeting to discuss with the professor and establish what they are looking for in you.

Remember that professors often get dozens of emails every day, so your chances to get an answer are higher if you keep things short.
Send an email saying that you are interested in a PhD in program XX under his supervision and ask a few short, relevant questions, e.g. if spaces are available at all.
Any longer questions, or even sending a whole portfolio, should not be done in the first email. If things go well, he agrees to talk to you about your application and there are spaces available, you can go on with your other questions.
If possible, a short visit in person might help; you can for example discuss most of your questions with PhD students or postdocs should the professor be too busy.

Thank you, Mr @Dirk Liebhold for the answer. I am accepting this answer as it point out what to mention, what type of questions to ask and what not to mention in the initial contact.

One important thing to keep in mind is that a PhD is a (reasonable) long-time commitment and it is (sort of) all about researching and publishing. If you can "convince" yourself it may be possible to convince other people.
So the first item on your list is to understand why do you want to pursue a PhD if you have no research experience. Don't get me wrong, it is possible to have research experience with no publications, or with publications in minor conferences that have little impact. But if you went through a Master Degree you should have some research experience, just not a publication.
Definitely, trying to contact the Professor before applying to the program would be better. If something goes wrong you will have saved yourself a lot of time and resources.
You could also consider trying to find some other professors and institutions that would be alternatives to this first one.

Hello @prmottajr sir, Thank you for your answer. I have a question, what do you mean by non-publication research experience? Is it reading research papers and writing reports about assignments?

@Simon.Hermit during a Master Degree, one has to work on a project, although usually not entirely original, that (should) have the structure of a research project that is carried out in a lab. Sometimes the only publication is the Master's dissertation. In some cases that could be considered a non-pier-reviewed publication.

oh, @prmottajr, The projects I worked on we only had to give presentation about it to professor and submit a report on it explaining how we approached the solution. Apart from that I did not involve myself in any other peer-reviewed or non-peer-reviewed writings. Will it be counted as some form of non publication research?

@Simon.Hermit the Master didn't require a final dissertation? If not, maybe the reports could be used as samples for non-peer-reviewed (sorry for the typo on the other comment) research documentation, but it will depend on their content and structure.

@prmottajr Some Masters are like that. My university offers both MS (has a thesis) and M.Eng (no thesis, project instead).


text:
Should I mention my blog in a postdoc application?
I am a PhD candidate in Physics, and I am applying to some interdisciplinary postdocs that deal with economics/climate science/etc. I have a pretty good academic publishing record, but also own a moderately successful blog that deals with economics, politics, science, etc. from a Left perspective.
Would it be sensible to include my blog in my CV or research statement to show that I am interested in that sort of interdisciplinary work and that I have good communication skills?
Some of the posts have a couple of thousands reads etc,  which implies I have an audience.  My issue is that, because it is a partisan blog it has obviously some strongly worded opinions, so I am not sure if it would be professional to mention it. The reason why I want to include my blog is that my PhD is in pure  physics, and I want to show I can "work" in other environments as well.

Is your blog prominently under your real name (i.e., if someone googles you, does it show up?)

Nope. It isn't, and I made that choice in purpose for some of the reasons I outlined above.

Wrote up an answer, but I think I ended up writing about a general job application rather than something specifically related to a postdoc as the same would seem to generally apply.  So just to check that I didn't miss anything, is there an argument for why this consideration might be different in the context of a postdoc application vs. an application for another job that a PhD might pursue?

tl;dr-  While a good blog could be a professional asset, the given description sounds like something that probably wouldn't enhance an application.

Blogs can be professional assets, even with political content
A good blog can be a professional asset.  Such a blog could even touch on topics that others might consider politically sensitive; for example, it's entirely respectable to write a technical piece on forecasting climate change using data science techniques.
You can even write a heavily political blog in a professional way.  FiveThirtyEight's a great example of this: they're heavily involved in political analysis, but they're quite professional about it.  I'd imagine that its writers would generally do well to include a reference to it in their future job applications.
Then there's a grey area when it comes to the interfacing with politics in one's own field of expertise.  For example, if a climate scientist were to maintain a blog devoted to their research on climate change, then it wouldn't seem like the worst thing in the world if they occasionally included a political perspective piece in which they maintained an objective tone while expressing personal political opinions.  However, it'd be important for such opinion pieces to be substantial in terms of content and analysis.
Political rants tend to come off poorly
Political rants can cause the reader to think less of the writer.  This can be true even if a reader shares some of the same opinions.
I suspect that a lot of factors go into this.  As a partial list, in no particular order:

Readers get into the habit of filtering content from politically charged sources, so if the writer starts to sound like a source of politically charged content, it makes sense to put less trust into their assertions.
Strong political positions can reflect on a lack of political knowledge (Dunning–Kruger effect), professional focus, emotional inclination toward objectivity (stability), or/and reasoning skills.

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.
-Bertrand Russell, on BrainyQuote

The willingness to engage in political rhetoric in professional venues (e.g., a job application) negatively reflects on one's general professionalism.

As a consequence of factors like these, many'll tend to respect a writer less for their political rantings even if they would tend to agree with the opinions expressed in those rants.
Overall, probably best to not share this blog
For the reasons given above, sharing a "partisan blog" that has "some strongly worded opinions" would seem like a bad idea.  While it's not impossible that a reviewer might actually enjoy it, I'd expect it to generally have a negative impact if anyone takes the time to check it out.
In general, folks'll be more likely to think well of your ability to operate in other venues if you're able to conduct yourself with the same sort of professionalism that you'd approach Physics with, keeping a level and objective perspective throughout.

This was very helpful. Although they aren't really "rants", more like like using conceptual tools from physics, nonlinear dynamics, complexity science etc to formulate  an analysis about economics and society.

@mathDummy Particularly as you mention interdisciplinary, keep in mind that such analysis might not come off well, depending on who is reviewing your application.

Unfortunately, it's risky for a junior academic to draw attention to a blog which is either (a) not about your discipline or (b) highly opinionated, regardless of topic.
The risk can be offset if it is clear that the blog enhances your professional standing in some way. But that doesn't seem to be the case in this situation--in fact, it seems a little gratuitous to put it on your CV. There are other ways to demonstrate your communication skills and interest in public engagement without potentially alienating a future academic employer.

Although I personally do not agree with the left slant on climate science, I don't think that it should not be mentioned, but with a caveat: check what is the bias of the department you are applying for.
If the lab/department itself is hugely biased or partisan, and values politicization of science they would perhaps love your blog and you would stood better chances of being accepted.
Now, I am not proud of giving you that advice, but we see more and more fields of science being blatantly abused with PR that has nothing to do with science (AI has gotten really bad recently in that respect) and I would expect that such groups love people that would be engaged and spread the faith in addition to doing research work. Strange times we live in.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to cite R packages when using Mendeley?
In Mendeley, the closest category for an R package appears to be "Computer Program"; however, R itself is a computer program, not its packages.
Other literature sources seem to cite technical documents about R packages instead of the actual packages.
Aside from manually entering the citations, is there a way to incorporate R packages in my Mendeley library?

I think you could visit https://stats.stackexchange.com , or the famous https://stackoverflow.com .

Is the question here a) what is the correct way to cite an R package, b) what should I do to cite an R package when the citation function gives me a paper, or c) something about interfacing between Mendeley and R.

https://superuser.com/questions/8743/how-to-cite-software-in-latex

Each R package has a different way to be cited. Some were formally published as scientific articles in journals, some only as packages. The only way to know for sure is to check how the package maintainer want you to cite their package, with function citation.
Base R also comes with function toBibtex that help you export the correct citations as a bibtex file.
For instance:
> citation("Rcpp")

To cite Rcpp in publications use:

  Dirk Eddelbuettel and Romain Francois (2011). Rcpp: Seamless
  R and C++ Integration. Journal of Statistical Software,
  40(8), 1-18. URL http://www.jstatsoft.org/v40/i08/.

  Eddelbuettel, Dirk (2013) Seamless R and C++ Integration with
  Rcpp. Springer, New York. ISBN 978-1-4614-6867-7.

  Dirk Eddelbuettel and James Joseph Balamuta (2017). Extending
  R with C++: A Brief Introduction to Rcpp. PeerJ Preprints
  5:e3188v1. URL
  https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3188v1.

To see these entries in BibTeX format, use 'print(<citation>,
bibtex=TRUE)', 'toBibtex(.)', or set
'options(citation.bibtex.max=999)'.

> toBibtex(citation("knitr"))
@Manual{,
  title = {knitr: A General-Purpose Package for Dynamic Report Generation in R},
  author = {Yihui Xie},
  year = {2018},
  note = {R package version 1.20},
  url = {https://yihui.name/knitr/},
}

@Book{,
  title = {Dynamic Documents with {R} and knitr},
  author = {Yihui Xie},
  publisher = {Chapman and Hall/CRC},
  address = {Boca Raton, Florida},
  year = {2015},
  edition = {2nd},
  note = {ISBN 978-1498716963},
  url = {https://yihui.name/knitr/},
}

@InCollection{,
  booktitle = {Implementing Reproducible Computational Research},
  editor = {Victoria Stodden and Friedrich Leisch and Roger D. Peng},
  title = {knitr: A Comprehensive Tool for Reproducible Research in {R}},
  author = {Yihui Xie},
  publisher = {Chapman and Hall/CRC},
  year = {2014},
  note = {ISBN 978-1466561595},
  url = {http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466561595},
}

As for importing bibtex files into Mendeley, I do not use Mendeley myself but this Q&A on TeX.se shows that one can simply use menu items "File > Import... > Bibtex (*.bib) " to do so.

This is only a first step, to answer the question it would be helpful to explain how you get the output of the function into mendeley.

Yet another source for Bibtex entries which fails to escape titles correctly. :(

With the bibtex package, you can generate a Bibtex file from the package citations and then upload it in Mendeley or another reference manager software. As an example
library(bibtex)
write.bib('package name - here', file='name for the file')
write.bib(c('bibtex', 'utils', 'tools'), file='references') ## for multiple packages

Please see the package's cran page (https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/bibtex/) for further information

You could export the citation as a bibtex file, e.g. https://www.rforge.net/doc/packages/knitr/write_bib.html

To add to the accepted answer, I believe you are looking for:
writeLines(toBibtex(citation("package")), con = 'path_to/reference_filename')

You can omit the package name for citing R.  Hope it saves someone a few minutes.

knitr::write_bib(c(.packages()), "packages.bib")

This will generate a .bib file containing all used packages, which you can add to Mendeley.
https://bookdown.org/yihui/rmarkdown-cookbook/write-bib.html

For example, if I want to cite Data in Function reference
http://ggplot2.tidyverse.org/reference/#section-data, in this case, I will use web page to added to Mendeley manually as follow:

title = Data - Function reference - ggplot2
url = http://ggplot2.tidyverse.org/reference/#section-data
Date access = 2018-02-12

I think that this is the wrong answer.

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:
How can I get feedback for my work in math if I'm not in academia?
I will soon finish my undergraduate degree in math, and I want to study mathematics as a hobby after I graduate.
Online, I see a general trend of people saying

You can't learn real math without collaboration and feedback. Go to graduate school!

But I don't want to go to graduate school, and I have found that I learn better through self-study than by taking notes in class. That being said, it always does help to get my questions answered by professors, and collaboration with other students is sometimes helpful as well.
Question:  Is it possible to have this kind of mathematical community without actually being in academia?
What I fear is studying for years by myself obsessively on a subject only to find that I had a horrible misconception the whole time that could have been avoided if only a professor had looked at my work.

You know, you do not have to graduate if you do not want that degree, you can hang around while learning some material, and connecting with people.

I would still seriously consider graduate school if you really want to learn mathematics. Sure you will have to take some classes, and pass some tests including qualifying exams, but the bulk of your work would be self-directed research. There's also no reason you couldn't self-study the subjects that you are learning in class. In fact, you are encouraged to do so!

@rviertel I have many reasons for not wanting to go to graduate school. If math was my life goal (like it used to be) then graduate school would be for me. But I realized that I wasn't interested in doing math research as a career, and I wasn't really into the idea of teaching. Math for me is a hobby, and I mainly wanted a PhD for the status it would give me. I decided to go into computer science instead -- I think I will have a lot more fun being a programmer or software engineer, doing math on the side as a hobby.

For what it's worth you shouldn't really be afraid of mistakes. They teach you a lot, and usually you gain something useful from failed attempts which you would not have gained by following a path pointed out to you from the start. At least that's my experience, including my math habit.

I’ll give an answer based on personal experience. My situation is not exactly like yours, but may be similar enough to provide some insight.
I recently completed my undergrad in physics and applied math. Upon finishing this I decided that I was more interested in pure math, and wanted to pursue this in grad school. I ended up not getting into any of the Ph.D programs I wanted (probably because of a lack of pure math experience), so I was left in limbo, so to speak, still wanting to study math but not yet able to enroll on a graduate program.
My solution was to email some professors at a local university who I had found doing things somewhat related to what I was interested in. I told them my situation and explained that I was just looking to learn more about their research and math in general. This ended up working out and now I attend regular seminars at the university and I meet up with them every once in awhile to just discuss math.
I have found it very helpful to be able to have face to face conversations with other mathematicians, even though I do most studying on my own at home. Though Stack Exchange is a valuable resource, I don’t think it can adequately replace this interaction.
I’d like to point out that I am not sure if my experience is typical. After all, this is a somewhat small university that I am talking about, and it may be harder to find professors at larger universities who are able to take extra time to talk to you (I certainly found this to be the case at UC Berkeley, which is where I did my undergrad). Still, I think that this is an option you may be interested in considering.

How big is your university? I don't think it's true that bigger school implies busier professors. I go to a small liberal arts college (1600 students) and the professors are always super busy.

The place I’m at now is less than 20,000 students. So smallish but not tiny. And you are certainly right that small doesn’t imply not busy professors, and vice versa. I do think there is a correlation there though, in general. If nothing else, a place with larger class sizes means more students filling up office hours, emailing with problems and questions, etc. Not to mention large high profile places might put more emphasis and pressure on their professors to research and publish papers (it seemed profs at Berkeley we’re always extremely busy with research related work).

But again, I don’t pretend that my experiences on this front are going to be typical of everyone. It’s possible that I just got lucky. One of the profs here even told me that he enjoys working here so much because they put a big emphasis on teaching and interacting with students, and the pressure to publish papers is not as great as at other places he has worked. Still, I think you should definitely give it a shot because you never know if something really worthwhile will come of it.

I definitely will. There are some medium-sized universities in the area -- I'll see if they have seminars in math that I'm interested in.

Nowadays, you can get feedback and answers to questions from places like MathStackExchange, and MathOverflow. Most of the responses are (in my observation) either entirely competent or quickly corrected by others. Good quality control. No, that wouldn't be the same as having a good advisor (ideally a world-class scholar on your subject) that you talk to in person every week. Still, these sites can give guidance.
Also, quite a few of the more-senior people who like to contribute to such sites may be amenable to direct email contact, etc.
(Grad school is not about "taking notes in lectures" per se, but is about having access to the informal observations of very good mathematicians, and being able to ask them questions immediately, in the moment.)

How obnoxious would it be for me to post a proof for review on stack exchange, say, every week? Do you people get tired of looking at people's homework? Or is that what you're here for?

@user87627 as long as you show that you make efforts you can get positive responses. If you only ask questions and don't seem to work on it then you may get negative responses. At least on math.SE. Mathoverflow I don't know because I have not been on there so much.

Proofs for review are considered off-topic on Mathoverflow, and so is any kind of homework.

@user87627 Grad school isn't about homework any more than it is about taking notes in class.  There will probably be a bit of classwork at the very beginning, but that's not the main focus.  For most of grad school, you'll be finding interesting problems you want to work on and then working on them, while having more senior mathematicians around whose job responsibilities include giving advice to the apprentice mathematicians (which is what grad students are; they're there to do research, not take classes).  Disclaimer: I'm CS, not math, so there might be some field-related differences.

@user87627: I'd rather Math SE's front page be covered by all your proof attempts than by the Please-Solve-Questions that we see more and more of nowadays from students who ask others to do their homework for them!

Disclaimer: I am a mathematician, but I do research in CS.
My observation is that all mathematics, but especially research-grade mathematics has a lot of features of a folklore. It is much easier when someone explains it to you, even more if informally. Reading books helps, of course, but for me a quick informal explanation done in five minutes could replace a tedious drilling through formalism for understanding for few days. Of course, you'd still need to be able to get through the formal and completely correct description. But it's much easier, when you already have an informal understanding.
To give an example, the determinant is actually an oriented volume of the n-dimensional parallelotope spanned with matrix component vectors. Compare this with a definition from almost any undergrad book on linear algebra.

"the determinant is actually an oriented volume of the n-dimensional parallelotope spanned with matrix component vectors." ohhhh... you should write a textbook like that, I'd buy it. Hell, I'd buy two!

I've read it in a critical paper on teaching by V. Arnold and it blew my mind.

+1 for "[Mathematics] is much easier when someone explains it to you, even more if informally.", and I'd like to add that in my experience this also holds for other fields.

It seems there is a clear demand for textbooks including informal understandings.

This is true. I do think part of this is because textbooks are so poorly written, unfortunately. In general I learn better from reading than from listening -- however, I think one on one explanation is the best, especially when it's combined with the book.

"...Compare this with a definition from almost any undergrad book on linear algebra." actually, I find the algebraic definition much easier than the above. After all, what is a parallelotope, and how can it be spanned by component vectors, and how can you prove that it has all the properties it has? :p

This is a centuries-old discussion about he devil of algebra versus angel of geometry. I am creating a question on a more related SE.

It's even easier if instead of Lobachev, it's explained to you by Lobachevsky!

You have a couple of good answers about what you could do. You should also be aware of what you shouldn't do. Don't send unsolicited e-mails to random mathematicians in which you launch into long mathematical discussions. Unfair as it might be, there is a good chance that your message will be quickly deleted as the work of a probable crank. Most professional mathematicians receive numerous such e-mails (or in the old days, physical letters) over their careers and have learned not to pay too much attention to them. If you have a legitimate mathematical signal, don't broadcast it over a channel which has been drowned out by the noise of cranks.
The good thing about the suggestion of being active on Math Overflow is that this would allow you to develop a relationship with professional mathematicians. I have had a number of unsolicited e-mails from people that I have encountered on Stack Overflow, and I have almost always made an effort to respond to them. The virtual rep that you earn on Math Overflow entails a certain amount of real-world rep with the mathematicians who participate on that forum.

Regardless of whether or not you look like a crank, there are very few people who are prepared to spend an hour or more helping a total stranger to no obvious personal benefit. Heck, even if a friend or colleague asks for that, there are plenty of circumstances in which one would say no.

@DavidRicherby, nevertheless, there are some people who view select responses of this sort as part of their professional/societal role, if not "obligation". To be a bit rhetorical, if experts don't try to help "cranks" improve their viewpoints, who will?

@paulgarrett Sure -- there are a lot of people in the world and some of them are really nice. I was just trying to convey the scale of what's being asked for.

@DavidRicherby, indeed, it's a non-trivial favor to ask, so appropriate perception (on the part of the asker) of the response (from the asked-of) is a bit subtle. On one hand, if one doesn't ask, one gets nothing, but the mere "asking" itself does not immediately/truly entitle one to a response. All that kind of thing...

One good option is to hire mathematicians to help you when you have questions. Many graduate students and some folk with Ph.D.'s work as tutors. If you're going into programming in the US, you should have the budget. You might not connect with the first person you contact, but if you live near a research university there should be some opportunity for this.

This is right, if you want someone to do work for you that's not part of their job, then you should pay them.  You're not likely to pay enough for advice from a professor, but grad students are much cheaper.


text:
Can I withdraw from the poster session?
I submitted my paper to ICANN2016 conference in which we could choose among the possible options of "poster" and "oral" presentation at the submission time. I submitted for the oral category and received the acceptance notice as a "full paper" to be in the proceedings, but no info on the type of presentation (oral/poster).
Then I registered as they requested to do so before the deadline, but later on, when the conference program become revealed on the website I noticed that I am placed in one of the poster sessions and even in a so "irrelevant" session!
Honestly I become less motivated to participate in the conference as I've heard that the posters are mostly a way the organizers try to compensate the conference expenses (they have 80 posters in the conference). And the chances of getting noticed or getting any useful feedback on my work can be so subtle!
Also not to mention that in the review feedback there was no detail about the review process which could be considered as useful feedback on my work. Just a simple general comment like "the work is so solid, technical and great.."
So I came to a sort of conclusion that I already wasted my publication by submitting it to the conference!
Also I was wondering if I can withdraw from participation and ask my payment back? considering that they didn't mention the type of the presentation in the acceptance notice, and also the fact that I chose the oral presentation in the submission.

This is very, very common. At most conferences, there are simply not enough time slots for everyone to give an oral presentation. Conferences still tend to be way too long most of the time with way too many "less important" presentations between "interesting" ones anyway.
Posters can be a very efficient way of communicating your results and connecting with other researchers important to you. You are not "wasting" your paper by presenting a poster. And you will attend other's presentations and can engage in the discussions. So I don't really agree with your conclusion.
It's understandable that you are disappointed. However, while it is totally up to you, your decision on whether to participate should not depend on a potential resentment of being "rejected" from an oral presentation. Base your decision on whether to go on who you think you might get to know, and who might be there who could benefit from your results. Prepare a great poster. Have handouts ready. Approach people directly, start to network actively.
Whether or not you might receive any money back highly depends on the specific event and the local organizing committee. You can ask. But at this stage I would say it's unlikely.

It is sometimes possible to write a polite mail to the organizers saying that you understood from previous correspondence, that you've got a talk. Seeing that it's only a poster, you would like to withdraw and ask for money back. I have done so myself in the past, it was no problem.
I by the way, I disagree with the point of view, that I often see on this site, that a poster can be just as valuable as a talk. Surely that is correct, "sometimes", but I've attended my fair share of poster sessions, and more often than not, you really just stand there, trying unsuccessfully to spark some interest in your work.

Or, on the other side, wander around and try to find a poster with a single interesting section and no presenter because you don't want to be accosted by an overly enthusiastic student that wants to lambast you with what's great about their work. It's too awkward for many.

Yes, it can happen that there is no interest the posters. However, I've also had talks very early in the sessions with hardly anyone there or people just working on their own presentations. Sure, you can just speak up a bit (or do whatever a good presentation involves) and try to get everyone's attention more easily. But giving a talk is in no gurantee that you'll be able to spark interest in your work.


text:
Where to put explanation of figures, in caption or in text?
I am writing an article which include some complicated figures.
These figures are networks with different colored nodes. About these figures, for example, I want to say:
Red nodes show XX, blue nodes indicates to YY, and Yellow nodes show TT.
Currently, I do not know where I should indicate to the details of figures, only in text, only in captions, or in both of them?

Somewhere during my studies I have learnt that a figure and its caption should form a self-contained element. That means, if I isolated a single figure together with its caption from a random publication and gave it to you, you should from those bits of information be able to deduce what this figure is about and what you see there. That does of course not mean, that a physicist must be able to understand the full implications contained in a figure drawn by a chemist or vice versa, but they should be able to understand that "fancy stuff" is in the top left, "other fancy stuff" in the center is indicated with some arrow annotations and a drawn overlay indicates the mechanism that makes them do whatever is interesting.
So in your special case, either make a legend containing the meaning of your different colored nodes or, if that is not possible, describe that in the caption. You can repeat that in the text if you feel it's necessary, but you're not obliged to do so in general. Also, it's no obligation to put into the figure caption the full interpretation of the implications you draw from this figure – this should go to the text. Hence the figure caption could be something like

Figure 1: Process scheme of the process of doing fancy stuff. Yellow nodes indicate XX, red ones show YY and green ones TT.

In the text, there can then be the interpretation of the figure, for example:

The process scheme of this is shown in Figure 1. As can be seen from the arrangement of the red, yellow and green nodes, everything is very colourful – which is very good in our case – and the guys at management would love it. However, a closer look at the connection between node "foo" and node "bar" reveals, that there could be some problem in [whatever fancy stuff you want to say]...

TL;DR: Put the stuff that is necessary to understand what's in the figure either directly into the figure (legend) or into the caption. The discussion of the figure can go to the text.

The usual practice (in at least my discipline (Physics)), is to try to add these details in the figure legend. That makes the figures most easily understandable.
However, situations where this can not be done are not particularly uncommon. The easiest case to imagine is when it is not possible to add a legend into the figure simply because the graphics do not leave enough space in the figure box. In such cases, the right place to put that information in, is the figure caption.
DON'T put this information (solely) in the article text. No one would want to read the entire article just to make sense of a figure!

even if the information should be in the caption, try to use the colors, not just words, to notice them easier.

...but please remember that some of your readers are colorblind. http://jfly.iam.u-tokyo.ac.jp/color/index.html


text:
Is it a bad idea to take a research position unrelated to my desired area of research?
I'm currently trying to get an assistantship / funding for my masters degree and was recently given an offer from a professor I previously worked with.  Although the position is in same department I intended on attending the work is unrelated to my research interests.  I wouldn't say that I'm uninterested in the work, it's more that I've never seen a graduate student that did work unrelated to their research and that lack of overlap with my own interests might increase my workload.  In the meantime I'm contacting other professors to see if they have anything available.
Anyways, how bad of an idea is this if it is a bad idea?  Also, is it generally assumed that by accepting an assistanceship in a specific subject that I'm also planning on doing my thesis in this area?  If I can't find any other funding my only other option would basically be not going to grad school.  Sorry if this is a stupid question.

How do you really know what your research interests are. How broad are they? I’ll just say that over 35 years I’ve worked a wide range of material science and accelerator based projects and there was always something interesting enough to get all the work done.

How bad an idea is it to for me eat a pizza when I am thinking I'd rather eat a hamburger?

Anyways, how bad of an idea is this if it is a bad idea?

This is a matter of balancing your own intellectual interests with your career goals. In terms of career goals, not only is it probably not so bad, it's actually probably a good thing; it looks great at this stage and later on if you have experience in multiple areas, as this will increase your breadth of expertise and your ability to collaborate with other researchers down the road.
However, in terms of your intellectual interests, you must carefully decide how much you are willing to sacrifice. It may be that you are only passionate about topic X, and working on anything else you would just not be happy. Or it may be that you are flexible, and you would in the long run be just as happy working on topic Y. Also note, that switching to topic Y now is likely (but not guaranteed!) to mean that later on down the road, at least if you are successful in Y, that your research interests evolve and become more related to Y. That could be a good thing or a bad thing, it is up to you to decide. Above all, you should never choose to work on something that you have no passion for.

Also, is it generally assumed that by accepting an assistanceship in a specific subject that I'm also planning on doing my thesis in this area?

You should check with your program (how many years away is your thesis?), but likely yes. It could also be a flexible blend of topic X and topic Y; have you talked to the professor about your research interests? Are they willing to mentor you even though you want to retain some interests in topic X? Are there possible opportunities in the future to do some research that is "between" X and Y?

I've never seen a graduate student that did work unrelated to their research

This is very surprising, because in my experience this is extremely common. While you may think that graduate students were always "set" on the topic they work on, in actuality many of them who work in some field actually started out in another field, but then started working with a professor and ended up switching trajectories. Research interests often inevitably evolve. Keeping an open mind with your research interests and directions, if you are willing and happy about it, can be a huge asset in academia as it opens up the number of possible professors that you can work for.

and that lack of overlap with my own intererests might increase my workload.

Yes, this would be true if you continue research X while working on Y with the professor; that is something you should talk to the professor about.

Agree, if you can find balance, it could be great. The best students often produce a paper (or more) unrelated to their main research topic by the time they graduate. That looks good on your CV as well. Of course, it's all conditional on you managing to actually do it. I've also seen plenty of students spreading themselves thin over too many things and failing to complete their degrees...

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


text:
Is it wrong to call yourself Dr First_Name Last_Name when you have a Professional Doctorate such as DTech or DBA and not a PhD or MBBS?
Is it wrong to call yourself Dr First_Name Last_Name when you have a Professional Doctorate such as DTech or DBA and not a PhD or MBBS?

Your country?  Where I live, you can call officially yourself Dr only if the title you obtained is exactly Dr.

And also, called by whom? Your friends? Your parents? Official documents? Pleaseclarify the question.

@user111388 Thank you for your answer, however, "Where I live, you can call officially yourself Dr only if the title you obtained is exactly Dr." <---this is a nonsense answer as there are many physicians for example who can officially call themselves Dr. but didn't receive a Dr. as they received a MBBS. That is to say, there is no Dr. degree, but there is PhD, DPhil, DEng, MBBS, etc. My question is can a DTech recipient officially call themselves a Dr. Given that DTech is like a DBA (Dr of Business Administration), it is a professional degree that isn't externally examined with a viva voce

Why do you call my answer nonsense? Indeed, in my country, there is a Dr. title and only if you recieved this title, you can call yourself Dr. in official documents.  It might be different in your country but then you might want to state it.

I am from Australia. I have attached a sample Doctoral Testamur with URL https://live.staticflickr.com/7233/7158848837_b12e2f8e76_b.jpg
The recipient is Michael Bernard Hale, not Dr. Michael Bernard Hale.
That said, it is well know that having a PhD was the original way one would be called Doctor (i.e. teacher).
My question is whether having a DTech allows one to formally/officially to be designated as a Dr.
P.S. I don't have a DTech but a PhD.

Please note that this is NOT just an Australian question, but in general from different countries. For example, one can obtain a DTech from the UK.

So what exactly do you want to know? If there is any country in the world where it is against the law to call yourself Dr. without a Dr. title?

My contention is that if someone obtains a DTech or a DBA, regardless of where they obtain it in the world, then they should not use the Dr. designation. There are already many others, such as BAppSci (Chiropractor), BAppSci (Osteopathy) that call themselves Dr. I think as there are so many degrees that allow one to be called Dr, that "Dr" will become meaningless.

Removal of my clarification edit was not helpful. If you want an authoritative answer you should make your question as clear as possible. This is not a chat board.

The rules for title use differ from country to country. So, without specifying the country as context in the question, the question is ill-posed.

@user111388: "Where I live, you can call officially yourself Dr only if the title you obtained is exactly Dr." Where is that?

I was using P.S. as in the end of a letter (i.e. "post scriptum"), not as a degree.

@ZeroTheHero: Suggest you read the title before commenting. Did you not know that MDs obtain a MBBS or equivalent? What did you think I meant by MBBS?

@HanzSchmidt I just learned something new.  Thanks for the heads up.

This is highly dependant on legislation (of the country where you are when you are calling yourself). In germany (AFAIK, one of the more picky legislations wrt what you can call yourself):
Let's assume you move to Germany with a proper DTech from South Africa, Australia, UK or Sweden. Proper meaning: scientific thesis, degree from a university (or similar recognied highest level institution), honorary degrees have separate rules, bought degrees cannot be used in Germany.

For South Africa, the most general rules apply: you are Firstname Lastname, DTech (University of ...)* you can also add a translation: (Doktor der Technologie).
If the country doesn't use the latin alphabet, you can transliterate. And long form or usual abbreviation are both fine.
* Whether you put the degree before or after the name doesn't matter.
For Australia, there is a treaty on equivalency of degrees and in consequence (legal text in German) you are Dr. Firstname Lastname. Not Dr.-Ing., though.
Since Sweden is member of EU (same for EWR), with a Swedish DTech, you have the choice. You can either be Firstname Lastname, DTech or Dr. Firstname Lastname. Again, not Dr.-Ing. even though that is the German degree corresponding to the Swedish DTech.
This does not apply to so-called Berufsdoktorate where the doctor is awarded not for a research thesis but automatically when finishing a Master level education.
UK used to be in the EU until recently and the offical texts have not yet caught up with Brexit. I saw a note somewhere that UK degrees are still treated like EU.

German doctorate degrees are mostly of the form Dr. ... ..., e.g. I'm Dr. rer. nat. (doctor in natural things [sciences], in my case chemistry).

When addressing a person, usually at most the "doctor" is pronounced, the type/field only if that is considered important for the specific occasion.
I could ask to have the doctor put into my ID card where it would appear as DR (the line is all uppercase) only, without specifying what kind of doctor I am.
I could also put the doctor to my doorbell, either as Dr. rer. nat. C. Beleites (sounds very arrogant, unless it is part of the professional doorbell Chemometric Consulting Dr. rer. nat. C. Beleites where I'd think it only a bit stuffy -  as it is, the office door bell actually reads Chemometric Consulting C. Beleites) or as Dr. C. Beleites (slightly arrogant). Only my business card contains in small print the information that I'm Dr. rer. nat. and Dipl.-Chem. (since one cannot know from Dr. rer. nat. that I'm chemist).

BAppSci (Chiropractor), BAppSci (Osteopathy) that call themselves Dr.

This is not allowed in Germany. Even a physician can call themselves Dr. only if they actually obtained a doctor degree. Otherwise, they are
Firstname Lastname, Arzt (physician, meaning they passed their state exams and got approbated) or Firstname Lastname, Facharzt für ... (meaning they also passed the specialization exam for field ...).
If they also did their doctorate, they are Dr. med. Firstname Lastname, Facharzt für ....

whether having a DTech allows one to formally/officially to be designated as a Dr. P.S.

Not in Germany.
In some faculties, the candidate can ask to get e.g. a Ph. D. rather than the usual Dr. rer. nat.. But once that degree is awarded, one has to stick with it.


text:
Do universities employ teachers?
Do universities employ people simply to teach?
I come from a family of teachers, so teaching comes naturally to me. What worth would a university put on a person that is willing to take a large amount of the teaching load?
Would certain departments employ people who are willing and able to do the teaching, leaving other members of faculty to do other things or is teaching just simply not a big enough part of a university's work to justify employing people specifically for it?

Anecdotal, but yes. At my university there exist teaching fellows whose main job is undergraduate teaching (they have some time for their own research over the summer and take on service roles too). These people all hold PhDs in the relevant subject.

Do they exist at small unis as well?

My university has around 10,000 undergraduates, so yes (I think that counts as a pretty small uni).

In general, consider teaching at a community college where teaching is emphasized more than research. E.g., CUNY has Lecturer positions which are all teaching (plus service), requiring no research.

Which field? It matters.

What country are you asking about?

Adjunct faculty is somewhat like this kind of position. Not necessarily ideal job.

Yes, research universities hire full-time faculty whose primary job is teaching.  At least in the US, these faculty typically have different titles from tenure-track faculty, such as instructor, lecturer, senior lecturer, and teaching (assistant/associate/full) professor.  For example, my department employs 12 lecturers and teaching [rank] professors; my wife is one of 13 lecturers in another department.  We work at a large R1 state university; both our departments also have lots of "standard" tenure-track faculty.
Teaching faculty in my department are primarily responsible for the large lower-division undergraduate courses.  To first approximation, each such class is taught and maintained by the same teaching faculty member every semester.  In contrast, tenure-track faculty like me normally bounce between a few different courses, including upper-division requirements, electives, and graduate classes.  Teaching faculty in my department typically teach 3-5 times as many students per semester as tenure-track faculty, mostly because our intro classes are huge.  Most teaching faculty also have teaching-related service responsibilities, like serving on curriculum revision, grievance, and appeal committees.
At most R1 universities, including mine, teaching faculty are ineligible for tenure. But there are exceptions, like Berkeley's "Lecturers with Security of Employment" or Duke's "Professors of the Practice".

Another example for last paragraph: CUNY's "Lecturer with Certificate of Continuous Employment".


text:
How to quote passage with literal error that changes the meaning?
I have the following problem:
I want to write an indirect citation of a passage in a specific book. The problem is that there is a literal error. Normally this would not be much of a problem (if I would quote it directly I could also write [sic!] to tag it as an error).
But the thing is that the literal error changes the whole meaning of the sentence.
To provide an example of what I mean (obtained from [1, p. 497]):

Nonpolynomial approaches, like dispatching, may not work well.

The thing is that dispatching is a polynomial and not a nonpolynomial approach.
Two pages before it is even described as a polynomial approach (obtained from [1, p. 495]):

For comparison, we now consider problems that do not grow
  exponentially. These are called polynomial problems because [...]. As
  a specific example, consider the job dispatching problem [...].

What would be the proper way to handle this?

Edit:
Because some made the valid supposition, that this is just a bad wording: As it was ascertained in the comments below this question, it is indeed a literal error.
The error was not documented in the Errata of the 2nd edition (can be found here). But in the subsequent edition (the 3rd edition) on page 525 the sentence was changed to:

Polynomial approaches, like dispatching, may not work well.

So the example above is indeed a literal error.

[1] Wallace J. Hopp and Mark L. Spearman. Factory physics; foundations of manufacturing management. 2. ed. McGraw-Hill international editions: Management & organization series. Boston, Mass. [et al.]: Irwin McGraw-Hill, 2001. ISBN: 0-256-24795-1.

In your particular case: get hold of a copy of the latest edition of the book and see if they have corrected the mistake! https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Factory_Physics.html?id=TfcWAAAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y

I have also thought about that. Unfortunately the library of our university does not offer a copy of the 3rd edition. But I think a library of an institut has one, maybe I will look it up there.

"Nonpolynomial approaches [...] may not work well."

@TonyK Is this written in the 3rd edition?

@MichaelLanghammer: No! I was suggesting that you omit the phrase "like dispatching", indicating the omission in the standard way with "[...]".

@TonyK Sorry, I misinterpreted your comment.

There seems to be a more fundamental piece of carelessness in the writing here. p.495 refers to "job dispatching" as "a problem". But p497 refers to "dispatching " as "an approach (to solving the problem)". This isn't my field of expertise, but common sense says using the same term for both "the problem" and "a solution method" doesn't make sense - especially if there are other solution methods for the same problem.

Why do you want to cite a wrong text in the first place? Is there no alternative source which gets the matter right?

@alephzero The quote whitout the omission and with the following sentence is "As a specific example, consider the job dispatching problem descibed in Section 15.2.3 and suppose we wish to dispatch jobs according to the SPT rule. This requires us to sort the jobs in front of the workstation according to process time."

@alephzero On page 493 the Section 15.2.3 is called Dispatching where it is stated that "A traditional alternative to scheduling all the jobs on all the machines is to simply dispatch - sort according to a specified order - as they arrive at machines." As a dispatching rule SPT is mentioned. Considering that, I think dispatching in the sentence "Nonpolynomial approaches, like dispatching, may not work well." referes to sorting the jobs in a specific way with a dispatching rule (for example the SPT rule).

@alephzero This would also highlight this more as an error, because sorting can be solved in polynomial time (for example with Quicksort in O(n²)).

I believe that @user2390246's point was that, if you search the text of the third edition on Google Books, you will find that this has been corrected: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=TfcWAAAAQBAJ&lpg=PA525&vq=approaches%2C%20like%20dispatching&pg=PA525 Of course, this doesn't affect the general validity of your question; it merely resolves the immediate problem in your example.

@recognizer No, I wasn't being as helpful as that, I didn't get as far as trying to search for that particular section. Good call!

Related question (unfortunately without answers): http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/307735/what-are-standard-ways-for-an-editor-to-specify-he-is-making-a-correction

It is indeed corrected to "Polynomial approaches, like dispatching, may not work well." in the 3rd edition. The only thing that I do not understand is why the error was not documented in the Errata of the 2nd edition (can be found here). However, thanks to everyone!

For what it's worth as a reader I would question the value of quoting something directly you feel the need to immediately correct. It comes across as a less than reliable source. Can you avoid using that particular quote and instead finding something you could either directly quote or otherwise not have this problem?

You misparsed the grammar. I don't know if it's correct or not once you correctly parse it, but Nonpolynomial approaches, like dispatching, may not work well means something radically different from Nonpolynomial approaches like dispatching may not work well. In the former it's just saying that two different things (nonpolynomial approaches, and dispatching) both fail to work well, and that there is something similar about their failure. Only the latter is claiming that dispatching is a nonpolynomial approach. Of course the author might not have even understood the distinction...

If the purpose of quoting the text is to discuss the error, then quote the error. However, in this case, it seems that your purpose is to discuss the real situation. Quoting the error just makes things confusing.  Instead, I suggest something like:

Wallace et al. [1, p.497] say that polynomial approaches, such as dispatching, "do not work well."1
1 [1, p.497] erroneously described dispatching as nonpolynomial; compare [1,p.495].

The footnote explains that the literal quote from the source is incorrect but attempts to downplay this. The point of the footnote is only to stop the reader being confused if they look up the quote, not to criticize the authors for the mistake. You might be able to phrase the footnote better than I have, to make this point more effectively.
But be sure that it really is an error. The phrasing "Nonpolynomial approaches, like dispatching, may not work well" is ambiguous and could mean any of the following things:

"Nonpolynomial approaches, such as dispatching, may not work well."  (That is, nonpolynomial approaches may not work well; dispatching is an example of a nonpolynomial approach. This is the interpretation that you've used.)
"Nonpolynomial approaches that resemble dispatching may not work well" (That is, among the nonpolynomial approaches, those that resemble dispatching may not work well; other nonpoly approaches might be fine.)
"Nonpolynomial approaches, which resemble dispatching, may not work well." (That is, nonpoly approaches resemble dispatching; nonpoly approaches may not work well.)
"Like dispatching, nonpolynomial approaches may not work well." (That is, dispatching may not work well. Nonpoly approaches have the following commonality with dispatching: they also may not work well."

Also, as dan1111 points out in his answer, you need to be sure that your correction (changing "nonpolynomial" to "polynomial") fixes the error.

That's four things :) Some of them are not strictly compatible with the comma before "like", though the distinction is subtle enough that it's possible the original text did not apply it correctly. Given the ambiguity and/or mistake in the cited source, might it be simpler to find another source that makes this particular point and cite it instead?

@user2390246 four? Doh! I agree that some of the interpretations aren't compatible with the commas but I'm not sure I want to trust the commas. If you believe the commas, the fourth interpretation is the literal meaning. But, yes, finding a source that you can cite without all this messing about would be even better!

Thank you for your advice. There is a valid reason why I want to quote this sentence. First it is stated that some sort of formal problems "are hard (in the NP-hard sense)", then two conclusions are made. One of them is the described sentence. If would decide not to mention the sentence then this whole quotation would not be textual complete (at least in my understanding). I will think more about how to do it, but I like your answer the most.

The fourth possible meaning in your list was what first occurred to me while reading the question. I think this possible meaning is enough to absolve the author of the error that the OP alleges, but (depending on the commas) it may be enough to convict him of serious ambiguity.

@AndreasBlass As was pointed out in the comments on the question, the author has since corrected that statement, which means it was indeed in error.

Yes it is corrected in the 3rd edition. This is the proof that it is indeed a literal error. The only thing I do not understand is why the error was not documented in the Errata of the 2nd edition (can be found here).

@MichaelLanghammer Presumably because, when the errata was written, they weren't aware of the error, and they've not updated it since becoming aware of it.

Maybe that's the reason. But when an error is known shouldn't the Errata be updated? Isn't that the purpose of such a document? But I don't know if it is the usual procedure to update an Errata or not.

@MichaelLanghammer Yes, ideally, the errata should be updated. But I'm not omniscient so I've no idea why it wasn't. You should be asking the author or publisher, not me.

You should consider the possibility that you are misunderstanding the text.
It's possible that the author doesn't mean "Nonpolynomial approaches, of which dispatching is an example, ..." but rather he means "Nonpolynomial approaches, just as in the case of some polynomial approaches, ..."
In other words, his "like dispatching" doesn't mean that dispatching is an example of a nonpolynomial approach, but rather that it too suffers from the same problems as nonpolynomial approaches.
Simpler example: "Boys, like redheaded girls, have faces". This doesn't mean that redheaded girls are examples of boys. It means that boys, along with redheaded girls, share this property (having faces).
Just saying.
The author could clarify which is meant by using either "just as" or "such as" instead of "like".

Sorry, I didn't notice your answer before I posted mine. We are basically in agreement. In fact, your example is far more natural-sounding. I'm giving you the +1.

If you want to quote the sentence, use [sic] (without any exclamation mark, there's no need for that), and then explain what's wrong, e.g.,

Wallace et al. [1] state that [sic]:

Nonpolynomial approaches, like dispatching, may not work well.

We should note, however, that [...]

(I'm not sure I've clearly understood the question, though)

Or it might be even better to include the [sic] right after the word in question, i.e. "Nonpolynomial [sic] approaches, like dispatching, may not work well.". I've also seen footnotes being used to clarify quotes.

Agreed that you definitely need to leave out the exclamation mark. Including it looks far too much like, "Nonpolynomial [duuuuuuuuuuh!] approaches, ..."

I am not at all sure if this should be considered an error by the author. It may represent an error in understanding by the reader.
An earlier mention was made of "dispatching" as a polynomial approach:

... polynomial problems because [...]. As a specific example, consider the job
  dispatching problem [...].

Shortly thereafter (just two pages later), the author references dispatching in this seemingly contradictory fashion:

Nonpolynomial approaches, like dispatching...

The key here is to recognise that the sentence construction:

The A and C strategies, like strategy B, are unlikely to work well.

can very reasonably be taken to mean that none of the strategies (A, B, or C) are likely to work well.
It does not imply that strategy B is a member of the group of strategies A and C.
Note that that little comma before the word "like" is highly important. If it had been omitted, the sentence can definitely be considered erroneous and misleading:

The A and C strategies like strategy B, are unlikely to work well.

The strong implication here is that strategy B is part of the A and C group of strategies.
Given that the line you quoted does have that critical comma, I don't think it's reasonable to conclude that it's in error.

Great minds think alike. +1 for you.

This! Commas are important.


text:
How to prepare enough material for my class?
I have recently been admitted to teach some TOEFL courses in an institute and the course I lecture is reading and writing. According to the institute policy, each teacher is free to have his/her own material of teaching.
I am spending a lot of time observing classes and I prepare powerpoints to present in my class which takes a long time to prepare them every session. The students have been pleased so far but in one of the classes another instructor has given the students 7 gigabyte of additional material and also sends them about 10 sample writings each session and all in all has a wealth of teaching stuff to give to the students. They  have about 3 years experience teaching TOEFL.
I am new but I know I am doing my best. However, I feel bad for my students to be deprived of the material that other students have the privilege to have just because their teacher is someone else.
The other instructor does not share his material with anyone and it is of no use to ask him. I would appreciate if someone let me know how I can compensate for my students and if you know any good sources of TOEFL writing samples please let me know.

If your students are satisfied and they're learning what they are supposed to learn, why do you care what the other guy is doing? (How many of his students do you think read 7GB of extra material? Do you think it's even possible to carefully read and use that much material in a few months?)

Of course not, but I do feel responsible for my students.

Probably related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46433/how-much-study-material-is-enough

It is a common misconception among beginning teachers (including me when I first started) and some experienced teachers that it is good to include more materials in your teaching.  However, since students have a limited ability to learn, it is better to keep the quantity of material within that limit.  Pick the most important stuff, and make it really good.  Then review as much as possible to help students remember.
When designing your teaching methods, start with objectives (e.g. improving students' TOEFL score), then pick your assessment (the TOEFL), then design the content (practicing things that are likely to be on the TOEFL).
When I teach, my challenge is getting rid of unimportant material so it does not distract students from the important information.

Getting rid of unimportant material so it does not distract students from the important information. Exactly.

Yes, in my experience the challenge of teaching is definitely "how can I possibly cut enough stuff out to fit in the available class time", not the opposite.

You will have to build your own corpus of materials!  Every teacher has to start somewhere. I would be surprised to find this instructor ginned up 7GB worth of material on his own so in the mean time a very good place to start is either at the institute library or writing center or your own local library.  I'm sure there are stacks of books on TOEFL that have plenty of links to relevant topics.  And a Google search for "TOEFL teaching material" returns nearly a half-million hits.
A sort of more passive approach you can take as the semester and years progress is to keep a notebook or folder with materials you find useful.  If you read an article in a magazine  you think would be useful as teaching material, clip it and stick it in this folder.  Over time these tidbits can become the basis for your own custom reading materials.

Also: http://magoosh.com/toefl/2014/how-to-teach-the-toefl/


text:
Should I include information about my mental health in my masters personal statements?
I graduated in 2016 with a 2:2, which I feel was lower than what I could have achieved.
I had had some minor issues before starting university, however I had an amazing support system and managed to get these in check. I completed my first year with only the normal issues (homesickness at first and adjusting to living away from home) until just before the end. I failed the last two exams of the year, partly due to the same issues that reoccurred later.
I had been struggling with one of my elective modules and after talking with my tutor, he recommended not worrying about it as I could fail 20 credits and as a 10 credit module, it would not affect my grade. However, the day of I woke up and completely panicked, zoning in and out all morning. I walked to the exam, and blanked and ended up in my department building instead of the exam hall, which was 20 minutes away and I had to run down a very steep hill to make it to the exam. But I made it and sat the exam.
I injured my knee while running. The problem with this is that my main coping method is exercise and I was on crutches. I then managed to completely space out for the last exam of the year. Meaning I failed both these modules, which was my 20 credit allowance. Despite this I averaged a high 2:1 for the year.
I went into my second year, with added roles and responsibilities. I had lived in catered accommodation in first year and moved to self catered in my second year. I became the social secretary of the physics society and started another sport (total of three) I had been a super human in my first year and wanted to do more. This turned out to be a bad idea, as my mental health started to decline, and my grades took a hit.
I then tried to pull them back up in my third year, but poor living conditions caused a physical health decline, which then exacerbated the mental health problems to a point where some days I couldn't get out of bed.
The main problem being that in my third year I was living with some really shitty people and they were really scathing of mental health issues, meaning I didn't seek the help I needed and am now getting and didn't apply for special circumstance. Hindsight really is 20:20.
I have taken time out of my career to get this sorted and to make sure that I am taking the right path for me. I have now ruled it down to three possible paths and want to apply to see what I can do.
I just want to know whether I should mention these issues and the steps I've taken in my time off to overcome these, on my personal statement. I don't seem to get anywhere else to put this and none of my previous lecturers know about this to mention on any references.

Firstly,
I believe you should indeed advise your tutors about your mental health condition and what you have been going through, and that you are motivated and willing to do whatever you can to succeed.
Not to make them biased about your condition and kinder to you on the grades, but to inform them about what you are going through in case your grades suddenly take a hit. Also make sure the tutors keep these informations about you for themselves if you do not wish to deal with people's judgmental behaviors.
You don't have to keep this as a personal burden, don't hesitate to seek for help or talk to people about your personal/scholar record. You shouldn't feel crippled about it, but rather embrace it and who you are, and work on fixing it (if possible of course).
I strongly suggest that you do not give any importance to the "shitty people" you are referring to, and that you focus on yourself, your studies and your well-being, which is the most important.
If you judge that it is important for you to tell your tutors about it, I think you should.
Secondly,
That being said, for your statement of purpose, as far as I remember, the point of it is to describe your personal record, what has influenced your career path, professional and personal interests, and so on...
And again, if you judge that it is important for you to mention, or justify some things about your personal record, why not mention it? Remember that statement of purpose is the only part of your application over which you have full control.  So it might be worth it. Just make sure it remains an informative aspect and not the core of your SoP.
I would personally mention it. But it's up to you to decide wether you should share this very personal part of your life or not, it isn't easy for everyone.
Best of luck to you.

Mention it, yes, but don't dwell on it.
The majority of your personal statement should be devoted to explaining your motivations for further study and (if it's a research Master's) your potential to do good research. However, since your mental health had such a big impact on your grades, I would add one or two sentences explaining that this was the case.
Ultimately, the most important thing to emphasise if you do mention it is that your mental health is stable now and you are not expecting to experience similar problems during the Master's course.
Good luck with your applications.


text:
When reading papers, what's the most convenient way to check a citation without disrupting the reading process?
Papers can include clickable-link formatting with in-text citations.  It's convenient to click a link to check the citation, however, it's disruptive to have to manually scroll back up to continue reading.
Is there an easier way to resume reading after checking a citation?  Alternatively, is there a less disruptive method for checking a citation?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about how to use a PDF viewer, not specific to academia.

Many PDF viewers provide a "back" feature.  If you want to know how to do this with the software you are using, ask on a forum dedicated to that software (or maybe superuser.com).  If yours doesn't support it and you want to find one that does, there is Software Recommendations SE.  In either case you should carefully read the site's help and posting guidelines first.

Can you right-click and open in another tab?

You can open same PDF in different tabs/windows. In one tab, you keep location pointer to the References section. In another tab, you keep location pointer at whichever page you are currently reading.

With Acrobat, you can split the screen.  I'll often keep the references section in the bottom part of the screen.

@NateEldredge Name one academic though that doesn't benefit from knowing this

If you are reading the PDF in a browser, simply open the link in a new tab?

@NajibIdrissi If they're answerable, practical, reasonably scoped, and pertain to an issue consistently and almost exclusively encountered by academics (because who else clicks bibliographic links anyways), why not?

@NajibIdrissi Often enough that it is a problem, and not links to a chapter header from which it is trivial to jump back?

@NateEldredge If this question is going to be considered off-topic here, can we migrate it to a SE where it isn't? This tip is so useful, and as far as I can tell, hard to find, that it would be a shame to delete it entirely.

I agree with @NateEldredge that this is boat programming.

@StephanKolassa Do all programmers buy boats? Do all academics check bibliography in pdfs?

@sgf: the question is essentially how to navigate in PDF readers. Tacking "for academics" at the end doesn't change that. This is completely analogous to how taking "what is the best boat?" does not become a programming-related question by tacking "for programmers" at the end.

@StephanKolassa How should I deal with discouragement as a graduate student Worked for the best question on this site. Why? Because graduate students tend to get discouraged, even though getting discouraged is not a specifically academic activity. But your analogy fails anyways: This question is not "What is the best way to navigate PDF readers for academics", it's "How do you do this specific thing on PDF readers that academics need to do a lot." Programers don't need to boat.

@NajibIdrissi "What's the best chair around" is a highly subjective answer. On the topic of boat-programming questions on academia, there is a meta-question with only one answer: Just because an issue is also an issue outside of academia doesn't make it off-topic here.

If you're using Adobe Acrobat Reader (which I suspect you are), you can press alt + left to jump back to where you were before clicking the link. I find it amazingly useful.

Thank you! Do you know how to do similar thing for Google chrome?

@Hang yes - literally alt+left to go back to the previous page. 90% of the time Chrome will go back to where you were on the previous page. It sometimes doesn't work with bad SPAs.

@AytAyt Yes, sorry, I guess I don't know what order they add buttons—I always just get the one with the most buttons.

If you have a 5 button mouse, you can use the thumb buttons to move back and forth. (I purchase my own mouse for work, just to have this feature.)

Thanks for the tip! it works in Sumatra as well :)

@Snake: What's a SPA?

@LightnessRacesinOrbit single page applications. Applications that load content after a page load.

If using Preview on MacOS, you can use Command + [ to go back.

In a web browser, you can right-click and select "Open link in new tab" or whatever the specific option is for your browser.  Then you can click through the tabs rather than scroll through the article.

Holding Ctrl and clicking with the left mouse button to open a new tab is even easier/faster.

@applesoup, this doesn't work on Chrome on my Macbook.

Sorry, my fault. It seems to be Cmd+left click in Chrome on a Mac. Does that work?


text:
Is it correct for a PhD holder to sign as "Dr. J. Doe, PhD"?
I have seen some of the PhD holders sign as "Dr. [First Name] [Surname], PhD".
Is it academically correct to write "Dr. Frank Amoani Arthur, PhD"?

Are you in Germany? If not you can do whatever you want.

In addition, "Dr. X Y, PhD" would be correct if the person actually holds two different doctoral degrees: a Dr. and a PhD.

I would like to add that in some fields and (sub)cultures, adding the ", PhD" bit after your name may seem unnecessarily pretentious.

It certainly depends on the usage context. In a job talk title slide, naming the degree seems justified, while in a conference talk or in a twitter profile, it would look pretentious.

Have a look at this answer.

@CapeCode Not just Germany. In The Netherlands it is a criminal offense to write your name like this. The law explicitly provides that you have to choose between either writing "dr." or writing "PhD".

There are two important points to note about name markers that refer to academic titles:

You can have more than one of these markers in your name: Kay Doe, PhD, MD indicates a person who is both a doctor of philosophy and a doctor of medicine.
The marker Dr. can very often be used as a variant of the post-positioned markers. If both of them are equivalent markers in your country, you can choose either marker to refer to your academic title.

These two observations make the suggested name form Dr. Kay Doe, PhD rather ambiguous.
Does it refer to a person with two doctor titles because there are two markers? Or do both markers refer to just one doctor title? But if so, why is that doctor referred to twice in one name? This may even lead to suspicion: Does the name bearer use two markers which refer to the same  title with the intention to sound more impressive than their academic distinction actually warrants?
This ambiguity is avoided if you use only one title marker per title.

+1 for not asserting that something is "correct" or "incorrect" and instead focusing on what is the most effective for communication.

In Germany, we tend to list multiple doctor titles in front of the name, e.g. Dr. phil. D. med. Dr. h.c. Max Mustermann would declare a doctor of philosophy, a medical doctor and an honorary doctor all at once. But notably, these titles must match the precise expression of a title that has been awarded. So Dr. phil. X cannot be used instead of X, PhD, except if the awarding university explicitly declared it that way. Here you can find a list of examples (need to scroll down to a table).

In the US, at least the title doctor doesn't imply a medical doctor, though it includes that. My students would usually refer to me as Dr. Buffy. Someone not knowing that I hold a doctorate might call me Mr. Buffy, but Dr. Buffy is more specific.
If I wish to list my degrees after my name they aren't being used a title like Dr. or Ms.
So, being pedantic: Dr. Buffy, BA, MA, PhD. is just fine. In Germany, and places with a related academic culture, degrees are used more as titles so it is a bit different: Herr Doctor Professor Buffy.
Medical doctors (again in the US) insist on being called Doctor and have no difficulty with Dr. Foobar, MD. It would be extremely uncommon for them to be listed any other way.

"Herr Professor Doctor", actually.

Yes, Herr Student @OlegLobachev. Kidding of course. Thanks. In the US we would garble it, of course. As I did. I listed them in the order I did because of the order I earned them. I was Doktor before I was professor.

There is a story of a quite famous mathematician (a professor) who was living with one of his students in a "romantic" relationship. He once is said to have informed her that she didn't need to refer to him with all of his titles as long as they were in private. Apocryphal? You judge.

There's a reason why physicians are Dr. Foo, M.D. The Dr. part is for public appearances, so patients perceive that they're authoritative. The M.D. part is required by regulation in some places like hospitals and medical schools, as to disambiguate Ph.D., D.O., D.D.S./D.M.D., O.D., D.V.M. etc. which all have different rights/requirements when interacting with patients. My major US institution sticks both (Dr. Foo Bar, PhD) on everybody's e-mails and ID cards and computer accounts, even for non-medical people.

I'm sure this must have been dealt with in previous questions, but the short answer is:
This is correct if you are both a medical doctor and an academic doctor. But just being an academic allows you to write Dr. (name) XOR (name) PhD.

This is not universally true.

If you have Dr. NAME only it might cause some confusion. I was once caught in a situation where I was asked to be on standby for assistance during a medical emergency because my boarding pass identified me as Dr. MYNAME. I had to explain that the Dr was for a PhD and not for medical practises.
In my opinion the academic the title should be
Dr. LASTNAME or Dr. LASTNAME M.D. for a medical practitioner
Dr, LASTNAME PhD for an academic qualification
Dr. LASTNAME HC for an honorary doctorate (honororium causa)

As you can see from some of the answers here, there is substantial variation in use of academic titles and suffixes for degrees.  It is certainly okay to use the suffix PhD if you have a PhD, and it would be hard to mount an argument that it is "incorrect" to use a suffix for a degree you actually have.  There is wide variation in what is common practice in academia, but what is most important is to consider the following practical issues:

IMPORTANT --- avoid confusion with medical doctors: In most places, in an academic context the title "Dr" is fine for someone with a PhD (though in some countries they are distinct).  However, in contexts outside academia it can cause confusion.  In particular, for a person with a PhD who is not a medical doctor, it is often desirable to avoid using the title "Dr" in contexts where it might cause people to think that you are the appropriate contact person in a medical emergency ---e.g., "Dr O'Neill, this man is having a heart attack - do something!"  So, for example, when I am checking into a plane, or in similar circumstances, I try to ensure that I am booked in as "Mr" not "Dr", notwithstanding that the latter title would apply in an academic context.

Academics rarely use the degree suffix: Because the PhD is so common among academics, we would rarely use this suffix outside of a CV.  It is common for academics to use titles (e.g., Dr, Assoc Prof, Prof, etc.) in descriptions such as a signature block, staff page, etc.  It is uncommon (but not incorrect) to additionally add the suffix "PhD".  The main reason most academics leave this part off is because the degree is common among academics.

Dual use might clarify or it might confuse, depending on who is reading it: If you use both a title and a suffix for the same degree, that can potentially help to understand the source of the title, or it can look awkward or cause confusion.  This really depends on the audience.  In most cases, if you use the title "Dr" and the suffix "PhD" then people will assume that the title comes from the degree specified in the suffix, which is accurate here.  It is perhaps a bit unusual to use both, but it is not unheard of.

I think in the US anyway, you can sign your name however you wish. In my case, I am a DVM and I have a Masters degree. I want my business cards to say Dr. MYNAME, DVM, MS.  I have seen multiple DVMs that write their name the same way. I think it's good to know what kind of Dr. I am, and this helps others to know it also. Even if I didn't have the Masters degree, I would likely still want my business card to say Dr. MYNAME, DVM.

What is a DVM ?

@astronat Doctor of Veterinary Medicine.

Dr Jones if he has a medical degree.
Mark Jones, Ph.D. or Dr. Jones, if he has a Ph.D.
Never Dr. Jones, Ph. D.

What if a PhD who is also a medical doctor? I think "Never" is too strong a word.

@scaaahu Mark Jones, MD, PhD.

@NicoleHamilton That's a good one.

My major US university puts "Dr. Jones PhD" on everybody's ID cards, e-mails, computer accounts, directory, etc. It's because the medical school and hospital have all kinds of "Dr." running around and they need to make it easy to identify what responsibilities you have.


text:
How to format a teaching statement?
I have already written a teaching statement for a faculty position as assistant professor.
I have three questions:

What is the right tense of teaching statement? (present tense or future)
Must I sign the statement of teaching like "best regards" etc? How should I put my name in statement of teaching? I mean is there any template for that?
In the last paragraph I put some words on the position that I am applying for, about the university and etc, is that Okay to keep this paragraph?

it is not clear whether you want to highlight your previous Teaching experience or to highlight your future teaching interests?

This is too short for an answer, but 1) No "right" tense 2) No 3) Yes

Actually, I did not mention my previous teaching experiences. Should I write past teaching experiences? How many pages is normal for a teaching statement?

I used present time verbs in my current teaching statement.

@user40491: As to length, see https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28594/what-is-the-appropriate-length-and-specificity-for-a-teaching-statement?rq=1  In general, you may find a lot of your questions answered if you browse the [tag:teaching-statement] tag.

In writing research and teaching statements, I generally use past tense for activities that have been completed, and present tense for ongoing activities—the same way you would in standard "ordinary writing."
Statements such as these do not need to be signed, as they are not letters. (Your cover letter for the whole application is a reinforcement of this.)
As for talking about the position, it certainly seems like a good idea to me to talk about how your experience and teaching philosophy fits the specific position in the application, doesn't it?


text:
Should I publish a journal article on a new device instead of waiting to patent it?
I have developed a device that would be patentable, however I have no funds to get an international patent.
I suspect that it might be better to write a research paper on the device so that people can read about it and provide funds for a patent, however I am worried that somebody can patent my device after reading my research paper.  Alternatively, I could wait for a year or so when the college can get me funds and a patent lawyer and patent it with me.
Which should I do?

Once you have published your paper, nobody else can patent the device you describe in the paper, so no need to worry about that. Further, depending on patent jurisdiction, you may not be able to patent it after publication either.

What kind of commercialization profile would the new device have?  For example, are you talking about a piece of computer code, or a common household thing that anyone could make, or a specialized machine that would be deployed only in a few special sites in the world?

As a head's up, the patent system is a mess, and it's costly by-design.  If you want to win at it with no money, you'll probably need a well-informed strategy.  (Not a lawyer, etc..)

If you are affiliated with a university, they'd probably have a patent office. It takes over the patent application (and analysis if it makes sense at all), but at a price. In most cases you would be able to apply for a patent also after publication, but in a limited time frame and-- best ask a lawyer!

If you are university affiliated, you should try to find your Office of Commercialization, or something similar. Generally speaking, they can help you through the process, and many universities help cover the fees for patents they consider to have likely commercial potential.
If you publish, that counts as a public presentation, and starts the clock ticking in the U.S.:
An old article on the subject: http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2001/10/patent-first-publish-later-how-not-ruin-your-chances-winning-patent
Other people know this - they're not likely to "provide funds" to you out of the goodness of their hearts if they can just wait a year and use your now patent-free invention. You don't have to worry about them patenting it, but you also lose out on the protection.


text:
How do I get into a Computer Science Masters with a humanities undergraduate degree?
I realize my question is similar to this thread. However, I have a slightly different story which I'd like to ask people's opinion about.
I have a Bachelor of Arts degree in East Asian Studies (specialist) and History (minor). I graduated in the middle of the latest economic slump and wasn't able to find jobs in my field. Since I have been an avid computer geek from a very young age, I decided to leverage those skills and ended up becoming a tech support consultant, sys-admin, and am currently a full-stack web developer.
In a way, I don't really require getting a Computer Science masters degree as I've been in the field now for about 5 years. On the other hand, not having that extra piece of paper has impeded me from being strongly credible as well as from obtaining better paying jobs.
Question:  Given my experience in the field already, how likely is it for me to get accepted for a Computer Science masters degree with my B.A. undergraduate degree?

The answer would probably depend on the nature of the program that you want to apply to. In a graduate program in straight computer science, lack of a background in things like discrete mathematics, algorithmic complexity, computer language theory, etc. would probably be a serious (but not insurmountable) impediment. On the other hand, in a graduate program with a more applied bent, your work experience might count for a great deal. Also -- with your background, a masters in Computer Information Science (some of which will concentrate on web application development) might be a natural fit.


text:
Can I take a second Master’s degree program in Biostatistics if I already have Masters Degree in Statistics?
Is it possible to do a second Masters Degree in Biostatistics if I already have a Masters Degree in Statistics?
During my first Masters Degree, I took one Biostatistics course for my elective, and I found the subject really interesting. I thought about taking a PhD program in Biostatistics, but to me PhD is too long and I have some doubts on whether I will be successful as a PhD student. I am particularly interested in Masters degree in Biostatistics that has co-op option, so that I can gain some work experience as well.
But is it possible to take a Masters program in Biostatistics when I already have a Masters degree in Statistics?

You might want to consider why you want to do this at all. There will be very few positions where a degree in biostatistics is required but one in statistics is not also allowed. Plenty of people have advanced degrees in statistics but do most if not all of their work in biostatistics.

Mostly because I didn’t get to take many biostatistics related courses during my first Masters Degree (I did not take, for instance,  a course in longitudinal analysis / survival analysis / how to handle phase IV observational data. ) Also doing co-op appeals to me strongly, as this can be a way for me to set my foot into the door

Some graduate programs are unwilling to admit students who already have the same level degree in the same (or similar enough) area.

Yes, it is generally completely permissible to do so. Universities often have rules precluding people from getting degrees that they have already earned at another institution, but not ones that preclude highly overlapping degrees. For example, I know many people who have math and CS degrees that overlapped so much that the theses were on the same topic. I think such determinations are usually made based on the name of the degree, and not an analysis of the similarity of coursework.
Wether or not this is encouraged or a good strategic idea is a different question, but most schools won’t have a rule-based problem with this.

Thank you for your reply. If I took my first Master’s degree program from a Statistics Department, and if I apply to a Statistics department at a different university to take a second Master’s program in Biostatistics, would there be a problem (since both are Statistics department)? Thank you,

@Lise most universities have policies about not accepting people for duplicate degrees. It sounds plausible that circumstance they might consider it a duplicate degree, but that’s really a question best asked to individual departments.

@Lise If you liked this answer, please press the up arrow to give it a positive vote. If you feel t answered your question, you can accept it by hitting the checkmark.

@Lise Even if this does answer your question, it's advisable to wait at least a day to accept the answer, in order to encourage a variety responses. People are less likely to answer a question that already has an accepted answer.

I think the answer depends on the graduate school requirements (that you are applying to). Usually schools mention required background for applying.


text:
I want to be a guest speaker at a university
Currently, I am doing a PhD and I want be a guest speaker at one of my previous universities. The topic of my PhD is very similar to what I studied at the university and therefore, I want to give a small talk to the students there. How can I ask the authorities at my previous university to do the same?

Convince the staff member responsible for inviting guest speakers to invite you.

(OT: Although the topic of your PhD might be very similar to what you studied at university, this doesn't seem like the right motivation to give a guest lecture. Moreover, students don't seem like the right audience for a talk on your PhD topic, fellow researchers should perhaps be your target.)

@user2768 Just because a standard talk about your research is not suitable for students doesn't mean that you can't give a good talk about if it is tailored to this audience. Das: You could try to contact the alumni organization of your old university. They sometimes organize exactly this sort of talks from alumni to show students possible career paths. Usually they prefer speakers from industry, but if you can give a good, accessible talk about your PhD research, I don't see why that couldn't be of interest as well.

@ChristianClason I'm pretty sure I didn't claim otherwise...

Das: Can you clarify why the university might want you to give a lecture? Perhaps they have a course that invites guest speakers or maybe the alumni organises such lectures as noted by @ChristianClason

I want to be the plenary speaker at the biggest conference in my field! ;-)

I'm surprised nobody has addressed the elephant in the room so far: Do you expect to get paid (by which I mean of course, reimbursed for travel costs)? (And you shouldn't think of "authorities": a university consists of people -- indeed, that is the origin of the name -- and you need to address a specific researcher. Presumably if you studied at the university, you had an advisor or a professor you had contact with -- why not try them?)

Inclear. "To do the same" as who? Or "to do the same" as what? Do you wish to ask the authorities at my previous university to do the same as you, i.e., to "want to give a small talk to the students there"?

@Hexal "To do the same" is, I believe, a standard expression in the (or perhaps an) Indian version of English, meaning "to do what I have described". So in this case, it would mean "to invite me to give a talk to the students".

@AndreasBlass Linguistically, "to do what I have described" is "to want to give a small talk to the students there" or "to give a small talk to the students there". The word "invite" is missing in the OP.

Find out who organizes the relevant seminar. Often there is a website listing talks and a contact person. If you can't find this information, just pick someone from the faculty who is likely to be interested in your talk.
Either email that person yourself, or get someone (e.g. your advisor) to introduce you. Introduce yourself; say you are interested in visiting the department and/or giving a talk; indicate what you would like to talk about; and specify what dates work for you. The following email is a good start.

Dear So-and-so,
I am visiting Madeuptown the week of Sextember 47th and would be interested in visiting the University of Madeuptown underwater basket weaving department.
  I am currently a PhD student in underwater basket weaving at Fictitious University advised by John Namedrop and I have been working on the use of new wicker weaving materials, which may be of interest to the students in your department.
  Please let me know if you would be interested in arranging something.
Best,
Das

I have been the organizer of a computer science group seminar (in the US) and I regularly received such emails. Indeed many of them were much more direct than this.
Most likely, you'll be invited to speak. However, it is possible that they are unable to schedule something suitable at the time you specify. (If you don't get a positive response, then leave it at that. I.e., don't pester them.)
It's worth a try if you are interested in giving a talk. The worst thing that could happen is that your email is ignored.
If you are lucky, they may offer to cover some of your expenses. However, don't bet on it if you are "self-inviting."

This answer assumes that you wish to give a talk at a different institution than your current one. The fact that it's one of your earlier institutions is only mildly related.
Usually, giving a talk at a seminar is not a problem. Simply find the relevant ongoing seminars and their organizers: they might have a free time slot. If you see no seminars online, contact the researchers corresponding to your interests, and take it from there.
However, asking for the reimbursement of the travel costs is or might be a problem for you: it would require substantially more time or effort on the part of  the organizers. Why would they give themselves an ulcer?


text:
Is a Bachelor's sufficient to claim being an "engineer" in countries with Engineer's degrees?
Here in Peru, a Bachelor's degree recipient can do an additional thesis to earn an Engineer's degree to be recognized as an engineer.
Some Bachelor's degree holders have been calling themselves engineers on the basis of their undergraduate coursework and Bachelor's thesis.  This seems unfair to those who have invested the additional time, effort, and money necessary to earn their Engineer's degree.
Question:  Is it appropriate for a Bachelor's degree holder to refer to themself as an "engineer" without having earned an Engineer's degree in a country like Peru?

This is both a highly opinion based question and very specific to the culture of Peru. I don't think it is likely that you are going to get useful responses.

In some places use of the title "engineer" is regulated by law. But if not, then it seems to be a meaningless title. People employing such others need to take it into account, of course.

I edited the question a bit to clarify the wording.  However, you might be interested in modifying it a bit -- for example, you could ask how to deal with Bachelor's degree holders calling themselves engineers, or you might ask if there're university regulations prohibiting that practice, etc..

Nicole, read carefully the link, to be considered an engineer you need both bachellor and engineer degree.

@Buffy I think in quite a few places being allowed to call yourself an “engineer” is regulated by law - you don’t want a bridge falling down and killing people because the guy who designed it didn’t know what they were doing. I think that this question would be best rephrased as “How do engineering professional organisations in nations where postgraduate engineering degrees are required handle engineers from nations where only bachelors degrees are required?”

@SolarMike I disagree that this question is opinion-based; it should be answerable by consulting the regulations/bylaws of engineering professional organisations like Engineers Australia.

Ignore it, move on. I'm guessing you probably have better things to worry about than that.
If you are in a hiring position, looking for an engineer, that distinction would make a difference. Otherwise, you would just be pedantically annoying, without any real effect.
ps: In Brazil, by law, every lawyer gets the right to be called 'doctor' after graduation (no MS, no PhD, nothing). It's ridiculous and anyone caring about it is wasting time.