text:
Is it ethical to omit the PhD credential from my resume?
I am applying for a Statistical Programmer position at a commercial research organization (CRO), and I am wondering if it is unethical to omit my PhD in Statistics from my resume?
All of my degrees (Bachelor's, Master's, PhD) are in Statistics, and I am just wondering if it would be ethical to just list my Bachelor's and Master's degree on my resume, and indicate my experience as a RA while I was a PhD student as my "work experience"? (Since this Statistical Programmer position only requires Master's degree plus some years of experience)
I am asking this question because I do not want to do anything unethical/cause me troubles later on.

Do you want to do that because you are afraid of looking over-qualified for the job position?

The contents of the offer, if you get one, will be highly dependent on whether or not you have a PhD. You might be hurting yourself financially by doing so in case that didn't occur to you.

Sometimes when applying to programming jobs, I'll omit the entire education section (BS & MS) to give me a few more lines to talk about my projects. Am I being unethical by failing to include two degrees (and years of study) on my resume? I don't think so—I'll happily tell anyone about my educational certificates. The resume is just not that weighty of a document, and it's role is to get you into the door.

"Since this Statistical Programmer position only requires Master's degree plus some years of experience": Would have thought the PhD would count as "years of experience"?

@Bad_Bishop The meaning is basically the same, but I think the more typical phrase is "Contract Research Organization"

@AhmedFasih: This is different. This is as if you had omitted the BS&MS education, but put in the high school you went to. I'm not sure if that's unethical, but it's definitely dishonest.

Why would you want to do this?

"work experience" usually means "commercial experience". For you it was a job, but for typical company trying to sell PhD as a "work" would be a lie. From my position (a commercial programmer), you have 0 work experience.

Do you think that such a deception will help you significantly in landing the job? Several years of “work experience” at a university is going to look very suspicious and will probably raise some flags.
In general, you’re always better off stating the truth. There’s a smaller chance of things going sideways down the road if you do.

Why would it look suspicious working several years at a university in connection to / right after studies? Lots of students do, some as amanuensis while doing their masters. Some start working part time with teaching.

@mathreadler: What I'm saying is that if a tech-aware hiring manager saw someone an extended "work experience" doing "research" at a university, that person would probably have a clue that the applicant is trying to hide a PhD degree. Moreover, some people do it for a few years, but once it starts to approach the length of a PhD, there is the obvious question: "Why didn't you do a PhD?"

is it such an obvious question? Many people may enjoy teaching undergraduates but maybe don't enjoy writing papers, doing research, taking more classes on their own et.c. Some people enjoy doing the technical work which for example research engineers do, but don't enjoy other parts required to do a PhD. Yet some people maybe just like being in the atmosphere and want to work with other, more social aspects of universities and student life.

@mathreadler: Whether or not there is a good answer, yes it is an obvious question to ask.

Also, the OP asks about listing an RA as work experience. Then it’s eminently reasonable to ask about the PhD.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit everyone simply don't want to do a PhD but may still like the life around campus and work related to university. I'm sure many employers know this. It's not really a secret.

@mathreadler: Refer to my previous comment.

@mathreadler: while your points are perfectly fine at least over here they amount to asking for a big change in the academic system: whatever jobs are there at the universities below postdoc level, are needed to feed PhD students. So it is also no secret that unless the student at least pretends to work towards a PhD they typically won't get work experience at a university. And we're back at the point @ aeismail raised...

@cbeleites in my experience that is not true. It is rather the other way around. Universities offer successful students to become teaching assistants with the hopes that it will make them happy and want to stay in academia and work towards higher degrees and maybe faculty rather than getting hungry for money and start working part or full time at the first or second company they get a summer job at - worst case even before getting their first degree.

@mathreadler Are you suggesting that universities often hire as TAs people who have already graduated with MS degrees, in the hopes that they will love TAing so much that they will decide to go for a PhD?

@Tashus no, I suggest that they often start doing that a good bit before they get their MS degrees. Maybe they are studying last year of bachelor or first year of their masters and teaching earlier bachelors.

@mathreadler That isn't the scenario in the question. OP specifically asked about listing PhD years post-masters as "work experience."

@Tashus that's the reason for adding it as a comment. It shows that something may be lacking in the assumptions.

@aeismail "Why didn't you do a PhD?" personally, if I saw that I couldn't help wondering if the applicant started a PhD and then abandoned it, and were now trying to hide that fact, which potentially looks much worse (the hiding part, mostly).

I have a rather unique position in this regard as I work as an Adjunct at my local university in addition to working for a private employer exclusively for Government clients. As such, I have a foot in all three camps, so to speak. My experience with people employing across these fields is a little different to the conventional academic, and as such will differ from the other answers here.
Your PhD qualification (in the private sector) may actually be a hindrance to you getting employment there. A controversial guide to professional hiring in the private sector is called Smart and Get Things Done by Joel Spolsky. In his essay, he suggests that PhD graduates are certainly smart, but not always able to 'get things done'. As I said, this is a controversial book but this one view from it seems to be an element of the book that is seldom a dissenting point.
I've worked with a lot of people with PhDs and I have to say that I'm one of the few who is a dissenter. Those that enter the private sector know what's involved and operate accordingly. Those same people however also don't make a song and dance about their qualification. Generally speaking, the practice is that you only use 'Dr' in your name when you're presenting at an industry conference or standing in front of a client that is looking to you for advisory services; anywhere that requires an 'eminence agenda' to be satisfied.
The other thing to remember here is that the private sector is NOT staffed according to qualification. You will find many out there in positions of responsibility that have worked their way up from nothing within the company and find people with qualifications a threat.
I would actually recommend some research; go on linkedin, find out what you can about the person or people responsible for the decision on whether or not to hire you. What do they list as their qualifications? If there's no PhDs in that group, then you need to make a decision about whether to list yours.
Ultimately, the question mentioned in Thomas' answer holds true, even if my perspective on it is different to his. What will your employer do if they find out later? Well if you've proven yourself at the job and demonstrated that you're an asset to them, nothing. They might be a little pleasantly surprised, not because you have a PhD but because you have a PhD AND get things done.
Now for the question of ethics; I've 'dumbed down' a CV before and I don't find the practice unethical at all. Your CV isn't a report card; it's more like a business card. It's meant to represent you in the best possible light to your potential employer. Many (including myself) have a practice of producing a customised CV for every job application, tailored to what I know about the company, the job description, and the people who will ultimately be interviewing me.
I'm not advocating lying on your CV by the way; that would be highly unethical. In the modern world though, CV's are not meant to be a complete history of your work experience. They're meant to showcase that part of your work experience and qualifications that are relevant to the role. Your Masters degree is sufficient to show you're smart, but what in your work experience shows that you can get things done? It doesn't need to be a complete list but it does need to showcase what (recent) experience you have that's relevant to the role, and it should present that in a manner that the interviewers can relate to.
There's no hard and fast rule here, and you'll note that I'm going to great lengths to ensure that you don't infer a YES or NO answer from what I've written. Ultimately, every employer, every PERSON will be different in how they relate to a PhD qualification. Some employers advertising for Masters or higher will value the PhD if you include it. BUT, I've also seen people removed from candidacy because of a PhD and a perception that you won't relate to their workplace.
So to summarise, my view is that not including your PhD is NOT unethical, but the final decision has to rest with you after you've done your research on the role, the employer and the decision makers within that business.

I disagree with the question "What will your employer do if they find out later?" being a valid concern.  By that logic, should you not include your sexual preferences, voting history, etc on your resume.

@emory I don't disagree with that from the perspective you describe, but I think the concern that's being addressed is whether or not the employer will think that a deception has taken place. In my humble view, NOT including a qualification is not deception; including one that you DON'T have most definitely is. Sexual preference and voting history should never be relevant to a job description.

@emory: No, that does not follow at all. All the things you list are in some way protected in many jurisdictions, and an employer that "reacted" to these would open themselves to a lawsuit. In fact, it is policy at many companies to go out of their way not to learn these things just as a preemptive defense ("we couldn't have discriminated on the basis of something we didn't even know!"). PhD holders are very much not a protected class, and a PhD is among the things that, in general, belong on a CV.

he suggests that PhD graduates are certainly smart, but not always able to 'get things done' - I suspect that the proportion of non-PhD graduates who are not able to 'get things done' is much higher.

@Kimball not in the professional fields of industry; not even close. PhDs in industry are fine because they have that work experience and know what's expected. Career academics (in my experience) often lack the organisational skills to 'get things done' in the manner we're talking about. Sure, when they get something done it's done well, but when someone at my day job says they'll do a thing, I'm 95% sure it'll get done. When organising my teaching at the Uni, I have around a 20% chance that what's been promised by academics will get delivered. Topic of its own as to why but respectfully, no.

PhDs and their added value depends on the field. In my field (electronics/IC design) some people say PhDs have large added value, because during their PhD they have gone through every step in the process of IC design mutliple times. This gives them a understanding in what goes into every step of the design process that is lacking from people who have been working in industry, since they tend to only work on their "part" of the design process.

This is a very good point, and highlights the need for research and understanding of your field and how it is recruited in the private sector. This is a perennial question of education v. experience and it won't be solved on Stack Exchange as the answer is often subjective. My humble view is that like everyone else, PhD graduates need a critical mass of work experience in (or understanding of) the private sector to be successful. It's important to note that Industry, Government and Academia ALL have very different cultures, practices and priorities; knowledge of one isn't mastery of all.

I don't know what exactly defines "ethical," but I think a good rule of thumb is to ask the following question. If I get the job and later my employer finds this information out, how will they react? I think your potential employer would be very surprised to discover that you didn't list your PhD. I don't know if you would be in serious trouble, but it doesn't sound normal.
More importantly, why do you want to omit this information? The fact that you have a PhD should be a good thing. Exceeding the minimum requirements for a job is a positive.
It sounds like you want to trade off the PhD under "education" for RA work under "work experience" in your CV. It's quite common to list both and I think that's the appropriate course of action. You can use your cover letter to argue that you satisfy the requirements.

"Exceeding the minimum requirements for a job is a positive." - Is it? In some European countries it was (and in places still is) common to be rejected because you are "overqualified".... (In some cases this may have been more of an excuse, in other cases that is the actual reason, because the employer suspects you will leave once you find a better job and do not want to stay.)

@DetlevCM Whereas, in other places, rejecting candidates as "overqualified" can be construed as illegal age-based discrimination.

No it is not always positive. As Detlev says, many employers may may be afraid that you will jump ships as fast as you can find one with a job description that is more related to the studies you did at university not to mention higher pay which could also be the case, of course, if it is more advanced stuff which not so many can do. Then they would maybe rather hire someone they can rely on not to abandon the job for a better one.

Overqualified: The employer may even be bound by a wage agreement to pay higher wages. If that is the case, I'd consider it actually unethical to hide the PhD, and the employer would (rightly) be quite annoyed.

@cbeleites even if they agree to not be hired based on the highest degree but the second highest one?

@mathreadler: Here (Germany) my guess is that the employee cannot enter such a contract (i.e. that clause would be void). If the employer is bound by a wage agreement (Tarifvertrag), that agreement typically says that deviations are allowed only to the advantage of the employee (not getting the position is not considered as a disadvantage). Think of it: the wage agreements would be pointless if they weren't binding. I once had a very interesting discussion with HR at a research institute what right they have to know of my PhD [very theoretical: I got my PhD basically there, and I was mainly...

... thinking privacy] - also whether I could refuse to get an upgrade in tariff group [which was also theoretical as the PhD didn't make a difference in the group] but did have the point that the group upgrade resets the specific working experience and can (temporarily) lead to lower wages.
To come back to the first point: an employee agreeing to the lower wage would come at the risk for the employer that the employee could at any point (successfully) demand the full wage they're entitled to. Not the situation for a good and mutually trustful working relationship.

@cbeleites phds are often ridiculously narrow. the point is to specialize so much you can actually break some new ground. so say I get a phd degree in something I don't want to / are able to find work as/with, but it increases my skills as an engineer in general and specifically the field i mastered in, then how do I get a job with something I want to work as/with?

If this is a US context, opinions are split on if it's ok or not to omit a PhD. See the comments in this Ask A Manager post for an idea of how people will react.

IME, "over qualified" can also mean that the recruiter is worried that the candidate won't find the job enough of a challenge - meaning they'll not be happy in the job and either under-perform or move on quickly.
It's not always a question of qualifications, and not all employers are ethical (or insightful) enough to reject someone for this reason.
When I've been in the situation of finding someone over-qualified in this sense, I've always discussed it with them at interview stage, and tried to be open about the fact the job might not stretch them that much.

List it as both a work experience and a PhD.
You've been working as a research assistant and you've also been doing your PhD. It's really not much different from having a job at a firm and attending a master's degree program.
I suggest you don't try to pass it off as something other than it is. Also, it's widely known that research assistants will often try and get a PhD, sooner or later. So, excluding the PhD might prompt your recruiter to think that you've given up on it and are now aiming for easier goals instead.

This is the correct answer. Being a PhD student is work. In many legislations even registered as regular employment with possibility for union membership, vacation, parental leave et.c.

Many people think of an application as being a simplex operation.  That is, the employer takes all the information and makes the only decision.
As an retired Director of IT and former Director of Undergraduate Studies at a UK University, let me assure you that it is a duplex operation.  You must interview the company as much as they interview you.  You must disclose everything because you should only want to work for a company that wants people like you.
It is probably unethical to hide your qualifications but, more importantly, it's being dishonest to yourself.
One life.  Live it honestly and to its full.

Your resume is a marketing tool not a biography.  There is no required format.  Omitting your PhD is not hiding it.  It does not imply you are ashamed of it.
When I read resumes (and I think many people are the same), I tend to read only the first paragraph.  It is extremely unlikely that I will read to the end of one page of resume.  So if you want someone like me to read your resume, keep it short.  Eliminate anything that is peripheral to your goal of getting me to green light you for an interview.  If your PhD does not support your application, then don't mention it.

You're expressing the fact that you think PhD might be a Con for this position.
Whether it's ethical or not to hide it is not really relevant. Instead, you should ask yourself why it would be a Con. If the jobs requires a master degree, it does not says it requires absolutely no PhD. Instead of lying or hiding informations on your resume, I think you should 1. show it and show reasonable pride for it 2. find why it would be a con, and counter arguments before they even come into the discussion.
Is it because your potential employer may think you're a thinker instead of a doer? Tell him about the things you did and how much you wanna do this. Is it because he may think you want a salary above the position's budget? Tell him about your expectations. Is it because he may think you lack experience? As someone said already, use it both as qualification and experience in your CV. Etc.
It really should be at your advantage, so be proud!
If it's a blocker, for real, you don't want this job anyway, because it will take at most one week to find out that you lied for this, and if there is one thing that you should morally worry about, it is to start a relationship (the one with your employer) on a lie.
On the opposite side, if you're the employer, you're really looking for persons who humanly fit your organisation. It'd be a really dumb move to halt discussions with potentially good candidates because they have a diploma you did not mention in your job desc. They wrote the job desc, but then, they talk to humans. None will fit exactly. Prove that you're the person they're looking for (and that should include you being honest, hiding such informations would be a no-brainer sign to "no-hire" for me).

There is such a thing as being overqualified. The solution is to remove items from the resume that don't pertain to the job. Since you're not lying about your other degrees it seems like a fair thing to do.
Older people often leave out jobs that they had 20 years ago so they appear younger. This is how people deal with unfair age prejudice.
A friend of mine from Africa I met in college changed his name from Saeque to David to avoid black prejudice.
If they mention that you might be over-qualified, say "Well, I'm older and not as smart as I used to be. So instead of being a genius, I'm now merely very smart and above average."
To sum it up: Do what you need to do to get a job. Let me say it in a more ethical way: Try various resume strategies and perform statistical analysis on the call-back percentage to pick the best resume.

Maybe you are very skilled in work related to your second-to-highest degree. Skills that you have honed while pursuing the PhD. If you disclose your PhD degree many employers will probably assume you will want to work with things related to your PhD and that you will not settle for other duties. Then by not disclosing it, you might avoid being marked as overqualified for duties you actually are a better fit for.
As long as you indeed intend working with those duties you can probably produce more value for a company if they hire you based on your next-highest degree rather than hire you for your PhD into a research managerial or administrative position where you may suck.
If judging ethics by what creates most monetary value for the company, then yes surely it can be an ethical thing to do so.

It may result in a situations that appears unethical later on down the line.
If you apply with your highest listed degree as master's, that's what people on the hiring committee will remember. If you later decide you want to take a PhD level position and update your resume to reflect that you have received a PhD, this could look extremely confusing to someone who was familiar with the earlier version of your resume, or talked with someone who was familiar with your earlier position in the company.
To them, Occam's Razor would suggest that you are now lying about having a PhD.

The issue of ethics always leads to a gray area so don't expect definitive guidance on that aspect.  I think the more important question you should ask yourself is do you think this position is really a good fit for you ?  You've invested a lot of time pursuing a doctorate and you are considering omitting that factor in applying for employment.  Why did you want to earn the Ph.D. in the first place if not partly or solely to utilize it professionally in a capacity that would benefit an employer ?
Unfortunately, I've seen this practice become institutionalized where I live and work in California.  I know of people that have retained a particularly employment headhunter locally that specializes in finding clients jobs with the state.  He goes through a process of "dumbing down" their CVs by removing references to advanced degrees in order for them to qualify for a broad range of postings.  The sad part is many of the people that use his service are more than happy to take a job that they are vastly over qualified for in order to get the security, benefits, pension system, etc. offered by employment with the state government.
This mindset will almost invariably lead to job dissatisfaction and regret.  It's better to find the job fit for your level of qualification without compromise.

You probably don't need to hide the PhD. What's really important instead is that you write a strong cover letter that explains exactly how your experience applies to this job, which is probably a little harder if you try to omit how you got it. A good cover letter can also give a satisfactory reason for why you are going for a job that doesn't seem like a match on paper. (Although I don't know that you have to go into that in your case, your qualifications seem close enough.)
Another thing you can do is list your experience first, and your degrees at the end. If the PhD is on the last quarter of the page, they may overlook it.


text:
European student trying to get a clear picture of US PhD system
I am born and educated in a northern European country.
After I graduate I want to continue doing research within the topics I am passionate about. Much of the research I am interested in happens in the States. So, I am trying to get a clear picture of the PhD programs in the US.
I have tried to find answers on my question online, but the university webpages something leaves me confused.  I would be very grateful if any of you can answer my questions or provide me with useful references.
Questions:

How does the application process work?
Do I apply directly to the university and the later if accepted look for a professor?
Do I have to take courses before I can start doing research despite having a master and highly relevant skills for the topic in question? And if so usually how long?
How does research funding and salary work?

Half of your question should be addressed by How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in the US, particularly for weak or borderline students?

Also see https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43313/why-are-us-phds-different-from-european-phds, https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19213/phd-in-the-us-compared-to-europe, https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18478/phd-duration-in-the-usa.  Generally try searching some more on this site, I am pretty sure almost all your questions have been addressed before.

This varies a lot by field. What subject do you want to study?

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

To answer your questions in order:

For academic graduate programs (that is, not a professional program like an MBA or JD), either at master's or doctoral level, you apply to the department via a central administrative unit which is usually called the university's "Graduate School" or something similar. The department website will probably have details. The contact person within the department/program is called the "director of graduate studies" or "graduate director." It's a good idea, but not necessary, to contact potential advisors first if you have a clear idea of what you want to work on. Most American students do not do serious research-level work prior to grad school and do not have specific research directions in mind when they enter a grad program.
In addition to your academic credentials, you will almost certainly need GRE scores, and also TOEFL scores if you are not a native English speaker. Check with the program's grad director.

See 1.

Usually, but you can often place out of coursework by taking exams. It is unlikely that you will be able to avoid taking exams in the US system, regardless of your credentials. Check with the grad director.

PhD programs, especially in the sciences, generally admit students with a package of free tuition and a living stipend, which usually requires serving as a lab assistant or instructional assistant. Sometimes there is research fellowship money available through the school or through the advisor's grant which does not have these obligations. There are also some fellowships funded by government agencies, but these are generally reserved for US citizens. Master's programs may or may not offer funding. Check with the grad director and/or the university's Graduate School.

It's a good to carefully consider the amount of financial assistance that you're being offered.  The cost of living varies dramatically in the US between cities like New York and San Francisco that are very expensive by world standards and locations where the cost of living can be quite low.  You should also be aware of health insurance options that might be available to you- needing to buy health insurance often comes as a shock to foreign students.

@BrianBorchers Excellent point. Something else to be aware of is that at some schools grad employees are unionized, in which case health insurance is typically subsidized or paid for by the university. I don't think "grad student union" is a thing outside North America.

@Elizabeth in the UK, postgrads are part of the university's students' union and can join the National Union of Students for a fee. However, for obvious reasons, the unions don't get involved with health insurance.

@astronat Right. A little OT, but I was countering Brian's implication that the student was always on their own WRT health insurance in the US. It's usually true, but grad students at each university have the right under US labor law to form collective bargaining units and strike for things like health insurance. Which they do.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Applying for PhD scholarships with an MPhys vs MSc (UK)
I completed a MPhys course with a 2:1 recently, and I'm trying to determine the best path for applying to PhD scholarships in the coming years.
My question is whether it's worth applying to MSc (by research) programs, as has been suggested to me, before applying?
I can imagine that it'd make me a better candidate, and it'd provide some valuable experience of academic research not dissimilar from a PhD.
What I want be sure of, however, is that I'm not spending the time, and money, for the wrong reasons - for example, my main concern in applying for PhD scholarships is that I didn't really make any contacts with the faculty at my old university, and I'm anxious about getting good references (I did do some work that I'm proud of, it's more that I didn't stand out or make an effort to be known).
I figure that an MSc would give me an opportunity to really throw myself out there and at the very least get a recommendation based on the strength of my work. But of course it's a big outlay if the only real thing stopping me at the moment is an anxiety around talking to my old department!

Why not apply to both? Then if you get accepted to PhD and MSc, choose the PhD. If MSc only, that's fine also, and try for PhD again next year.

I suppose I assumed that it's sufficiently different as a process - in terms of how soon I would apply for a start date, the academic recommendations aspect, and perhaps just how many applications I'd make to account for how competitive they might be - to make it tough to do both simultaneously?

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


text:
Parts of thesis draft published without proper credit
My Master's thesis instructor has copied a chapter of my thesis draft into several publications, sometimes listing me as an author and sometimes not. They said it won't cause me any problems so I gave permission in one case but not the others, where I was just informed afterwards. As they were my boss and instructor, was in a hurry to submit the publication and insisted there will not be problems I didn't feel like having another choice.
After consulting with my supervisor I'm starting to feel doubtful, especially if any automatic plagiarism checking is involved because searching for various numeric results and phrases from my thesis in Google returns results with the exact same text and without my name in the list of authors.
I'm supposed to hand in the finished thesis this week and don't have time to rewrite the affected chapter. My supervisor said I should at least include a footnote explaining the situation. What should I write? I wouldn't want to cause trouble for the instructor either, they're a nice person in a difficult situation.
The other publications are all reports or conference proceedings available free of charge from government sources or the university's website so commercial publishers' copyright claims should not be an issue.

Just to be sure we understand correctly: are the 'instructor' and the 'supervisor' two different persons? What is the relation between them?

The instructor was my boss at the time and works for the university. The supervisor is a tenured professor. They don't actually know each other.

He's a nice guy, in a difficult situation, who decided to exploit you. How nice!

Too long as a comment so I am submitting as an answer.
While I like the principles of jakebeal's answer, I would like to advise against citing someone committing a misconduct in a permanently archived document without a proper investigation. I am sympathetic about your situation but to any future investigation committee you're simply another party of interest, and it's fully likely for you to accuse the other of misconduct. That's drawback number 1.
Drawback number 2 is that the world comes and goes around. Just because the instructor is no longer in a position to harm you does not mean he cannot do so in another occasion. If you've decided to use the footnote approach, I'd recommend saying a human error was made rather than a misconduct was committed.
This is not to say I would always cover for unethical people, this is to say that without a proper third party's investigation, I will not accuse anyone especially if I am involved in the issue.
And I also think rewriting, as suggested by aeismail is also a good approach if you don't feel like hurting the instructor in any way.

Would it be sufficient to state in the footnote that this is all original work and it also appears in such and such other publication, with a complete reference in the bibliography? Without any explanation how it got there.

@User21436587 that sounds like an aseptic, objective approach. No one can dispute it, no problem with that being on record. To be completely covered, perhaps you should speak with your supervisor in private and get his assessment of the situation.

@User21436587: I think the reference goes in the footnote, not the bibliography, lest it appear that you used the reference, and not the other way around.  Also think about writing, "this is my (not all) original work," so as to leave no doubt.  In any case, compose your footnote, ask your thesis supervisor, and do what the supervisor says.

@User21436587, yes I agree that is a better alternative to explain a lot by saying nothing. What other comments are valid; you need to coordinate with your current supervisor.

Your instructor has committed serious academic misconduct several times: if it is your words or your work being published, you should be one of the authors and your permission is required for publication.  It's also not clear from your post whether the same material was published multiple times, which would also leave you vulnerable to accusations of self-plagiarism.
It sounds, at least, like you are no longer working with this instructor, which is a good thing.  You should always look to separate yourself from seriously unethical people, lest you be tainted by association or involvement in their crimes.
Now you are faced with a problem of cleaning up a toxic mess, because your instructor has also lied to you about this "not being a problem" for you.  There are three different aspects of the cleanup that I can see:

What should you do in your thesis?  I think that your supervisor's suggestion here is good: put in a footnote at the beginning that explains where else the various pieces of the chapter have been published (both with and without you as an author), and note that due to misconduct on the part of the other author, you were not listed as an author.  Note that I am assuming the instructor is not required to sign off: if they are, this may be a problem.
What should be done about the papers?  Once you are safely graduated and are secure from retribution in another position, you can contact the publishers and request to have the record corrected.  The note, signed off in your thesis by your supervisor, will be useful here.  If material was inappropriately reused in multiple publications, you might instead ask for some of the publications to be retracted. Don't be surprised, however, if the publishers fail to take action, as many publishers are not very responsive when asked to correct the record.
What should be done about your instructor? It is very difficult for a student to accuse their instructor of misconduct.  Fortunately, it sounds like you have informed a responsible senior individual (the tenured supervisor), and it would now be appropriate for you to pass the responsibility of deciding how to proceed to that person.  Unfortunately, it sounds like this person may not actually take any action, so you may wish (again, once you are away and secure from retribution) to contact people who actually have authority over the instructor and may be willing to act.

Finally, be prepared to simply walk away if you need to: fortunately, this is happening only at the Masters' stage, and so all of this mess can likely be rendered irrelevant by your future work as long as you take precautions (like the note in your thesis) to avoid it coming back to bite you.

Note that he may not be qualified to be a full author of the paper if his contributions were not sufficient.

@Davidmh Which "he" do you mean, in instructor or the OP?

The OP, the one that is not an author in the paper.

@Davidmh I have a hard time imagining a scenario in which  a large amount of a person's writing is included in a publication, but that person is not qualified to be an author at all.

In addition to jakebeal's fine answer, I want to note that this problem would have been entirely avoided if your instructor had simply included you as an author, as virtually all publishers allow published journal material to be "recycled" in master's and doctoral theses, and vice versa. (It would make life exceedingly difficult for graduate students if they couldn't reuse material from work published during their careers in their thesis!)
The other issue is that you should maintain a paper trail of all of your correspondence with the instructor regarding the papers that were submitted (and I hope you did maintain such records!) Without them, all of the allegations will be much more difficult to sustain, as it will become an "X said, Y said" allegation.
One other thing to inquire about: will your university offer you an extension on turning in your thesis? Many universities allow students to petition for a short-term extension (usually a few weeks). If so, then this might give you time to revise the affected text to remove the plagiarism allegations. This might be the best option for you to avoid future problems.

Further to this comment, even if you don't have a paper trail of the correspondence, it is really important for the OP to back up any and all previous drafts of the thesis.  If it comes to it and s/he is accused of plagiarising the instructor's papers, these earlier drafts should definitively prove the case otherwise, exonerating the student (and potentially putting the instructor in hot water).


text:
Is there any online server to upload recommendation letters and share the link with the universities
Usually we need a few recommendation letters when we apply for a job or academic positions. Im wondering if there is any online server to make it easier on my referees so that they only write once their letters and later I only share the link with the companies or who asks for a recommendation.
Any suggestion is welcome.

How can your referees be sure that you won't be able to see the recommendation letters?

that is the open point. is it so critical that I dont see? I must not be able to edit though

@Srteve Many referees will expect confidentiality, since a reference is supposed to be an honest evaluation of you. If you are able to read the reference, your referee may feel pressured for social or legal reasons to omit negatives from it, and the recipient of the reference may suspect such a thing has happened even if it hasn't!

Yes, it's called:
 https://www.interfolio.com/
And you can't see the letter, as they validate any request. Works quite good.
It's not free though.

In mathematics there is, and it is used by most research-oriented departments for hiring: MathJobs. Hiring departments pay (i.e., not candidates) and candidates indeed cannot view the recommendation letters.
It is extremely efficient, and in my opinion this system deserves to be more widely imitated. Note however that this is used at the option of the hiring department, and not the job candidate. So in particular you can't use this system, except for positions advertised via this site.
In your situation you might be able to use Interfolio, but I'd check with prospective employers (or your advisor) before using this.

Authentication is an important aspect of references and letters of recommendation. If the letters were uploaded to a third party site what assurances would the recipient have that they were genuine? If they just had to click on a link on some site there is a great deal of potential for fraud. Anyone could upload anything purporting to be written by anyone.
People will just start writing and uploading their own letters.
Most reputable employers and universities would expect a letter to come direct from the writer or to be uploaded to their own systems using authentication supplied to the author.

Then how to deal with asking the referees to send multiple recoms to different email addresses? I feel rather embarrassed.

@Srteve You shouldn't feel embarrassed. Writing and sending references is part of a senior academic's job, and it is expected that you will ask them to do it.

Not necessarily. As I wrote in my answer, there are good solutions for the authentication problem.

Im wondering if there is any online server to make it easier on my referees so that they only write once their letters and later I only share the link with the companies or who asks for a recommendation.

I was recently in a position of asking multiple professors for letters of recommendation for applying to grad school. I had about ~8 applications, so ~8 letters from each professor. All of them were happy to send them through the standard protocol (through the application website). I think the case for applying for a job or any other academic position should be similar in this respect; your referees will understand that you are applying to multiple places and will not be bothered by the request for multiple letters.
To be on the safer side, you should explicitly tell them roughly how many places you will be applying to, in case they would like to slightly tailor the letter for each application.
Lastly, follow the relevant tips in the answer to "How do I effectively solicit a strong letter of recommendation from a professor?".

From your comments:

that is the open point. is it so critical that I dont see? I must not be able to edit though

This depends on the referee. Some might want to keep the letter confidential while others wouldn't mind freely sharing the letter with you. Here is one case where the student's professor did not write a letter since the right to view the letter was not waived.

Then how to deal with asking the referees to send multiple recoms to different email addresses? I feel rather embarrassed.

Don't feel embarrassed. Just ask.

As has been pointed out in another answer, the authenticity of the letter partially (if not fully) rests on the email address it came from. The letter is of little use to the university/company that you are applying if they cannot be confident of its authenticity.

That is a good idea, however, such letters won't be specifically addressed to (for instance) University X or Prof. Y. They would be generic letters. Most institutions prefer letters addressed to them (hence, they are using the current system).

I think it is still ok if the letter starts with "Dear Sir/ Madam"

I never said it was not ok, but rather "most institutions prefer it to be addressed to them" :)

I'm not sure it makes a difference. People now have to send dozens of letters, and so they can't expect the references to address each and every school specifically.


text:
How to survive in a small field where unethical senior professors on major editorial boards abuse their power?
In my small area in STEM, there are quite a few unethical senior professors who are members of editorial boards of almost all major high impact journals and seem to abuse their power. They are powerful and have a strong network. I have conflict of interests with some of them. How do I get my research published in those high impact journals?
For example, I submitted a paper to a journal where some of them are on the editorial board. It was rejected after a few days of submission with the reason that they received many more interesting papers than they could publish. Asked the editor politely for an explanation and got ignored.
Another example; a competitor was assigned to review my paper. It was kept on hold for a year without clear reason for rejection at the end. Later, they stole my idea and got the publicity.
One more example; I applied for a job. The PI said that they were not interested in my research. A year later, I found that a new group was established,  doing the things I proposed. Moreover, they published a few papers without citing my work.

Have you already tried to publish and got rejected because of the conflict of interest?

What evidence do you have about these professors being unethical and abusive? And can you say something about the kinds of conflict of interests you are referring to? Do you mean that they are your competitors and therefore actively want to sabotage your career and prevent you from publishing your work?

Switch fields.

It was rejected after a few days of submission with the reason that they received many more interesting papers than they could publish. Asked the editor politely for an explanation and got ignored. That is the standard desk rejection process in all the fields I know.

Alternative perspective (not claiming this is the case here, we do not have enough information for that): there are people who have the tendency to "nostrify" ideas learnt from other people - in other words, they would pick up ideas from others, forget where they got inspiration from, develop their research based on that. When they see the ideas elsewhere, they then accuse others of having stolen their ideas. That being said, if the OP is indeed on the receiving end of the stick, either they should get a strong ally, or indeed switch the field.

Title should be changed: the problem may be unethical behaviour, but abusive is a different concept. I would understand it as being treated in a demeaning, or insulting way, especially publicly. Being ignored or once papers being rejected might indicate a problem, but it's not - in my understanding - abuse.

I agree with Captain Emacs. In english, a person "abusing his power" is not the same as an "abusive person".

Per a suggestion by @CaptainEmacs , I modified the question to emphasize that the professors in question are abusing their power, and are not necessarily being "abusive." Please check to make sure that I have maintained the spirit of your original question. If you do not like the edits, you can always revert back to a previous version of the question.

I know some people in the editorial board. In the past, they were also not very nice.

There are two different possibilities about what's going on here, and I think it's important to consider both of them:

There might really be a small power network dominating your field and stealing your ideas.
You might not be as significant as you think you are.

I won't speculate on which it is, since we don't have enough information to judge.  I will note, however, that complaining about stolen ideas is a red flag, since in science execution typically matters much more than idea, and complaints about stolen ideas are often associated with cranks.
It is definitely the case, however, that fields can indeed be strongly effected by small cabals (see, for example, Nicolas Bourbaki) and that credit for significant work can be stolen (e.g., Rosalind Franklin, Jocelyn Bell).  So let us presume that is the case, and consider what your options are.  Here, I see three basic paths available to you:

Fight the power: Unless you have rather definitive proof, this will likely result in lots of pain and frustration for you with little gain.
Lower your sights: Lots of good work is published in not-quite-so-high-impact journals that are still quite solid and respectable.  You can also get rid of all fear of having your ideas stolen by embracing the culture of preprints (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv).  If you love what you are doing and you are doing good work, you can still have a solid career in this way, even if it is not as high-profile as you might like.
Change fields: Most fields of science are not dominated by small exclusive cabals.  If the subject is not terribly important to you, changing fields might allow you to have a more "normal" scientific career.

Which of these paths is best for you, given the particulars of your desires and your situation, only you can judge for yourself.


text:
How to cite a method that has a huge history of contributors?
I’m finishing my first paper, and am struggling with the citations a bit.
I have used a particular implementation of an algorithm.
The citation of those who thought of this particular variation and implementation of the algorithm is clear, but should I also include the creators of the original idea, and not just the implementation that I use?
In the case of genetic algorithms, seems like a tower where quite a lot of people have worked on (see Wikipedia for a short history), and it isn’t really clear who put the first or most important stone. Most people cite the work of J. Holland who popularized it, but that also doesn’t really feel right, since I wouldn’t give credit to all the others. On the other hand I don’t want to spend half a page repeating the history of the idea, citing 15 papers or so.
Some options that crossed my mind:

Is it enough to refer to the name of the idea (of which the detailed history is quite accessible such in the example)?
A huge list of citations [5,6,7,8,...,20].
Referring to a source that has a nice overview of the history.

What would you advise?

I don't think #2 is practical. If I cite a paper, I don't normally cite all of the paper's citations either, that's just bloaty. Cite anything you have directly used is how I normally go about it. If it's related, you can cite it too, but don't cite everything.

"Cite anything you have directly used!" OK i like that, if i can use that as a guideline, it makes life easier.

You might benefit from citing Holland's article as well. If other people in the field cite it, it is likely a major article covering the topic that should sufficiently cover general information the algorithm. So a dummy citation would be like "I used a custom implementation of Normal Potato Planting[Smith], known as Sweet Potato Planting[Doe]. It gives your article a point of connectivity with a prevalent source, and a point of connectivity with the implementation of the source you've used.

@Compass In this case, Holland's work is so foundational that it is unlikely to be an appropriate citation except when discussing the history of the field.  It would be like citing Darwin rather than a textbook on the modern synthesis of evolutionary biology (though less extreme since we're talking about 1970s rather than 1850s).

@jakebeal You doth not cite Darwin?! Monster! It's fine to cite something that cites the original too, but I didn't realize that Holland was foundational. Popularization and foundational are slightly different, after all. Darwin was foundational to evolution, but someone else definitely popularized it.

There were some german guys, who did and published foundational work before Holland did, but he is from the US, so the work reached a larger audience more fast, making it widely known. OK but its about the general question not the example. I am quite happy with your answers, but i will leave the question open for a small while, hoping to get some more oppinions, such that later readers can choose the suggestion they like. Thanks for the contributions.

To cite a body of work large enough to have generated textbooks or comprehensive review papers, you should cite a good recent textbook or comprehensive review paper.
You may not need to, however, depending on why and how you are using the algorithm.
The key is to provide the reader with everything they need to know about why you chose that algorithm and the significance of the choice.
In this case, if your work is focused on genetic algorithms and/or their applications, then you should position it within the comprehensive space of genetic algorithms work.  You would then cite both the textbook/review sources and the more specific "nearby" pieces to compare it to.
In the other hand, if your work is focused on an application, it's its more just about needing some tool and you happened to find genetic algorithms promising, then you don't need the comprehensive references because that's not the point.  Instead,
if you chose Algorithm X for particular reasons, then you should explain why you didn't pick competitor Algorithms Y, Z, and W (citing each). If you just chose Algorithm X because you thought that probably any algorithm would likely do, then be clear about that fact and don't worry about positioning it within a larger field, because honestly you haven't.

In this paper, this method is one of many used, and i didnt really want to put a lot of emphasis on it, or spend a lot of words and space to it. But i thought that i am some how oblidged to give credit to the original idea, since obviously it wasn't mine. But if i understand well, if i just use it as a tool, and didnt modify anything about it, even just a citation to the exact implementation I used would be enough? and extra references just optional?

@Sarmes If you picked the method because you wanted some GA method and this one happened to be handy and plausible, then you just need to state that clearly and give the one citation.  What's important to communicate is whether you're saying "Method X is the best GA method for this case" (which requires comparison) vs. "Method X is a sufficient GA method for this case" (which does not, because you are not asserting anything about other methods)

Although the question is more about the general problem than the example, i understand you are in to the topic. My paper is intended to be about different types of test functions to compare algorithms, but since i only have 12 pages, here it will be about describing the construction of test functions. A further work should deal more with the comparisons.

Assuming you are writing an article for an audience that knows what a genetic algorithm is (at least, anyone in CS and related fields), it is not so important to explain what it is, as much as the implementation details. In your shoes, I would cite the paper of the implementation.
If there is a risk of readers not knowing what a genetic algorithm is, or you are using advanced details that are not common knowledge, I think it is best to add a modern textbook, or whichever explanation you think is clearest.

For a general reference I usually cite two papers: original/influential and a review paper.
In the case where the idea is relatively well-known and there is no single original paper, a review paper or textbook should suffice.
Unless you talk specifically about history of a discovery, or trying to put things in a historical context, there is no need for historical reviews.
In the case of doubt think about the reader. (Or imagine that you are a reader, new to this topic.)

Just to add a little to the other answers (which are good): don't worry about it!
As long as you cite at least one relevant source (the one you directly used) you have a lot of leeway as to which historical papers to cite. I like to do a couple things:

Think about who might review your paper and cite them. You can even recommend them as a reviewer.
Cite an often overlooked, but good quality paper. If a paper already has hundreds of citations, it doesn't need any more. But maybe there is a nice paper with a similar result that only has a handful of citations. The authors of the less cited paper will appreciate it.
Cite open source citations. If I have a choice people of citing a paper in a paywalled journal or an open-access journal, I will cite the open-access one, and I will cite papers from a nonprofit publisher (like PLOS or eLife) if I can.

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


text:
Understanding the PhD Applicant Selection Process in US Universities: Committee vs. Professor-Based?
I'm interested in understanding more about how PhD applicants are selected in US universities. Specifically, I'm looking to find out whether a committee predominantly makes these decisions or if individual professors have a significant role in choosing their Ph.D. students.
Are there standard practices across most universities, or do they vary significantly from one institution to another? Additionally, how does the involvement of a committee or professors impact the selection criteria?

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


text:
Ethical and Normative Aspects of Unpaid TA Positions with High Workload for Recommendation Letters
I'm facing a situation at my university that I'm not sure is standard or ethical, and I'd like some outside perspectives. In certain courses, we have about 60 teaching assistants (TAs), all of whom are unpaid and volunteer for the role. Despite the large number of TAs, the workload remains quite high for each individual.
The intriguing part is that the professor in charge offers a recommendation letter, but only to those TAs who have volunteered for at least four semesters, not just one. I am questioning whether this practice is typical or ethical within academic settings.
Is it normal for universities to require such a long period of voluntary service for a recommendation letter, especially under a high workload with no compensation? Does this approach raise ethical concerns regarding the exploitation of student labor or the fair treatment of volunteers?

60 teaching assistants? How big is the course?

About 180 students take the course each semester. @BryanKrause

There is 1 TA per 3 students? How could their workload be so high? Are they actually doing work, or is their participation educational for themselves? What sorts of tasks are they performing?

Not only would I regard this as unethical, I think there would be legal questions around this practice in the UK. All labour in the UK is subject to the minimum wage laws, irrespective of whether the person in question volunteers or not. There are specific exceptions for charity work (and even then the criteria are quite strict) and activities that are part of a recognised qualification.
The professor here might argue that this is part of your education, but I think this would be quite a difficult argument to make.
It is unethical because quite apart from being exploitive of student labour, it is discriminatory against those that have other responsibilities, such as caring responsibilities or the need to perform labour that does generate income.

Same answer for US and, I hope, everywhere. Abhorrent behavior.


text:
Academic CV/grant proposal: Should you include students who have abandoned?
I am wondering whether I should include students I have supervised but have quit in my CV, especially for grant proposals where supervision history is assessed. I have a couple of students who could not finish their programme, either because they didn't meet the academic requirements of our university or because of lack of funds. Do you think it would look bad on my CV to include them? If I do include them, should I explain why they quit?

I wish everyone included this information on their CV/website. However, many don't, so I think you may be putting yourself at a disadvantage by being so forthcoming.

For grant proposals in particular, this information can be used to assess conflict of interest. In fact, the National Science Foundation (NSF) moved that section off the biosketch to a separate document to make the intent of this section more clear. There, you could also indicate the last time you interacted, which may make the lack of relationship clear.
With grants, it is always essential to ascertain the purpose of the information to understand what information to present and how it should be presented. If you are unsure, you can always email the sponsor's help desk. They are typically fantastic in helping you understand the documents you need to assemble. Do not worry that they will assess your questions with your application.  PIs frequently worry about that, but that isn't happening.  They want good applications that are easy to review, so ask away!

I think that would depend on how many there are, compared to the successful ones. It would also depend on the reasons and if they would seem reasonable/common to a reader.
Certainly having students quit, for whatever reason, isn't a boost on your CV. But if your CV has a section on "Successful students that I've supervised" then it would be natural to include only those who succeed.
Certainly students quit for reasons outside the control of their supervisor. People will understand that. However, if too many of your students quit, the reasons given may not be the true reasons.

I would probably include them all if they spent a year with you (post bachelors; less is fine for undergrads and postdocs and visiting scholars and the like).  It is normal in some fields for there to be some attrition (e.g. Ph.D. student getting frustrated and bailing with a masters).  They still did did work with you (just like an undergrad did for instance).  Perhaps you don't have to really dwell on the issue of if they got done or not. Just list them in sections, undergrad, post bachelors, masters (could include Ph.D.s that bailed), Ph.D. and postdocs.


text:
How to find a new PhD advisor if my relationship with current advisor is not working out?
Currently I am not in a good relationship with my research advisor and I do not think it will be good as previously. So I decided to change my research advisor if it's possible. Would you guide me how I can find another research advisor? Is it possible to have two PhD advisors?

You can have co-advisers, but if you want a new one as you don't get along with the old one, that makes little sense. If you are really sure to want to switch, ask yourself which other faculty, if any, you got along with well/appears to value you (seminars, classes, ...)/whose research focus interests you. Then cautiously approach them to investigate if they'd be open, in principle, to take you in. Whatever you do, frame it in positive terms, and if you leave your old adviser, leave gracefully.

@gnometorule First I have to get the permission from my scholarship program if I can change my adviser  before  finding a new PhD adviser by myself. I am afraid they may not allow me by this kind of situation. So would you please tell me how I can write a letter of change of adviser request to my graduate school? What things should I include and avoid in the letter? If my graduate school allow me to change adviser,do you think they will suggest me to a new adviser to take me in?  Is the process like this or other?

I suggest you make the Is it possible to have two PhD advisors? as a separate question.

How can I find another research advisor?

The finding part ought to be the same as the one for finding your first advisor. As this would be your second supervisor, your approach should be slightly different. As @AllanG pointed out, you ought to be truthful with regard to why are you making your change.
This post should be helpful for this part of the question: How can I find a second supervisor?

Is it possible to have two PhD advisors?

Yes. You can have a joint supervisor or an auxiliary advisor. Joint supervisor/advisors are especially common when doing an off-site or industrial level research project where there would be an advisor who would help you on-site and the primary one in the institution. If you are doing an interdisciplinary research concerning fields across two departments, then you can have two advisors, one for each department with one being the primary and the other the auxiliary. There are other ways too, but it also depends strongly on the institution guidelines.

If you feel you must change your adviser, it is essential that you speak to the adviser before discussing the possible change within anyone else in your department.  It is best to be as honest as possible, since usually advisers are experienced in working with students, and do not appreciate an explanation that might appear ingenuous.  Also, your request could reflect poorly on your adviser if you speak to someone else in your concentration.  I would sit down and carefully make a plan of action to use in bringing up the subject. In addition, try to learn as much about your adviser as a person. For example, is he or she vindictive, intolerant, considerate, etc.  That will help you frame the way you approach the subject.

Depending on the circumstances, this could be terrible advice.  If the advisor is truly vindictive, they might actively interfere with OP's search for a new advisor, given the opportunity.  If the student-advisor relationship has completely broken down, it's probably better to speak first with an ombudsman, or the graduate program director, or some other well-informed neutral party.

@AllanG I have few questions for everyone here: 1. Does changing advisor is same as changing majors or field of study? 2. Do you think contacting graduate school (international office) will lead me to a better solution? It's because I went to this office so many times with same problem but they couldn't give me a good solution rather than to go back to my advisor again. 3. Is it good to ask my advisor to write a recommendation letter for me to find another advisor?

If your relationship with your current advisor is bad enough that you need to find a new one, then talking with him or her is not going to help. Fixing this sort of problem is part of the job of the graduate program director (or the equivalent). Note, however, that like the HR department of an industry company, the director works for the department, not for you; they may ignore you or happily throw you under the bus to save face, avoid annoying the current advisor, or simply because they don't care about you.

Depending on how established your department is usually the director of graduate studies or graduate student advisors are from the administrative side who can provide a first line of help -- in fact in many institutions they are the "canonical" way to get support. Trusted faculty members may also be able to help.
Unfortunately finding someone who would actually be a good fit is a process that is inherently quite personal, but in any sense I feel like seeking departmental guidance can be a good start.

If the relationship is hostile, asking your advisor directly may not be an option. I would suggest to speak with someone you trust, such as a mentor or other members of faculty with whom you may have a positive relationship.
Look for someone in the same area of research, unless you would like to switch research projects, this would depend on how far you are towards copletion of your research. Document your experience and concerns, you may not need to use this, but such record may be valuable if things turn bad, especially once you declare that you are leaving. Talk to the ombudsperson, their job is to mediate between students and faculty, find the best solution for both parties, and to protect you from abuse or retaliation.


text:
Can I get admission in Germany for Masters if my university is not there in the Anabin database?
My college is affiliated with a university recognised by Anabin. But my college on its own is not recognised there. Would it cause any problem with my admission for Masters in Germany?

https://anabin.kmk.org/filter/faq/studium.html "Über die Zugangsvoraussetzungen für ein Masterstudium bestimmen die Hochschulen." Your best way to get an answer to your question is to contact the university where you want to pursue a Masters. Yes, if your college isn't listed that could mean it will not be accepted. Or that it's not on the list because the list is incomplete (as explicitly stated).


text:
Republishing a collection of published papers in a book
A publisher is interested in republishing a book on a collection of papers published by me and my colleagues. I have secured permissions from publishers of papers to do so. Are there other issues remained?

Did you get permission from the other authors?  It's not "necessary" so long as you have the permission of the copyright holders, but it's certainly a professional courtesy to do so.

@ScottSeidman I'd say it rises quite a bit higher than mere "professional courtesy".

Did you get permission from the other authors? It's not "necessary" for the new publisher, so long as you have the permission of the copyright holders, but at the very least, it's certainly a professional courtesy to do so, and possibly a very important thing to do.
Royalty sharing with the other authors might also be indicated, or even legally required.


text:
One of my colleague's largest publication seems to be plagiarized/purely reproductive-What to do?
This year, a post-doc joined our research group, his main publication is a Nature Communications paper with 21 authors in total (solid state physics).
As his and my work have quite some overlap, I began to notice that out of the 15 subfigures in the paper, 12 are straight up reproductions of work published between 6-70 years before they published their paper. The information they convey, even the layout and design of the subfigures can all be found in other publications.
There are only two subfigures which I haven't yet found in the wider literature. These two subfigures are heavily derivative of the other figures in the paper.
As is usual in our field, there is not much said in the text that isn't somehow in the figures, so the text itself is also like this.
For 11 out of 15 subfigures, they do at least cite some sources, but these subfigures and the information therein are so commonplace in the field, that no claim to novelty can be based on these figures.
The other four subfigures are a bit more complicated. As I mentioned two are derivative, the other two have been published years before his paper, but he conveniently omits citing their work. Even though the mechanism and main conclusion he brings in his paper were already mentioned in these two works. I do believe he actually performed these measurements.
I wonder what am I to do with this?

Do I tell this to my boss?

Do I inform my institute?

Should something like this be retracted?

Do I confront him?

Personally, I am shocked, that 21 people, including some big names can get together and publish something like this. I am also deeply worried of picking fights and I am not sure my superiors would like to hear about my finding. (None of my direct superiors are part of the 21 co-authors).

More plagiarism than derivation would you say?

The structure of his paper is basically this 11 pictures are pure and utter reproduction that he needs to establish that he indeed has the material he wants to have (he does this in a very redundant and verbose way).  The methods  of verification are very well known. Then we have the grand finale of two subfigures, which are plagiarized, then from one of the two plagiarzed pictures he derives two additional subfigures. However if you take the plagiarized pictures away basically nothing of substanceis left in my opinion in the picture.

(1) What is your position in the group? (2) You write that "these subfigures and the information therein are so common place in the field". That makes me wonder how the paper got published. After all, it needed to demonstrate novelty to the reviewers and editor. Plagiarism is usually a question of re-using material that is uncommon.

Is the prior similar work cited in the paper? It can be perfectly normal that most of a paper is reestablishing results already found to effectively show that you're working with the same material. It might be better to focus on the supposed novel figures that you claim are plagiarized.

Sounds like you’re the watchdog of the group. Have you discussed the matter in any fashion with this new colleague yet?

Are the reviewer comments available? Nature Communications sometimes post them, and they could be useful to read to figure out which parts the reviewers  believed to be novel.

As a remark: You keep on referring to your colleague as if he is the only author of a paper with, by your accounting, 21. Orthogonal to your question, I don't think that's a particularly useful perspective, as I doubt any 1 author constructed the majority of the figures.

Why do you consistently say "he did…" etc. when there are "21 authors in total" involved?

@user176372 Really? In my field I would assume the first author was responsible for all the figures.

I am not the watch dog of the group, it just happens to be he case that we both work on similar thing and ever so often I realize that what ever he wrote I can find in anohter paper from before. I am just getting familiar with the field and know this particular paper quite well. I coincidentally realized this because I know the wider literature and his paper,  but i felt this was so glaring that I couldnt avoid noticing.

To the 21 authors, of course I dont actually know what all these 21 ppl did, even the attribution at the end of the article has some 7 ppl just participating "in discussions of the paper".  After publication, he does clearly make it seem, like this was mostly his work, he goes around and gives talks leaving the impression that the other 20 ppl were just supervising/funding/along for the ride. I think it is save to assume, by the standards of my field, that he was at least a major contributor to each subfigure.

Where is the big "plagiarism"? All you've stated is copied figures. Are they essential to the paper? I'm confused. Is it the case in solid state physics, that figures are part of the "results"?

@Dilworth is there any field where figures aren't part of the results? Figures include graphs, plotted data, images of experimental results etc. In my experience, they are usually there to convey results. The only exception I can think of off the top of my head would be a figure used only to explain the experimental setup, but usually I would expect figures to be showing the data, the results.

@terdon: Yes, pure math, where figures are simply meant to illustrate a proof or a definition. In contrast, results in pure math are theorems.

@terdon, yes I come from math; I never realized a figure (which is normally merely a nice pedagogic illustration in math) would be a part of the "result".

DO NOT contact anyone but the journal, from a burner account, and I fear your description here is already too frank unless you've subtly misdirected a bit (e.g., number of authors) and the question should perhaps be deleted.  The risk/reward calculation is against you.  You have to watch out for your career and research is too small a world to make even one enemy.  There is no possible reward.  There is however risk big or small, which cannot be quantified or known, so it is a bad decision.  Scale the heights of the ivory tower and do more honest work yourself: that must be your revenge.

I would not assume your colleague had anything to do with the figures.
Be very very careful; you can read about the extremely sad story of Ranga Dias who claimed to have discovered room-temperature superconductivity; Dias was not first author of a now retracted infamous paper, and also of this other retracted but apparently had a hand in producing the figures.  Please, read the story to understand how students can be unwitting participants in deceptions.
If you have solid grounds to suspect plagiarism or image manipulation, you should contact the journal. They have the resources to conduct a full investigation, and they would be the last arbiters of the case anyways.

Edit: thanks to the link provided by @anyon, you can read Dias investigation committee report on this mess.  To highlight and reinforce my suggested caution,
here's an excerpt from page 16:

Prior to publication, [Dr. Dias] provided R(T) data to co-authors only in the form of finished figures and not in the form of raw measurement data.

Here's another excerpt from page 19:

In his discussion with the Investigation Committee, [Dr. Dias] assumed responsibility for assembling the data and preparing the figures and manuscript for the Nature 2020 (CSH) Paper.

Please, do not reach hasty conclusions on the origin of figures (or more generally data or text) before you know with certainly who created the figures.  Much better to let the journal handle this: they have the authority to ask for raw data and give the authors a chance to explain any suspicious figures.

The actual investigation report makes for interesting and sad reading for anyone desiring more details https://www.nature.com/magazine-assets/d41586-024-00976-y/26947600

@Anyon wow!  I did not realize the report was publicly available.  Many thanks…

This is a very nice answer!

Note all three links in this answer are paywalled

@BenVoigt  I wish they weren’t but that can’t be helped.

I would advise you against making any outright accusations, or using any words that can be perceived as accusatory in nature and involving subjective judgments, such as “plagiarism” and “purely reproductive”, in connection with your colleague’s paper.
What you can reasonably do is share factual information regarding your findings with your superiors. Unless you are very high up the totem pole, you should not leap to conclusions that involve subjective value judgments about whether someone committed plagiarism or other type of misconduct. If you’re going to report anything, report pure, objectively verifiable facts (“subfigure 2.3 is similar to a subfigure from previously published reference […], which is not cited in the paper”) and let others draw their own conclusions and decide what if any action is appropriate to take.
I can’t advise you on whether it’s a good idea to make such a report. That depends on many things. But, as long as you stick to facts, it does not sound like it would be unreasonable to share your observations with the PI.
Some other things to consider:

There is much more to a paper than figures. What about the actual analysis and other scientific content? Even if all the figures are reused, it’s not clear that this would be plagiarism.

The paper has 21 authors! Is your colleague the first author? If yes, it may make sense to consider him as largely responsible for the figure reuse, but even so, he shares a good part of the responsibility with other authors. If he is not the first author, his culpability even in the case of misconduct would appear quite limited, and in that case, the fact that his “main publication” is as a minor coauthor on a paper with 21 authors should probably be of greater concern to you than the alleged misconduct.

Consider the possibility that, more than being an unethical paper, this paper is simply a bad or mediocre one with a low level of novelty. It wouldn’t be the first time such a thing has been published in a good journal, even by large groups of authors from well-known universities.

Complete aside: the holiest part of a totem pole is the base. :-)

Thanks. I dont want to reveal the actual paper here, in the whole text(its really not long maybe 2-3 pages inclduing the figures and headline) there is I would say 2-3paragraphs which are novel (at least I havent found them in some other paper yet). Mainly these present an analysis of data that someone else already pubilshed(which they fail to mention),  however their analysis  in the 2-3 paragraphs has a different  focus then the one published before.  He is the first author, and I have seen him make a big show about this work in the past, suggesting he really claims this for himself.

Reach out to your PI or other big name of your institute. Ask her/him, that you do not see the novelty of the paper if s/he can help you understand this. You must make it sound as honest curiosity, why this deserves to be published in such a high-ranked journal. Don't make accusations.
In the best case, you learn something, you did not get from reading the paper yourself. If your feeling is right, your peer starts wondering how this was ever published. Do not push further, let it go and try to write papers with more scientific value.

PubPeer.com is intended to be an effective tool for handling situations like this.  Post there, anonymously, if the journal's editors are not responsive.

I would be very cautious about making official charges in any venue. Not everyone will make the same judgement about such things. There are a lot of considerations, including whether there are creative elements in the images or not. This affects both plagiarism and copyright. There is also the question about what license(s) might apply to the figures, since the publication itself is open access.
But, I think it would be appropriate to have a quiet word with them, face to face, raising the issues. "These seem to be copies...." Maybe they can give you a good explanation of why it was appropriate, if, indeed, it is.
But "confront" may imply the wrong attitude going in. Among other things, it would probably negate the possibility of any cooperative relationship in the future.
Maybe a retraction or correction is needed, but get full information first, including that provided by the author(s).


text:
Should I include extra information in quiz questions?
I'm curious about the pros/cons of including extra flavor text in quiz/exam questions.
For example, which would be better?

What is the product of this reaction?
The following molecule is found in a marine plant species, and has shown to inhibit cancer cell growth. One possible reason is due to the following reaction of this molecule. Provide the correct products of the reaction.

I've jumped back and forth between the two options. One on hand, I think it is beneficial to have students learn to parse text to determine important pieces of information. On the other hand, am I primarily interested in their passage reading skills or the content of the course (I realize the answer could be both)?
I also want to consider english language learners in this. Does it make things more equitable for students if there is less text to process through to get to the "actual" question?

@NajibIdrissi Very true observation :)

I'm not a molecular scientist, but would knowing it's a molecule found in a plant and/or inhibiting cell growth prompt a student to use a different method for finding the product?

@Azor-Ahai It has zero bearing on solving the question, which is why I described it as "flavor text"

@JM Thanks for clarifying - "flavor text" isn't exactly a standard term.

@AzorAhai "flavor text" is a common term in tabletop role playing games. Flavor text is any text that exists to provide an immersive atmosphere but does not mechanically affect outcomes. Describing the elaborate embroidery on a wizard's robe is typically flavor text that helps players imagine themselves there, while imbuing the robe with actual magical powers that can be called upon to perform specific actions would be "crunch" text.

tl;dr-  Questions loaded with extra information can be great on homework, but exams should have more concise question statements.

Exams should avoid extra wordiness since it's extra work being put on-top of students who may already be under stress from activities outside of the class.  Additionally, more distractible students might get side-trekked by the additional information.
For homework assignments, questions with extra content could be awesome!  I'd stress that the extra content should be real; for example, if the question's

The following molecule is found in a marine plant species, and has shown to inhibit cancer cell growth. One possible reason is due to the following reaction of this molecule. Provide the correct products of the reaction.

, then the depicted molecule should be a real one actually found in marine species and shown to inhibit cancer cell growth.  Real examples like that can help build students' general knowledge, while fake examples can pollute their knowledge base with misinformation.
The other issue is that wordier question statements can create interpretation issues in which there's more ambiguity over what information the instructor's looking for.

It is always a good idea to offer authentic questions or tasks for assessment. So, if this additional information is authentic part of the problem, it is good to include it.  For example, if you would put it in the Introduction section of your paper on the topic of the quiz, you can include it in the quiz.
However, from the reading point of view it makes it harder to process, particularly for language learners. Any unnecessary bits should be left out.
Ideally, you should find the right balance between these two contradictory factors.

Other answers have mentioned reasons that this might not be a good idea. One way it could help some students is by triggering linkages in memory! For example, one of your students might think, "Wait a minute, this reaction inhibits cancer? I thought I remember reading about how Exemplar Acid kills cancer cells - maybe Exemplar Acid is one of the products?"
This is especially helpful when you want to test for or encourage students use of the material in real life. In real life, we usually get background information that can help us identify what a solution might look like. If we are building a bridge, we usually get quite a bit of information on performances of past bridges in the area, recommendations from other engineers who bid on the project, knowledge of local weather patterns, etc., rather than just a bare equation that we are expected to solve, transform, or optimize. Similarly, in a medical research context, knowing what the products accomplished may be very useful in hypothesizing what actually happened without having to spend time deriving from first principles.


text:
What are my choices?
I graduated with a Mathematics degree from a top-20 program in Mathematics. I have a good math background (I took many honors and some graduate level courses in my university with good grades with a 3.8+ mathematics GPA, and some researches and reading courses as well).
I applied for the PhD program in math at several universities (none of them is top-10). However, I got a terrible math GRE score (I took it once and only got 30% tile). Even though I believe that test is not a reflection of my math skills and knowledge, I think that test will bar me from going to any PhD program I applied to.
What are some options with my pure mathematics degree? I know some of you would suggest for me to go to some Master's program, but I cannot afford to pay anymore since I am an international student, and I know that I should not go to graduate school if I have to pay myself anyway.
At this point I am pretty much hopeless about my applications, and I think it would be wise to find a new path for my career.

Are you applying to the universities in the US? Or elsewhere?

In the U.S. only

Please read https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/38237/546

@scaaahu: I have read that one, and I do not think I will spend another $200 to retake that test and another $500 to send the results. These expenses are too much for me, and I would rather spend my time and effort to  start something new instead of doing that exam anyway. I am prepared for the worst situation, and I think that if all schools reject me, then it means that I am not able to do mathematics at higher level, so I would like to find a new path for myself.

Well, the answer below also suggests you to retake GRE if You have nothing this year. It'll be your own decision. I don't think you need to spend $500 to send the scores. If the score is good enough, send it to only 5 of them you want to enter.

@scaaahu: In any case, I do not think I would retake that exam anyway. Retaking it would just make not non-profit companies like ETS fatter, which they use education for not non-profit with billions of dollar in revenue. I just want to accept the fact that I will not be able to go to any graduate school and move on. My only concern is what should I do with a pure math degree?

what should I do with a pure math degree? A lot. Software engineer. Data Scientist, Teaching Math at high school.... etc. It all depends on what you want to do.

@bbq123: I disagree with your logic.  Based on what you are saying, if schools reject you, it won't be primarily because of your "inability" to do mathematics at a high level, but because of your low GRE scores. That is something which is easy to fix, by studying.  I do not think that rejection would be evidence of inability to succeed, in your case.

Just as a note, there are such things as funded masters programs in math: http://www.math.ku.edu/~jmartin/masters.html

I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that you'll be rejected.  Many programs use a GRE cutoff, but not all.  Wait and see.
If you don't get into any program that you like, I would suggest that you find something else to do for a year, perhaps back in your home country. Retake the GRE (study more this time), and apply to PhD programs again next year.  It sounds like you'll be a very strong candidate if you can get past the GRE cutoff.  I see no reason to give up.
(Also, are your undergrad professors aware of your situation?  They may have contacts at the graduate programs where you applied, and could suggest to them that they not overlook your application.)

All of my letter writers are big names people, and they do not even care about the GRE scores at all. I have this one Professor said that he did not even know what is GRE since he did not take it (he did his PhD in the U.S., and I thought it was interesting, and yes, he is a full tenured professor at my university). I think I got caught surprised by this GRE subject test since none of my Professors care about it, and during my undergrad years I only learned new math in my free time instead of practicing for this test, which maybe I should have done so.

Also, I would like to know some of the alternative ways around my situation. I fear that being rejected from all of the programs I applied to this year will cut my interest in mathematics, and I will have to find a new path for my life. I would like to know what should I do with a pure mathematics degree if I do not go to graduate school at all.

It's still "a world of connections."  If a student's advisor(s) is well connected, that trumps the bad GRE score.  Also, if the OP had a good showing on the Putnam, he might get recruited anyway.

I would suggest you go to the career counseling office at your university.  It's customary in the US (especially at top universities) for people to go on to jobs that have nothing to do with the subjects they studied at university, except that studying at university made them more generally educated and smarter.

You might want to put in a couple of applied math applications along with the pure math departments you had already identified.  It could be helpful to choose applied math programs that have applied and pure tracks within one department.  This would make switching tracks easier once you've established yourself in the department.
Another possibility would be a computer science department with some math-heavy tracks.
You could submit a short letter stating that you feel that your GRE result is not an accurate reflection of your actual level.
The difference between getting in somewhere and not getting in somewhere is huge.  $200, on the other hand, is not a huge amount of money.  (If it is for you, request a fee waiver.)  This would argue for studying for the test and taking it again, ASAP, and letting the schools know that you will be submitting a new GRE result on x date.  In fact it would probably be a good idea to pay extra if needed, to get as early a new test date as possible.
Admissions decisions are hard to predict exactly.