text:
Disputed territorial claims in academic submissions
This year I was asked to blind-review a paper which showed a map of China in the disputed Nine-Dash Line borders. I have seen the Nature Editorial from 2011 which discusses and criticizes this phenomenon (and suggests that there is a directive from the Chinese government to show the Nine-Dash line). The map in question showed graphically the values of a certain measured quantity for each of China's provinces. It may be of little surprise that the coloring does not reproduce very well for the tiny disputed islands. But this kind of display does give a reason to show borders.
Is it appropriate to insert a comment to this effect in a referee report, or can editors be assumed to be well aware of this issue already (or even be annoyed about an unnecessary reminder which may suggest, though not fairly so in many cases, a biased referee)?

Some journals/publishers may have a disclaimer on this matter. For example, "Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations". If your journal has a similar disclaimer, the editor may have a reason not to do anything about it.

"at 1"? what do you mean by that?

@AzorAhai The 1 is a link to a nature.com article: the editorial mentioned.

I note that the Nature editorial is from 2011. Though unlikely, I’d check whether their stance has since changed (stranger things have happened: recent developments show yet again that recommending political neutrality is, at best, hopelessly naïve).

Are you refereeing a paper on Biology (as alluded by the reference to Nature)? Or is it politics/history/international relations? That definitely has bearing on the answer. Also why does the paper even have a map of that area of the world? If it's not for a political reason - perhaps political borders are inappropriate altogether?

@einpoklum: The journal for which I refereed the submitted paper is interdisciplinary (with topics that would, as far as I can judge, all fit into categories also covered by Nature); the paper was not on politics/history/international relations, though.

@ChristianRau: So is there any reason to show the borders of state-sovereign territories at all?

@einpoklum: The map in question showed graphically the values of a certain measured quantity for each of China's provinces. It may be of little surprise that the coloring does not reproduce very well for the tiny disputed islands. But this kind of display does give a reason to show borders. This is essentially the reason given in the comments on the answer supplied.

@ChristianRau: Ahhh. Hmmm. Yes, now I see your dilemma. I'd put this last comment in the question actually to flesh out the scenario.

@einpoklum: Thank you, I have followed your suggestion.

Definitely point this out. The whole point of soliciting a review is to identify issues in the paper. You should not assume the editor knows the map on page 7 is inappropriate, just like you shouldn’t assume they are aware that step 5 of the methodology is unsound. The editor may choose to ignore your comment, but that is up to them. They should not be annoyed by a legitimate comment like this.
There is no justification for using scientific articles to advance territorial claims. If a political map is included, it should be clear when borders are disputed -- it's factually inaccurate to only present one claim. And one also questions why a political map is needed in the paper.

I would agree with pointing the matter out. Having not heard of the "Nine-Dash Line" dispute before, my first reaction on reading the Nature article linked in the question was to wonder how many uses of a map including it are actually intended to be "political statements"? From within China (which is where I assume the paper comes from) it may be difficult to get a copy of a map without the line (or dangerous to use such a map).

@Tripe Governments all over the world spend tremendous amounts of energy arguing over maps. Quite fascinating isn't it?

"Unless the paper is about politics, there is no need to include a political map." I disagree, and I have used country boundaries when showing purely natural phenomena without anybody commenting. Political boundaries offer a familiar point of reference for people to orient themselves and identify features. It's usually necessary to present geographic data in a clear and concise manner. Look at Google Maps, it shows countries in satellite view.

@user71659: Likewise, national boundaries could be important in many contexts that aren't explicitly political.  Say you have data on widget ownership rates by country.  You might like to illustrate it with a map where countries are colored differently according to widget ownership rates.  So you need to show national borders, and you have to put them somewhere...

(And for that matter, if one of your survey respondents lived in the disputed area, which country do you count them towards?)

I was at an engineering conference about renewable energy once, and a delegate explained how their work showed that "most of China's wave energy resource is in Taiwan".
Sometimes something is political even when that isn't the intended topic.

I'm also skeptical of the proposed solution "make it clear when borders are disputed".  If the tiny nation of Potsylvania decides tomorrow that their historic ethnic territory includes all of Asia, should all papers begin marking the entire continent as "disputed"?

@NateEldredge Use some common sense. If the area is currently heavily militarized in order to assert territorial claims, it’s disputed. The Jacobite succession can probably be ignored.

Many thanks to everyone for their input. I decided to go on this forum well after I submitted my referee report, and after I had seen that the final disposition of the paper was "Reject", because the paper, leaving the Nine-Dash Line issue aside, contained serious weaknesses. I think it is good to have some food for thought through the input here, in case one is facing a similar issue in the future.


text:
Does a PhD thesis have to be theoretical?
I already asked a question in the past about the requirement to join a PhD program, but I am now wondering what makes a PhD thesis what it is. As seen on a lot of different websites and for example on this post, one of the goals of a research thesis is to contribute to human knowledge by researching and documenting said research.
My personal goal is to contribute to human knowledge, and I feel like some researches in computer science (from different offers and thesis I saw) don't create knowledge, but are rather focused on creating a product that could as well be developed by any company with a research and development field. Because of this, I have trouble visualizing if there is really a knowledge creation in those PhDs, as I feel like those are not in a "science" related field but rather in a technical field (even though it's in the name "computer science").
Just to be clear, I'm not in any case questioning the benefit those research made, I think I am misunderstanding something in what a PhD is, and want clarifications to make sure I'm joining a PhD program with the right state of mind.

Does a PhD thesis have to be theoretical ?
If not, what is the benefit of developing a technical product in a academic environment rather than in a private environment ? (for both the doctorate and the academic world)

Most science PhD theses could well be developed by any company with a research and development department (going old-school, Bell Labs for example). Mine, for example, since I did much of the work at Bell Labs...

A PhD in theoretical physics will be theoretical.  A PhD is experimental physics will be experimental.

While doctoral degrees in some specialized fields have a different designation, you can get a PhD in many non-scientific fields. English Literature or Philosophy to name just two.
But even in those other fields, a dissertation is normally theoretical in some sense appropriate to that field. Many are more like mathematics, actually, extending a thread of thought, rather than gathering data and applying statistical methods or other tools.
I question the premise that most CS dissertations are "product development" actually. None of them in my particular purview have been. All have contributed to knowledge, though that knowledge can often be commercialized in some way.
Some CS research in the language area results in the development of a new language, of course, but that doesn't mean a commercially viable language. They are normally written to test out some ideas of semantics or implementation and so really do extend the range of human knowledge.
But CS, in general, has been concerned for a long time with building things, so research that is closer to the "real world" is natural. But companies find it difficult to justify doing "pure research" that can't be turned into a revenue stream in a predictable way. That sort of thing is left to universities and to doctoral students.
And, of course, there are many CS topics if that is your chosen field. You can be as theoretical as you want to be. Some subfields are nearly indistinguishable from mathematics.

I realized afterward that my point indeed isn't very clear because I was only focused in my point of view, I'm editing my post because the topic is not "science" in itself but rather the "knowledge creation" aspect of the PhD

I'll try to update as needed.

+1 for "extending a thread of thought" --- Wow, that's a great phrase! It captures exactly what is involved with almost all research I'm familiar with, at least in mathematics. Interestingly, I get no google hits for this exact phrase, although I suppose that will change as soon as this answer gets crawled by google.

At my University, a Phd requires to contribute a substantial, original extension to existing computer science theory.  Examples of said contributions are new approaches to solving problems, highlighting problems in existing approaches, etc.  Many times tools are developed to demonstrate the new concepts and approaches but they're far from being a product in any shape or form.  And the purpose of the research is by no means to develop said tools but only to use them as a means to an end: e.g demonstrate a new concept.
Exceptionally some of that research leads to a product being developed by sponsorship of an industrial partner or/and the University but it's a whole new, and completely different phase than the research task, and specifically the research that a Phd candidate would do.
Your mileage may vary at other universities.  However developing a product requires a complete different approach than research.   A product may draw knowledge from many innovations from research but most importantly is driven by user need and demand.  Research on the other hand is a narrow innovation, hardly useful as a single product on its own, and typically not driven by user need or demand but rather as gaps in existing research.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Another story of PhD selection regret
I am a student with an MSc in Physics who is supposed to start a PhD next month. The reason I am writing is the bad psychological situation I ended up after a hard choice between grad programs. I will try to go straight to the point omitting details on how frustrating the whole application period was. After many rejections last year and the year before, I was in the initially pleasant position to receive four offers. After long thought I reduced them to two, which ended up turning the whole thing into a nightmare.
Place A: The school that I did my MSc. I would continue in similar topics with a different and very young supervisor in the same research group as my MSc (it's a bit more complicated than that but anyway...). I left and now I regret it.
Place B: The place that I accepted to do my PhD even though I haven't visited it yet. Not sure about the exact topic, but it is supposed to be similar to A. It is slightly more well known as a name and the supervisor is widely considered as one of the top researchers in his field.
None of the schools are top-10 super prestigious but the Prof. in B can be regarded at this level, if not better.
I admit I made mistakes in the decision process but that's not important since I cannot turn back time. I was never 100% confident with my choice and when I rejected A it felt bad. But I had the same buyer's remorse feeling when I rejected the rest of the schools too, so I thought it is going to pass in a week or so. Here I am, four months later, feeling MUCH worse! I lost all motivation to work, let my father make all the arrangements for B (accommodation etc.), and did not even help him, I am constantly procrastinating everything related and even started having bad habits, like wasting time in computer games, unhealthy eating and sleeping every day after 4am. Starting a PhD this way is probably not going to have the best outcome.
To be fair, the whole thing is indeed partly in my mind, but there are also some facts that changed recently and made A look better now. It has to do with location - I had personal reasons to prefer B's location which do not exist anymore (no, not girlfriend). Moreover, I would definitely prefer A's location for a job (after graduation), hence staying in A for PhD could help career-wise.
I should also note that the offer from A is not officially on the table anymore, so one might think the whole thing is pointless. On the other hand, I had good relations and they seemed satisfied with me during the MSc, so with a bit of luck I might be able to get an offer for next year, if I try. Of course the whole wrong decision/regret story could hurt my chances, so nothing is certain in this direction.
The way I see it, now there are a few options now:
YOLO approach:
Drop out from B prior starting and try to get an offer from A for next year (or as early as possible). This is going to piss off B but it is still better than starting, wasting their time and funding and not giving my 100% self because of my problems. It is also possible that A might stop being interested anymore, but I will get in touch with them and explain the situation before letting the other option. I also get an unexplainable gap year in my CV which might hurt in future job search.
HONEST approach:
Be honest with everyone. Tell A that I want to go to them but I am commited to B and discuss with B why I don't feel very excited starting there. This can have a bunch of different outcomes, from managing to go back to A with everyone happy, staying to B with everyone happy or even losing both options. In any case, it is probably morally correct to follow this route but also tough. Telling to my new supervisor "I chose you but I feel that I don't want to be here" is not the optimal way to start a relation.
EVIL approach:
Start normally at B and pretend everything is ok. Since I have never been to the place there is a possibility that I'll like it and get better with time. This sounds very unlikely now but things might change with time. On the other hand, things can get worse and depending on how bad, it might be possible to continue half hearted (hardly to do a PhD this way) or eventually drop out. In this case nobody knows whether it will be possible to get readmitted to A or anywhere else as dropping out of a program definitely raises questions.
Anyway, if you read everything and reached this line, thank you very much. Honestly, I don't expect the forum to solve my internet as I probably need professional assistance, but writing things down helps me in any case. Since, I spent the time to do it, I thought it would be great to share, for people who have been in a similar position, others that are just interested in such stories or even someone who might have a piece of advice, which is of course very welcome.

UPDATE:
First I would like to thank the people who read my message, particularly the people who answered for the effort they put without having anything to gain. I really appreciate that.
I am adding this update to give some more details related to Allure's great questions. I did not analyze the reasons for my choice because my message was already long and I tried to focus on my current problem.
To answer the first question: the truth is that I was never sure (even now), in the sense that even if I stayed at A it is likely that I would still be in a similar situation about not choosing B. Or it could be easier since there would be less uncertainty as I already have experience with A, nobody knows. So I admit that I did not have the courage to handle the situation properly, but I cannot erase the second thoughts I have now either.
I am not the most outgoing person but still asked people for advice, probably not as much as I should have done, though. Most of the answers were pretty much like Allure's comment, that both seem good choices. Even my A supervisor who would probably like me to stay there spoke highly for B, too.
I should also mention that my supervisor at A would be different from my MSc supervisor and I would be his first PhD student. I would also be in a different nearby institute but I would be possible to work closely with the old group too. For Buffy's thought, being supervisor's first student (A) vs super-star supervisor (B - 80k citations, more than 20 students in his group, etc) is another open question with many different answers, even in the current website. I searched a lot about that and nothing really convinced me.
I wouldn't say there is a material change like Brexit. Probably the most accurate answer is that I made the wrong choice with the info I had. However things happened during the summer too, which made me reconsider. To explain the timing, I accepted/rejected the offers in May, my second thoughts started end of June and they aggravated during summer. When I chose B, my project in A wasn't going very well - I had some good numerical results that my supervisor liked but I lacked deep understanding. Also, the supervisor did not spend much time on this. All this, combined with the fame of B supervisor, as well as the fact that B is geographically closer to my home were the reasons for the initial choice.
What changed: When I arrived back home, the feeling of being close to home (one of B's pros) became much less important. My ties with my parents don't feel as strong as before for personal and work reasons and I think it was very immature and remnant from my undergrad that I even considered distance for the PhD choice. Without the distance fact, I would prefer A's location because of the language (English). B is in Europe and I do not speak the country's language (not need for work, though). But more importantly than that there's research. I said it wasn't going well until early May, but the situation changed drastically in the last 1.5 month. The supervisor showed interest, the project went much better and I really enjoyed my final presentation. In fact we were even preparing a publication, something that was put on hold since I left. To sum up:

When I decided I felt lost in A anyway, so I would have to start over no matter where I went. So I thought of trying in a new place closer to home (B).
Now I know that if I stayed in A I would already have something to start working on and even get a paper out quickly. B seems like starting from scratch again and in a location (environment outside the institute) that might be not very friendly, considering the language problem. Of course, I will never know if I don't go, but I have trouble being positive about it and that's not good.

have actually started your phd at uni B?

Hi Güray and thank you for your message. I agree with both things. I believe that with a positive perspective it could go well in both places, it is just that I feel more comfortable in A since I've been there and currently I feel it fits my career goals a bit better so it could possibly help to climb the ladder faster. Unfortunatelly being in academia is challenging and causes these feelings.

For Fábio, not yet but I am supposed to start in the first week of September and I already arranged accomondation for the first few months. So unless I go with a super crazy plan, I will start almost for sure.

what "committed" exactly mean? did you sign a contract? Is A completely off the table for this year (as in "they had X seats, all are taken and none will be open for me in any circumstances"?). I would still go for A in your case, having been in a slightly similar (but way less dramatic) situation.

Thanks WoJ. There is no official contract signed yet but I am supposed to sign it when I arrive in B (in a few weeks), not sure about the terms. But if the situation is the same psychologically, I will definitely tell them before I sign and see what happens. I can't say about A for sure. It is likely the place is still free, but it has been time since I talked to them. Last time we talked they told me to consider the position for the next round of applications (if I don't do something else), so they might be interested. The way I handled things might have a negative impact, though.

I think it is not possible to get the place in A this year formally though. Probably visit for some days or months if they can make it work and then start formally next year. In any case I would like to avoid doing something unethical with any program (lying etc.) as even though they do not collaborate currently, I never know about the future and some of their work is close.

what exactly are you asking? I am afraid right now this question is off-topic, as StackExchange designed for problem solving, not "forum-style" discussions

It's true that I am so confused that I had hard time even well-defining a question. Initially it was about whether the mentioned options made sense and which one sounds the best: Drop out now, try discuss it first, or accept it and move on. After the updates I had to elaborate more and I guess the question turned to whether the feeling that I made the wrong choice is because of my current anxiety, or based on actual facts (understand myself?).

As I said, it's hard to solve my problem here, so I'm sorry if I misused the site. However I see people in the comments who are interested, so at least I hope that someone else also got something from this discussion (eg. comments in Nicole's answer). I learnt a lot too and I wish I came here earlier when I had to do the actual decision.

I found a flaw in your reasoning. Your "EVIL approach" is a GOOD approach. The world is a bureaucratic tarpit and the deeper you descend into it, the more complex the game becomes. Keep your eyes on the prize and let your personal interest guide you. When you do well, everyone else does well. If you knock someone off their idealistic pedestal into their bureaucratic barbed wire, it's their problem. As a physicist you should know your biggest enemy is time. Don't waste it. By the time you finish, you may have Brexit, recession, war or what not, historically nothing unusual.

You're experiencing anxiety, which is a normal response to an upcoming major life change.  If it's severe enough to be causing physical symptoms, e.g., panic attacks, please see a physician as there are medications like Valium and Xanax that work well to control them.
I think you're pretty much committed to doing your PhD at B and that there'd be a lot of breakage in your life trying to change that.  But I also don't think you've given any reason to think this won't be a great new chapter in your life.  And, frankly, if your real long term life objective is to be back at A, perhaps as faculty there, then you definitely should prefer doing your PhD at B.  (Most schools won't hire their own PhDs into tenure-track positions.)
Here's what I think will happen to you.  You will experience about a year of upheaval in your life, making your new home really home, finding new friends, figuring out where to buy groceries and how your new department and new supervisor work.  It will be hard on you.  But it will challenge and grow you in new and unexpected ways and a year from now, you will feel a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment at having made the change and made it a success.
When I've moved (and let me tell you, I hate moving and I experience all the anxiety you're describing every time) the good things that always seem to happen are that I discover new opportunities I had never dreamed of and I meet new people that change my life.  Who knows.  If you don't have a girlfriend now, perhaps you will meet her there.  (If she was in your circle at A, wouldn't you have already met her?)  Perhaps you will find your soulmate, create a family, and move back to A, where you'll both be tenure-track.  Anything can happen.
Good luck.
Added in response to OP's added remarks:  Okay, the language and family issues definitely complicate the question and help explain your anxiety.  But if you don't follow through on what you'd expected was a move that would put you closer to family while doing your PhD because the relationship has cooled, this could be a decision you might later regret given that your parents won't be around forever.  The language issue is a harder call but apparently you thought you were up to it, so I'm going to bet that way as well.  Not having learned another language is a common regret.

Yes, please see other answers on this forum about not making major academic decisions when you are in the thrall of anxiety and depression. Try to get therapy and/or medication before deciding.

thanks for sharing your own experiences with anxiety. It's relieving to hear that people in this situation are not alone

@user1993 Oof! I'm 67. It still happens.  Last summer, I was days away from backing out of moving to Ann Arbor, MI after 15 years in Redmond, WA when it seemed like I was running out of time to find a place to live from 2000 miles away.  This summer, I decided I was happy enough that I bought the place I rented last year over the internet but still struggled with more anxiety just days before closing.  Such is life.

Thank you very much for the response and for the encouraging words. Indeed I haven't been to B yet and the uncertainty of change (all the things in your 3rd paragraph) make it worse. I know that there is some sort of psychological problem in my situation and I plan to seek professional help but avoid medication for now. What I don't know is what percentage of my preference towards A now is due to this anxiety issue or because there are real reasons that make it a better choice. It is interesting that there are people here who found some logic in this choice.

@Stealth If you gave it careful, diligent consideration and thought B was the smart choice before all the anxiety set in, there's a good chance it's still the smart choice.

Also, I would like to return and work in A's location but preferably in industry and not in academia, unless my goals change during the PhD. Being there could help to establish a network with people working in the area. Also, since you are in CS, I would like to add that my topic involves some machine learning. The difference is that A is an AI focused place while B is a pure physics place: another point for A here due to my interest in industry (especially because I lack experience, no internships etc.). Of course I knew that but as I said there were pros and cons in both.

@Stealth You've indicated your advisor at B will be better.  This matters.  As it happens, I'm just learning ML (and adversarial attacks) myself.  It was one of the things I hoped would happen if I came to Michigan.  I didn't come for the winters.  If you care about your career, you have be prepared to move to where the opportunity is best.

First, calm down. Your life is not going to end because you attended the "wrong" graduate school. Second, in life, we make lots of decisions in uncertain circumstances. You'll never know what might happen if you go to another university, but since you can only choose one option, you should make a decision and stick with it.
With that out of the way, a few things to think about before deciding what to do next:
Which university do you actually want to go to? By your description, you actually want to go to University A. What made you decide to accept B's offer then? Did something materially change that makes B the inferior choice? For example, if B is in the UK and you find you don't even want to set foot in the country after the Brexit referendum, then that's a real change in circumstances that should be taken into account. If nothing materially changed, then why are the reasons that made you choose university A no longer convincing? Did you just make the wrong choice? You must have the courage to make a decision and stick with it - you'll meet this situation again in life (e.g. buying a house, getting married ...), and cannot regret your decision forever.
I once talked to a dean about making grad school choices. He said that when he was doing his PhD, he also had two attractive options, and he discussed them with his advisor. His advisor said that whichever option he chose would be the right one. Sage advice.
About the YOLO option: there're two problems with this. First is that you'll have a year's worth of time to fill. What are you going to do in that year? If the answer is "nothing", then you'll just be a burden on your caregivers, which is not responsible behavior. If you're thinking of getting a job, then that's fair, but it's not easy to find a job for only one year. I suggest you discuss this with your parents first, see if they have any suggestions for what you can do in that year. If you can't find anything constructive, this option becomes very unattractive to me (don't forget that empty years in your CV also makes your application next year less competitive).
The other problem is that you're assuming you'll get admitted at university A next year. Unless you have some kind of reassurance from them, I would not take this for granted. Remember, you were rejected at many places two years in a row.
About the honest option: there's a chance that A will be able to admit you even though you rejected the offer before. It depends on the program. If they have a freestyle start date (i.e. you can begin whenever you want), then there's a good chance it'll work; on the other hand if they have an official start date in August like most universities in the US, it's unlikely they'll be able to admit you. Still, you won't know unless you ask.
As for university B, nobody wants an unhappy graduate student. If you genuinely believe you'll be miserable at university B, then you should have no qualms rejecting the offer. They'll simply call up someone from their wait list.
tl; dr:

Think carefully about where you want to go, make a decision, and have the courage to stick with it.
If you choose A, ask A if they can still admit you this year. If they can, you're gold. If not, figure out if you have something to do if you reject B's offer.
If you have something to do, ask A if they will admit you next year. If they say yes, you're gold. If not, go to B.
If you have nothing to do, go to B.

Thank you very much for responding and for looking at all options. These are great questions and I could write even more details about why the decision but I am afraid it will end up boring. About the gap year, I can do military service to not hurt CV (hopefully, as it is mandatory here), but it's a waste of time as it can be postponed when living abroad until the age that can be bought. I see that as the last resort choice as going to B is important in helping me answer questions like whether it was the correct choice or no. If no, I'm in trouble but I don't see any better solution.

I'm going to leave the question of the psychological and subjective factors to others here. For example, the answer of Allure seems about right to me.
However, on an objective basis, I'd suggest that in choosing B, for whatever reasons and by whatever path, you have made the best decision for yourself. It is simply that working with a more experienced advisor, rather than a newcomer works in your favor, provided that you build a good relationship with him/her. The experienced professor will have more and better ideas. That professor will not need to be as mindful of their own advancement and can (though not all do, of course) help you with your academic advancement. I've had both kinds of advisors and I'd take the senior professor any day.
Some junior professors are an exception and have many ideas that they have no time for themselves, but they are also too involved in such things as tenure portfolios and such. The senior professor will have much less pressure to perform in the short term. Your association with a senior professor can also help you kick start your own advancement.
However, you have put yourself into a very stressful situation. You need to find ways to reduce that stress. Stress reduction has been discussed elsewhere in relation to different issues. For example: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/114723/75368
Also, making a clean break with your current institution may help you with your fairly obvious burn-out symptoms. If the world looks new you may not be as tempted to fall back on non-productive activities.

Thanks for the response. As I said in my update it looks like the young vs old advisor causes disagreements among people with PhDs and unfortunatelly I do not have the experience to form my own opinion. I would say that in my case it is mostly the fact that I would be the first student of A advisor - this could cause some problems. Still not sure but someone with history is a safer choice. Despite being young, though, his ideas seem to have potential in my area.

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


text:
Is it worth the risk to apply to REUs? How likely am I to be accepted?
I am applying to biology REUs(Research Experience for Undergraduates) this summer. Would a white female junior from a small R2 university, 3.9 gpa, and one summer of research experience be likely enough to get into one these programs? I've heard that it's a long shot if you're not a minority, the issue is while female counts as minority for other REUs I don't know if it counts much for bio these days...
I'm asking because there's a very very good study abroad program (a very good university to study at for bio) I want to apply to that goes until June (which overlaps with 99% of REUs and other internships). So I either pick the top study abroad program and simply do research at my university over the summer or get a job, or I pick my second choice study abroad program in order to apply to REUs (as well as other internships such as NOAA), but risk not getting into any of them anyway and going right to my backup plans for the summer.

You have to decide based on your own preferences what to do. The only sure thing is that if you don't apply, you won't get in.

A footnote as your citizenship status is unclear. If you are NOT a US citizen or a permanent resident, REUs are definately a long shot. Their funding are directly dictated by NSF which only allows afforementioned students to be funded.

Unfortunately there is no meaningful way to estimate your chances of being accepted into any specific program or set of programs (REU or otherwise), because selection is not strictly random, nor is the criteria uniform or transparently available to applicants.
However, while REUs often mention the goal of increasing participation of minority candidates, in practice this varies from "a strict rule where only minority candidates are chosen" at some few programs to "its just something we are supposed to say, and the vast majority of people who end up in the program are not classifiable as a minority but that's not something we make a point to mention on our website" at others.
I understand the anxiety these sort of selection decisions cause, especially given the tremendous ambiguity and opacity of decision criteria, and especially the fear that vague bureaucratic-double-speak can cause.
My advice, having done an REU myself - and to even apply I had to push past a lot of fear of wasting my time and thinking I had no chance of being selected for any, but then being offered multiple options - is to apply if it is something you might like to do, and that's it. You cannot count on being chosen, or even hearing back on a decision from all places you apply (I had at least 3 big-name programs not even notify me of selection and they ignored my email follow-ups to their program coordinator).
If you have a good option that requires material commitment (like, say, a big deposit or signing some contract with explicit big penalties if you change your mind) before knowing what the other offers would be, I'd encourage you to decide what your taste for risk of it not working out is - i.e., with big risk comes the need for a good backup plan.
Personally, I had to roll the dice between summer employment and REUs that had very different decision timelines. I ultimately realized many of them had more flexibility than I realized, and while I would have preferred to not give late notice on turning down an internship and another REU offer I was otherwise excited to do, it worked out and people were far more understanding than I would have expected they'd be. You are a student, and these are opportunities meant to help you - so most places aren't going to be heart-broken if you have to change your mind, etc.
See what sort of flexibility you have on changing your mind if some options turn up you didn't expect, and then if there is an option I always suggest you roll those low-price application costs and see what happens.

I don't know where you are getting the idea that it is a longshot specifically for non-minorities. In general, REUs do have low acceptance rates for everyone. There are a lot of students who want to do them and not that many REUs.
Now, to answer your question: yes, being female will likely help somewhat, but it likely won't make a big difference. What will matter more is the GPA which will help out a fair bit. The previous research experience may hurt or help; at least in math some REUs try to admit undergrads without experience to spread them around, but that's not all of them  by any means, and for the most part it would be helpful. I suspect the situation in biology is similar.
Since you are a junior, you should already have some connections within the biology department, either your adviser or faculty whose classes you have taken. They can likely give you more personal advice since they know you better. But at least from what you've said to us, I suspect you have a higher chance of getting admitted to an REU than the average candidate.


text:
Academic Interview Question: "What is the title of your second book?"
Background:
I watch a lot of YouTube content lately about PhDs, postdocs, and an academic career in general, and one content creator that stands out is the amazing Tara Brabazon.  In one of her videos, either on her own channel, that of Flinders University, or of Charles Darwin University, she addresses academic interview questions.  One such question is, "What is the title of your second book?"
My Question:
How does one answer satisfactorily the question, "What is the title of your second book?", in an academic interview when one hasn't published a single book, let alone two?
About Me:
I study pure mathematics at the PhD level here in the UK.  I don't know how much it is expected of a pure maths postdoctoral fellowship applicant (or that of a more permanent position) to have published two or more books. Is it more of a Humanities thing?
I'm interested in staying competitive in the job market.

Adding this as a comment since it doesn't directly answer the question, but it's unlikely you'd be asked this question in a STEM subject interview. As you say, books are much more of a Humanities thing, and are very much an aside to papers and conferences as the primary output for researchers in (most?) STEM subjects.

A STEM-adapted version of the question might be "What will be the title of your first major grant application?". Note that many/most humanities academic will write their first book based on the topic of their PhD thesis, so the subtext of the question is "Tell us about something you want to work on in the future that is substantially different from what you're doing now."

“The Adventures of Algebrats”

Different fields are different, but does she mean this for a postdoc interview?  Anyway, it sounds to me like her version of the "Where do you see yourself in 5 years?" question, so that's how probably how you should interpret it.

This seems like a useless interview question, since the interviewer should already have a copy of the applicant's CV, which will include a list of publications. In any case, the correct answer is the honest one: "I have not written any books yet".

"Gosh, I don't know if I'd need to write a whole book about my Nobel Prize".

Even for a PostDoc position within the humanities, where there’s a good chance the applicant has had their PhD thesis published as a book, the chances of them having published two books before applying to be a PostDoc are relatively slim. It’s not a question anyone can reasonably expect a factual answer to in a PostDoc interview situation.

The title of my second book would be, "Why I Left Academia."

Stephen McMahon's comments should be the answer. In history, for example, it is quite common that the first book is a rewrite of the dissertation. The question about the title of the second book is about whether the candidate has any idea of what to work on after the dissertation. I assume that the same is true in the humanities in general.
The situation in pure Mathematics is very different. First, books by people early in their career are rare. You write papers, often on your own. Text books do not usually count for academic advancement in the early stages. Monographs presume that you are an expert in a field, which usually requires you to have already published a lot. Accomplished people in the field might never write a book or only have one book to their credit (unless you count Springer Lecture Notes, which are a bit different in their outlook). I am not talking about text books here.
If you were actually asked this question, your answer should be that you want to work in this field first, and maybe that will lead to a first book. The second book is in the far future. (Unless of course you are already the junior partner in a book project.) If you are planning on a series of monographs, you better be superb, or you will come across as a bit arrogant. If you are thinking about writing a text book, mentioning that during an interview might backfire because Math departments want to see good research and do not want you to be distracted from that.
Of course, individual cases can be very different.

Realted: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/203847/extending-the-phd-project-into-post-doc/203858#203858


text:
How do commitees evaluate candidates from foreign / unknown universities?
I'm asking out of curiosity / because I think the answer may be of general interest:
A bit of context: When I applied to PhD programs, I had degrees from two institutions. One (let's call it "A") is more selective and trains students a little more in depth than the other (which we'll call "B"), but doesn't really have a great international reputation (being very teaching-focused).
During interviews abroad, it felt like I was considered as a "serious" applicant because I studied in the other institution, B, which is much more famous because of its research programs, but actually didn't contribute as much to my training. Clearly, nobody had ever heard of institution A. During one of my interviews, an interviewer even saw my grades from university A, where grading is very strict, and asked me: "do you think your grades are good enough to go to [our prestigious university]?". In a live interview, I had the opportunity to explain these grades, but what about the other programs that did not invite me for interviews? I can't help but think that this kind of misunderstanding may have played a bigger role than it should have.
Fortunately I joined the program that I wanted the most. But I started wondering: what if I had only studied in institution A?
So here's the question: Those of you who, at some point, were part of selection commitees (for college, grad school etc.), how did you evaluate candidates who studied in small, foreign and/or unknown universities/high schools, as opposed to big, local, well-known universities/high schools?
In particular, how did you take into account :

Different grading standards - in institution A, the equivalent of a 70% was considered an unusually good grade, whereas in some prestigious universities, an A or a B is quite normal; that difference does not always appear on transcripts.
Different curriculum structures - some universities may require that students in their first/second years take classes  that do not seem very relevant for certain grad school applications
Different opportunities to perform research - this time in university B, a students would only perform research once at the end of their masters, so significant undergrad research experience is unusual and would require a lot of extra commitment
Different prestige - the "best university of the country" may not be as famous as MIT or Harvard, depending on the country. For example are you familiar with the best university in, say, Kazakhstan (no offense meant, Kazakhstani friends)? Would you "trust" a degree more if it came from a more famous institution?
Different academic culture - Europeans, for example, do not typically have a long list of "dean's list", "undergaduate award for (XXX)" etc.; it's simply not a thing there, so even exceptional students just don't have these. Writing SOPs is also not common in certain countries, so students are not trained to "modestly praise themselves" and might seem a little clumsy when they try to do so.
Anything else?

Have you ever faced this kind of issues when evaluating candidates? Did you at any point take extra steps to make sure this kind of differences would not penalize international applicants?
Edit: this question is not entirely similar to other questions like "How handicapped am I in graduate admissions if I graduated from a lower tier university?". Indeed, this question focuses on applications within a single country, with a priori homogeneous definitions of what a "good" university is, with known grading standards... Answers to this question clearly assume that it is possible to define "good" and "bad" grades by looking at a transcript, for example. My questions challenges the notion that the application documents (SOP, GPA etc) are meaningful, because unless a commitee member knows the high school / university of origin of an applicant, they really have no way to tell whether grades are good or not, because standards are not uniform.

In effect disagreeing with the premises of the question, I make a comment rather than an "answer". The issues/distinctions you mention are not very significant in my appraisal of applicants for mathematics grad study in my U.S. R1 university. We know that things vary around the world. What the admissions committee cares about is future potential. Obedience, conformity, GPA, etc., are not at all the most positive indicators. And, in the U.S., I don't care at all whether someone made the Dean's list, or whatever undergrad honors... These are relatively childish things.

@ PaulGarrett Could you elaborate? I do agree that there may more than that, but I can't put a name on it. What are rational things that can motivate a decision, assuming that grades, SOPs, classes taken, research experience..., all that stuff, is unimportant? Is it more than just a gut feeling / "I like this guy" kind of thing? How does one reliably see potential in an applicant when one has no indicator of what their past history really means - having no reliable standard of comparison? Is there absolutely no pre-screening based on grades at, say, Harvard college admissions?

I work in a European institute and we get a fair number of applicants from Middle and East Asian countries for PhD positions. It became obvious rather quickly that grades, curriculum, prestige etc. are basically incomparable. In fact, we only took these into account when we know the country of origin very well.
Instead, we put quite some weight on individual skillsets, what undergraduate research project applicants had done, whether their studies fit well with what we are doing, and letters of recommendation.
In other words, we do not take anything on your list into account, with the sole exception of the opportunity to do research: if a candidate hasn't done any independent research and we do not know how to interpret their grades etcetera, then we do not have enough information to make an informed decision. These candidates could be really good but we're unfortunately not in a position to determine that.
This works because we typically know pretty well what kind of students we are looking for; we are not selecting for the US-type Masters-PhD structure, these students immediately start with their PhD projects.

An effective process should involve a diverse group of faculty who are called upon to evaluate candidates for admission.
You are correct that academic and research opportunities and standards vary widely among institutions. For any academic department that admits graduate students there should be many faculty who share the load of evaluating candidates. Different members should be knowledgeable about institutions in different regions or countries, and can reach out to colleagues if they find a promising candidate from an obscure school. Some debate or agreement then needs to be reached among the various evaluators about who is above the bar for admission.
The challenges you describe are exactly why evaluating a candidate's potential can be hard. Some departments do a bad job evaluating. Some letter writers do a bad job explaining what the applicant has done, what rigor they have trained under, and to what group they are comparing the applicant.


text:
graduate admissions - Can I apply again in March for the same intake after being rejected in December?
This is a hypothetical question pertaining to the entry of Fall'19. Suppose I apply in December and get rejected. By next semester, I predict my grades would have improved a lot, crossing me over past the 7pt grade line out of 10, which a substantial thing. Additionally, by January I will be involved in a research project which will definitely give me brownie points. Given that I think my application's strength will improve, would it be allowed to apply again? Will my application be considered afresh in March?
Or, should I just wait till March and apply? I hear that intake chances are higher in December, since there are more seats to be filled.

Can you please edit your post to be a bit easier to read? For example, "sem" and "Jan" is a bit unnecessary. You also haven't even stated what you're applying for, or which country. Thanks!

You are trying for an equation containing two incommensurate things. It is an impossible task without a lot of statistical research. You will just need to make a decision. Check the university's rules, however, to see if rejection comes with a prohibition to re-apply without at least a substantial wait. Such rules should be public knowledge and easy to obtain from admissions officials or web-sites.


text:
How to present a degree that was earned abroad on a business card?
I live in Australia and hold a M.A. degree from the University of Hamburg.
That degree doesn't exist in Australia, so I can't get it acknowledged through the accrediting bodies.
What is the etiquette to present such a degree on a business card?
[Update] I refer to a particular degree in the area of child education and not to the term 'Master of Arts', which of course does exist in Australia.

The edit helps, but it's unclear what your concern is regarding the major not being offered in your country.  For example, is this a legal issue, where you're not allowed to claim a degree that's not accredited by local bodies?

@Nat Yes, that's basically is it. Not necessarily a 'legal issue', but more about reputation. If I receive a business card with a degree on it, I would assume that the degree has been earned in that country and meets their required standards. Not saying it wouldn't been met, but there is no one who could confirm that.

Many UK universities allow the use of additional post-nominal letters, which indicate the university a degree was obtained from, e.g. Oxon for Oxford, Cantab for Cambridge, and so on. Would doing this help with what you want to do here? In your case it would be Carsten Hagemann MA(Hamburg).

I suggest that you present it as it was awarded, and perhaps list the university as well. Most people will accept it at face value, though you may get the occasional question about what it means.
Australia isn't so isolated that it can't accept international terminology.
This would be different if you are in a field that requires certain certification, but that is a question to be directed at those providing the cert.

You shouldn't list a masters degree on a business card in Australia.
Educated Australians will know what a masters degree is.  Edit:  Australians will understand "Master of Arts in Child Education" just fine even if they've never met one before.

Maybe you should expand on your first sentence. Why? Or better, why not, if it happens to be your highest degree?

@Buffy It is just custom.  The only degree I see on business cards is a PhD, and that is because it is a title.  A masters is not a title in Australia.

List the full name of the degree and the name of the university. It is is not uncommon for degrees from universities in other countries to have degrees which differ from degrees given by local universities. Your business card is your introduction so it can contain whatever you wish it to have on it.

Have you ever seen the full name of the degree and the name of the university on a business card? Which field was this? I have never seen a card like this.

I have seen business cards which were minimal and formal then some which were printed on both sides in multiple colors. This person was concerned with presenting his degree so that it wouldn’t be misleading. Your reaction to my suggestion gives me pause to reconsider. If his degree can not be easily shown it might be best to omit it. It depends on what information he feels is necessary to convey. Thank you for your comment.

I see titles and post-nominal letters; I've also seen double-sided cards, multiple colours, etc.; I don't recall seeing details about degrees, that said, it is a matter of taste.

I live in Australia and hold a M.A. degree...That degree doesn't exist in Australia

I started to wonder what Australia called an M.A., so I googled "MA Australia master of arts" and discovered Victoria University offering such degrees, e.g., https://www.vu.edu.au/courses/master-of-arts-hrat. So, it seems it does exist.
(The above previously appeared as a comment and the question has now been edited to add the following.)

I refer to a particular degree in the area of child education and not to the term 'Master of Arts', which of course does exist in Australia.

The particular name used by the awarding institute, the University of Hamburg, doesn't matter so much, the level of the qualification does.

What is the etiquette to present such a degree on a business card?

Use post-nominal letters, e.g.,
A. N. Other, M.A.

Australians do not usually use postnomial letters (they tend to be informal), and if they did they wouldn't have periods.  For example "PhD" not "Ph.D."

@AnonymousPhysicist Ultimately, it is all personal preference... Given that the OP wants to present information, I'm advising as to how to do it, and given that they write M.A., I followed that style.


text:
Revised manuscript take too long to process
I send out my first article to be reviewed on 12 Jun 2018 and received comment from reviewer from Journal of international quantum chemistry on 13 July 1018. Problem is, I have sent in revised manuscript to that particular journal since 8 August 2018, the publisher inform me through email will let me know the editorial decision within two months. We wait until two months still doesn't receive any news. My supervisor has sent in a requiry for the manuscript to Wiley publisher but Wiley reply that they still waiting for another review. I quite afraid my article won't be review forever if that reviewer forgets to review my article. Other things makes me worry is,  my article cannot get other places to published when being rejected after a year by Wiley due to the value of an article. What should I do? Thank you very much.

First things first, relax. You are worried about the status of your paper, but nothing out of the ordinary has happened.
When you submitted it, the editors of the journal sent it for review. From your description, there were at least two reviewers. Peer reviewers are volunteers, so editors cannot force them to submit reviews. They can invite them of course, but whether or not they actually submit a review on time isn't something that can be directly controlled. From your description, one of the reviewers hasn't submitted a review. This is perfectly normal. It's not desirable, but it's normal.
What happens next is that the editor can either look at the review(s) that were submitted and make a decision, or wait. Again from your description, the editor has chosen to wait. How long will the editor wait? Only she will know, but you can be confident that she won't wait longer than ~1 month. If the reviewer still hasn't submitted a review more than one month after the deadline, the odds are he will never submit one. Maybe he forgot about it, maybe he was too busy, maybe he had some serious personal issues that stopped him from reviewing, who knows? It happens often enough that editors have probably dealt with it before.
Here's what will likely happen to your paper.

The reviewer submits a review.

Everyone is happy, the editor makes a decision, and you move on.

The reviewer doesn't submit a review.

The editor could make a decision based on the reviews she's received so far. This depends on how good those reviews are. If they're convincing enough then she might decide.
If they're not convincing enough then the editor could decide to invite new reviewers. This is the nightmare scenario for you, since it'll easily add another 1+ month to the review time. There's nothing you can do about this however except for withdraw your paper to submit elsewhere (in which case you'll have to put up with another 1+ month of review time anyway).

One thing that definitely won't happen is that your paper will be reviewed "forever". Eventually the editor will stop waiting and make a decision, especially if you remind her. As for the other thing that worries you, if your paper is indeed rejected, it's not likely to take a year. So far it's been two months, which in the physical sciences is very much within the norm. Chances are you'll receive a decision in another month.
As for what to do: do nothing and wait. You cannot rush the reviewers (you don't know who they are anyway) and you cannot rush the editors (it's their journal, things are only ever published when the editors are satisfied). If it goes another month+ without word from the editors, then you can send them a reminder, but otherwise just keep waiting.
If you are really concerned, don't take my word for it. Speak to your supervisor. Ask him how long it takes in his experience to publish in your field, or how long is a reasonable time to wait before worrying. If your supervisor isn't worried, you shouldn't be worried either.

Thank Allure for your useful and constructive comments, you also is the one who gives me a lot of useful advice when I published another question last two months. I got another question, is it means that i can send another gently and a polite reminder to the editor on next months.


text:
I am not sure whether this is a serious typos in a published article
Just now i found few short form typos in my published articles few years ago.The mistakes is almost like this: If I declare my first sentences Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) is one of the most important topics in high energy physics, but i state in same paragraph in second sentences and i type the short form QDC (wrongly) is a is the theory of the strong interaction between quarks and gluons......, i wonder is it consider serious typo? Thank you.

Which typos are theirs and which are yours?

Please structure your post more clearly. Mark the quoted sentences and check the others for typos/grammar.

Is this your article or one from someone else?

Actually is mine one, few years ago. If the mistakes are not so serious and it is in introduction. Do I need to write an email to tell editor?

In the future you might want to practice your writing skills with well articulated questions that respect the spelling rules of the English language. Just a thought...

If readers or the editor have not complained to you - they probably smiled to themselves and continued reading - likely thinking "ha, done that typo myself"...
So, unless you have been contacted don't worry.

Bro, Thank for answering my question, i don't know why still can get errors even, me , my supervisor and colleague, each gone true twice about that article.

@KohPINWAI If the errors were in the data or the formulae then someone surely would have contacted you, as it is don't worry... I had a typo in the model I was doing in class today - made me annoyed - students found it funny for 10 seconds then it was done...

Do I understand correctly that you're worried because you wrote QDC instead of QCD in one sentence?
Well, if this is the case, let me tell you clearly that no one, I mean, really, no one in their right mind would care about such a typo in a published paper, at all.

A student unfamiliar with the field would! I've seen plenty of typos and poorly-constructed sentences where an expert grasps what is meant instantly, while the novice is completely confused.

yes, this is the case, thank for answering my question.

@Allure A student unfamiliar with the field could, not would.But in such a case, the advisor can guide the confused student.

Relax, you wouldn't be the first to make that typo. Here's an example of a paper where that typo is made already in the first line of the abstract.
Unless you've defined both QCD and QDC abbreviations for closely related concepts, writing one instead of the other wouldn't be confusing for your readers. In general, clear typos do not pose any real issues. It's the subtle ones that change meanings or introduce errors that can be problematic.

i see, thank for the examples that provided.

It says more about the proofreaders than you: if I see a typo in a published paper that's who I normally think of. Typographical errors in drafts can be exceptionally common, in final versions, a lot less so, and in submissions ideally non-existent. It is one of the proofreaders' jobs to make sure they don't exist at all and to make the paper as good as it can be to represent the journal and its cause.


text:
As an undergraduate, should I graduate 1.5 to 2 years early with little research experience or 1 year early with a decent amount of research?
So I am an undergraduate student in my third semester and I am mostly done with my double major in Pure and Applied Mathematics/Statistics. I will be done with the requirements for my bachelors by my fifth semester at the latest.
If I want to go for a PhD in Pure Math, would I be better off graduating after my 5th semester or pushing some classes back, taking graduate level classes and seminars in my 6th semester and doing an undergraduate thesis? I have some research done and will be doing more next semester, but that is nowhere near what I would do for the honors thesis.
Alternatively, I could go all out next semester and graduate then. However this would leave me very little time to study for the subject GRE (I am good with the general GRE) and to actually apply for schools due to how busy I will be.
I tried to make this a good question by including as much information as I thought was relevant, but if there are any questions or anything I forgot to mention then please let me know.
Does anyone have advice?

I marked one duplicate, but if you check out the Related questions on the right you will find several existing questions that are similar to yours. I think answering beyond that is more of a matter of opinion or too tailored to your circumstances to be a good question for the SE format.

@BryanKrause that is an interesting post, thank you. I believe that the difference for me is that student loans are not the motivating factor for why I would like to graduate early. I go to a state school and I actually get paid to go here because of scholarships. My main concern is instead that there is a limit on how many graduate level classes an undergrad can take. I believe I will be capped at 2 classes. So even if I graduated a year early, I would have  no more graduate level classes to take unless I started a masters.

The only person who can tell you about the number of graduate level courses you can take is your own school. You might inquire about exceptions to the rule, ways around the rule, etc.

If I was reviewing your application and you had graduated in 5 semesters, I would immediately question the rigor of your program. A program that allows you to graduate that quickly would be a major worry for me.

@Dawn there are no exceptions to that rule unfortunately. I know the graduate director at my school and have taken a class with him, but he said there is no chance of that happening.

@Vladhagen do you mean in regards to the difficulty of the classes or the amount of classes required?
For the required classes, I would have taken the following:
Logic, Language and Proof, Calculus 1, Calculus 2, Multivariable Calculus with Linear Algebra, Differential Equations with Linear Algebra, Applied Linear Algebra, Advanced Linear Algebra, Applied Algebra, Abstract Algebra, Introduction to Real Analysis, Real Analysis, Analysis in Several Dimensions, and Topology and Geometry.
I also took some other Applied Math classes (Graph Theory, Stats, etc.) but those are less relevant.

Regarding the university, it is also an R1 university. Though I am not sure how relevant that would be to the rigor of the undergraduate major.

@MohammedShahid It would seem that many of those classes would build on one another. Calc 1 must proceed Calc 2 which must proceed DiffEQ and all three real analysis courses (in order). This is why I wonder how much you actually retained from these classes. If I was reviewing your application, I would be very incredulous that you actually learned in these classes.

@MohammedShahid I am also a bit surprised that an R1 university actually allowed you to take 4-5 math classes a semester, especially when they seem to build on one another.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

At most two graduate classes total (which seems utterly preposterous) or at most two graduate classes per semester (which seems completely reasonable, even for graduate students)?

Some things I would immediately question if I received an applicant who was in your situation:

Getting into graduate school is a different beast than succeeding in graduate school. As someone tasked with reviewing your application, one of the things I need to consider is how successful a candidate will be in completing a degree. I need to assess mathematical maturity as part of that assessment. I would question if a student who took as many math classes as possible, as fast as possible, really has the academic maturity to succeed in a graduate program. Graduate school is much more than just burning through classes as fast as possible. We have had a few "younglings" who have tried to do our graduate program and they invariably lacked the maturity to succeed as a graduate student. We have stopped being so impressed by students who are fast graduates. (And have actually begun avoiding them admittedly).
How did you manage to take 4-5 math classes a semester while also fulfilling general education requirements? In the US, most schools require 120 credits to graduate (with each math class being ~3 credits). If you did this in 5 semesters, you really took 20 credits a semester while at the same time fulfilling all prerequisites? Someone who took all three linear algebra classes in one semester likely did not really retain what they need to (and possibly circumvented some registration policies).
If you have a gap year between your graduate degree and your undergrad, what were you doing during the gap year?
Can someone who graduated 2 years early really establish a relationship with letter of recommendation authors?

Could you elaborate on what you mean by mathematical maturity?
I made a comment in the chat explaining how I managed to take these classes.There was no overlap like you suggest with taking 3 linear algebra classes at once.
In regards to what you mentioned regarding the general education requirements, I came in with 30 credits from AP exams which fulfilled most of them.
What is the gap year you are referring to?

Regarding the letter of recommendation, I agree that might be an issue. I have somewhat of a relationship with the graduate director and I believe he would be willing to right a letter of recommendation, but I do not know if it would be as valuable since I have not done much research under him.
However, I have done a bit of research under a postdoc here and I think he could write a sufficient letter of recommendation.
Regardless, I agree that this would be greatly improved if I stayed longer and did the seminar classes and honors thesis that I mentioned.


text:
Unofficially switched PhD supervisor to one at a different institution. Can I get this officially acknowledged?
My PhD (I have 1 year left in it) started out at institution A with supervisor A. For reasons not worth going into, I am now, in most practical senses, being supervised by supervisor B at institution B. It is the case, for example, that supervisor A asked if supervisor B could be the external examiner of my thesis, but supervisor B declined because they felt they were "much too close to the project".
I once asked to move my PhD entirely to institution B, but was told my funding was attached to institution A. This wasn't the end of the world; the arrangement we have is working pretty okish, and there's nothing acrimonious going on. So I am fine not changing anything practically
However: institution B is, frankly, much more prestigious than institution A. When I finish my PhD I'd like to be able to put institution B on my CV. I am thinking of doing some private tutoring after I get my PhD and the difference could genuinely be an extra 10% of my pay.
Can I get something official associating my PhD with institution B?

Frankly, the "prestige" of an institution has very little to do with what happens after the PhD - your work and contacts made by you or through your advisors counts way more over the next few years, and by then nobody will really care at all.

I partly echo @JonCuster but would point out that a good reference letter from the person in Instution B, especially if they themselves have some prestige, would do a lot to offset the perceived "lack of prestige" of Institution A.

I'm aware that prestige is rather overestimated, but again we are talking about me doing science tutoring, which involves parents looking at your cv

On your CV in the education section after your degree you can list your thesis topic and supervisor, where you name their institution.

This really depend's on School B's policies...at the schools I'm familiar with, the answer would be an emphatic no, though...there is usually a policy requiring students to earn a certain number of credits at the institution in question.

That is a question that only institution B can answer, but I doubt that they would be agreeable due to your formal link to A.
What you might be able to achieve is to have supervisor B included in some more or less official way in your process, though, as you say, he/she already declined.
So, supervisor B doesn't want to be your examiner, but perhaps, subject to supervisor A's sense of things, B could be a co-advisor and also sign your dissertation, giving titles and institution. A may even find it advantageous to have an association with B.
But that is largely a personality issue. I doubt that either institution would object.

If as I suspect the OP is in the UK, this may be hard to push through for bureaucratic reasons. (I am the UK equivalent of "Grad Chair for Math" in my department so part of my job involves reading these regulations, whatever my own views on them)

So, you got place and funding from Uni A, and you want a place and funding at more prestigious Uni B. A straightforward approach would be:

withdraw from a program at A
apply to a program and funding at B
secure a place and funding at B
complete your program at place B and defend your theses

However, your question seem to ask for a strategy which allows you to pass competitive stages at Uni A (presumably, less competitive) and secure the benefits of Uni B (more prestigious). It looks  a bit like you want to have your cake and eat it, too?

I've clarified the question a bit now. I have no interest in leaving or entering anywhere, that would be very drastic, this question is purely about how to get institution B on my CV


text:
COVID-19 impact on university tuition fee
If US universities switch to online education during the Coronavirus crisis, what will the impact it will have on tuition fees?

Ask your university, won’t be the same for all.

There will probably (just a guess) be no impact unless it goes on long enough that there is a general permanent restructuring of education nationwide. That seems unlikely.


text:
How to request a professor to let you into their class
For various valid reasons, I was not able to sign up for a certain math course that I need. The professor is amazing, and I really hope to get into her class. I went to her class every day for a week, and hoped to continue doing so until the last day to add, which is two weeks after the term starts. However, she had far too many students sitting in until Thursday of the first week, so she asked people who weren't enrolled to stop coming, otherwise there wouldn't be enough physical seats for the people who actually enrolled in the course. As a plus she is such a sweet lady, and I was hoping to take math in an unintimidating environment, so that I can actually learn (I've had many horrible experiences). I emailed her multiple times, and told her my situation of why I couldn't enroll on time, and simply requested if I could continue coming to the class for the second week, and I would sit in the back of the room, just in case someone happens to drop the class. She kindly denied my requests, but I genuinely want to be in her class. Not to mention, all the other math classes are also waitlisted, so I won't be able to get into other professors' classes either. I even took the quiz for her class on Friday, and got 20/20. I studied hard, so that she can see that I am serious about her course. I showed up on time/early every day. I am so disappointed, 1) because I need this course to graduate on time, since it's in a sequence of math courses 2) because this teacher was so genuinely great! I've never had such an amazing learning experience in a math class, and this was just in 4 days! She even stopped replying to my emails, which I understand because she is busy.
Is there anything else I can do? I just want to sit in until next week to see if someone drops. The cap is 40 students, and she let in 43. Please help me out. Sorry for the long message.
*By the way, only two extra students including me showed up to the class on Friday, and took the quiz. All the other students who wanted to get in didn't show up.

Wouldn't letting you in now be a bit unfair to the students who complied with her request to stop coming if not enrolled?

Yeah, that's true but she told them to stop coming after we took the quiz on Friday. They stopped after Thursday itself, and didn't end up taking the quiz. I think they didn't want to study for a class that they didn't think they would get into anyways

Should persistence count for something? I asked her in the summer almost a month and a half before school started, and have been asking her if she has any updates on the class situation

This question seems to have lost a lot of detail, given that the answers existing before the edit refer to actions / events that no longer appear. Clearly, a lack of action on your part has put you in this situation, now you have to deal with the consequences.

The answer is in your question. 'For various valid reasons,' you were not allowed to take that course. I think we can answer your question better if you state specifically what those reasons are.

Hi Lizzie, why did you remove essential information from your answer? As you can see your last edit is very confusing, e.g. @Zeb 's comment

@Lizzie "Should persistence count for something?" - Yes, it will count towards the prof thinking you are being a pain in the ****. It's unlikely to count for anything else. (And if you are a big enough pain, your prof will probably tell her colleagues, to warn them about the way you behave ...)

Please ignore all the useless and aggressive messages. I can't even begin fathoming a university where the student cannot take all the courses that she must take! Try to see her in person and explain the situation as briefly and succinctly as possible.

If you truly must take this math class this term in order to graduate on time and all of the sections are full, go and talk to your academic advisor. Whether or not they can help you with the current situation, they should be able to help you figure out how to fit in the sequence. And if nothing else, you will have a formal record of your efforts (this would help at my institution if you someday needed to petition the registrar for some kind of waiver).

What were the "various valid reasons"?

Wow, I didn't realize some people here would be so harsh :( Anyways, I have serious medical condition (I don't feel like it's necessary to discuss) and I didn't know that I would be coming back to school this year, because of the unpredictability and severity of my illness. My condition has stabilized, although I will have a surgery early next year. Anyways, I wasn't able to sign up on time, because I didn't even know that I would be going to school again. This is a big step for me, and I didn't know that finding classes would be such a massive problem.

@lizzie Please add that to the question. Medical reasons are certainly legit, people ask because we never know what people think of as "valid." that said, I'm not sure "I decided to go back to the school after the deadline" will get as much help from the institution as something like "my account was closed down mistakenly"

Lizzie, After reading the details which I asked you to add earlier, I can only come up to this solution: Go and talk to her in person. Being a teacher myself, I find it difficult to ignore the requests of an 'eager learner'. Which in your case is "you". Tell her how important it is for you to take that course and specifically from her and how you have performed in your first quiz. Ask her very politely if it is possible for her to allow you in that course (Politeness matters A LOT) and that you will continue to work harder. Try this and I hope it'll work. Good luck :)

This should be the selected answer. I'm very sorry to read unproductive and unjustified criticism in other answers. It clearly serves only to vent out the answerers' feelings, I'm sorry to say. Yes, go speak to her in person.

@Helen, while I agree in general that an in-person appeal is best, I think it is likely too late for that. It might even make the situation worse as the prof may be overloaded. Had this been done in the first days of the course, it might have had a positive effect.

@Buffy It's possible, but unfortunately I can't see the situation getting worse than it is now.

Thank you Helen. Unfortunately, I have already tried that. I was very polite and was very genuine in conveying what my situation was. I don't think there's anything that can be done now unfortunately :( She seems to be a new professor, so she's not too flexible with her class. I guess I will have to graduate late. My guidance counselors are saying they can't do anything to help me in this situation, since she went over the class cap already

At this point, for this term, I think you are entirely out of options. Pretty much anything you do to squeeze in will only make things worse. You should, of course, have acted in a timely manner.
However, you might be able to get credit for the course in a future term through an "independent study" option, either from this professor or another. You might also ask whether you can get credit for the course by passing one or more examinations in the future. Since you need the course for graduation and if it isn't being offered in a timely manner, the department head will have an incentive to make something like this work for you.
But for now, if you are being perceived as a pest, stop doing that.
However, you might be able to learn quite a bit of the material if you have a friend in the course who would give you access to her/his notes and answer a few questions you might have. You could go a long way toward learning the material without "bothering" the prof.

Depending on the institution, this may be something that the professor has 0% control over. Most courses at university level have entry requirements. These typically consist of either:

pre-requisite topics (to be done before this class) e.g. Calculus 1 before Calculus 2.
post-requisite topics (if you have done A then you cannot do B) e.g. Calculus 2 then doing Calculus 1.
Other requirements (be enrolled in a specific degree, be at a specific campus, have it listed as an approved option topic, etc..)

Before continuously going after the teacher of the course perhaps you should consult with the administrative staff to ensure you meet the requirements. If nothing else they will ne able to assist you, maybe set you up with an alternative class or ensure you meet the requirements for the next offering.
If the professor was to bend the rules for one student, then they would need to bend the rules for everyone. As aggravating and annoying as the rules can be they always exist for a reason. Be it degree accreditation, making sure students are well equipped to take a class, they always exist for a reason.


text:
Sending a math paper to a journal and to experts
I have written a math paper myself, and wonder whether I have errors or not
(I have not found ones, but maybe there are).
Now I wish to send it to a math journal, and simultaneously send it to several experts in the field / previous mentors or colleagues,
since the process of refereeing may take a few months and I am curious now if my paper is correct or not (hopefully, the experts / mentors could inform me about an error in a few hours or days, at most).
Is it okay to send it both to a journal and experts / mentors?
Edit: Thank you very much for your answers/comments! I marked each as useful, but could not decide which I like best.

I would send the paper to your mentors first. Their feedback will increase the chances of getting your work published.

@RichardErickson, thank you. (The subject of my paper is not exactly what they research now, though they have friends that research that area).

Pick the most appropriate of your mentors, write to ask if they are willing to look it over for you. Don't send it to "experts" you don't know, and don't send it to lots of people at once.
Wait until you hear back to submit to a journal.

You can do either, but don't do both simultaneously, and follow the advice of Ethan Bolker.
If you need to send it to people you don't know, get a mentor/advisor/professor to ask on your behalf. A cold email will be ignored. And if you include a paper it might be deleted without opening it. But a mail from a colleague is harder to ignore and likely to be trusted.
Note that sending it to a journal is, in effect, sending it to a panel of experts - the reviewers.

Thank you, too. I see all three advices are quite similar, with some elaboration / emphasis on one thing or another.

This is probably OK. Journals generally have policies against dual submission (example policy from Wiley), but are also generally OK - even happy to encourage - the author sharing preprints.
The only caveat is if the mentors/experts find a fatal flaw in your manuscript, you will probably have to withdraw it from the journal.

If you are confident in the work, writing, and meaning of the results, but just looking for someone to double check math, I would submit to the journal at the same time as asking colleagues (but perhaps not people you don't know).
The reasoning is, I consider these situations:

its possible/likely there are no problems, and you just wait for a month (or more) to have a colleague say this.
you do have a mistake but its not substantial and reviewers end up missing it. while they were reviewing you end up having someone take a look that finds it and you can fix before publication
you do have a big mistake and reviewers end up missing it. you have enough time to withdraw
reviewers end up finding the same mistake, and you had been working on correcting it, so when you have to revise you have already tackled a lot of the work
if there are 3 reviewers, its possible/probable that they don't give the same feedback or requested changes, so adding a "4th reviewer" as in a colleague you know is not much different from getting different feedback and having to balance what to fix/correct

The OP clearly has some doubts. Even without them, a second pair of eyes before possibly wasting reviewers time (bullet points 2, 3 and 4) is better professional behavior.

@EthanBolker I think it heavily depends on what the doubts are, which was what the first sentence was trying to address.  I don't think many people submit a paper and then  completely ignore that paper and topic while waiting for reviews. Perhaps I consider this point more like putting a preprint online at the same time as sending to a journal.  People can still comment on it, perhaps they find errors, perhaps not, but I haven't heard arxiv and researchgate preprints etc. as a means to 'waste reviewers time'.

Reading a paper and looking for subtle errors take considerably time.
It is hard to convince people to read your paper, even though they might be your coworkers. Convincing a stranger is even harder.
You might consider implementing parts of the paper, and checking statements by computer (depends on your field how difficult this is). This might be more value gained from time spent.


text:
Interview for lecturer in UK but no grants, how do I compete?
I have a Skype interview for a highly competivite lecturer position at a UK university (100 applicants).
I don't have large sums of money from external grants nor a fellowship but plenty of other things going for me. The question I have is: how can I up sell not having any grants or fellowships to compete with those applicants who do?
I should add that its in the intersection between engineering and physical sciences and healthcare.

Do you have a concrete plan for how you will acquire grants ASAP?

Thanks Dawn. I have a 5 year road map of what fellowships (including alternatives) I will apply for once in the position. My slight worry is that they may say its wishful thinking

I can not see the upside of not having grants or fellowships.  I am afraid in that respect you just are not competitive.  If you can come up with an upside then frankly your talents are misused.  You would be better suited to sales or politics.

If they want you to seek funding then you have to show potential for getting it. A track record is one way but not the only way. What about ties to industry?

Yes, I've worked with a big consultancy firm as part of my PhD and now do consultancy for them in the form of teaching at another institution. I've had interest from a space agency  and currently work with a national a healthcare organisation. A couple of things in the pipeline including impact acceleration funding.

Just a few ideas:
First, obviously you should emphasize the strengths in your profile during the interview, so don't insist too much on this point since it's a bit of a weakness in your case.
Nevertheless you should at least show that you are aware that it's something that you'll be expected to do should you get the job. Ideally you should have a plan with some specifics: know and mention the main potential sources of funding in your domain, possibly a specific call or two for which you can say that you will apply. If possible/relevant, mention any organization or people in your network who could be potential partners, especially if they already have a good track record in getting grants, and say that you will collaborate with them to obtain funding.

Thanks Erwan, I think this is in line with what I had in mind. Do you think, having a fellowship automatically trumps other types of experience (e.g. Teaching or industrial collaboration?). Or not necessarily?

@HCAI no, it's unlikely that a fellowship would be a strict requirement. as far as I know hiring committees always look at the whole picture, they take into account the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates for the specific job. Usually it's more important to have arguments about how well you match the job profile, how you can integrate in the group/institution, this kind of thing.


text:
Will low grades for a minor on my trascript affect my chances of getting into grad school?
So, I started out as an Information Technology major and now decided to pursue Psychology. I wanted to also pursue a minor in Computer Science instead because I am 1 class away from a minor. I am undecided what exactly I want to do after I graduate, but I do know I want to go to some sort of graduate school. So far, most of my grades have been at least a "C", most of them being A's. This semester I am taking 3 computer science classes and a calculus class. I have been struggling this semester and I don't count on having high grades (I realized I am not as interested in this field and have trouble understanding the subject matter). I think a few of my grades will end up being D's, but my GPA should still be over a 3.0. Once I start my psychology classes, I think I can bring my GPA back up.
So, I was wondering if graduate schools would worry about the low grades I may receive this semester even though they are not included in my psychology major. I also do not plan on retaking any classes.

Welcome. Just want to give you a heads up that questions like this may be voted to close due to being mostly opinion based. There are just basically too many variables for us to foretell your chance. Generally no magic there, A > B > C > D >>>> F. Subjects that are closer to the grad school program's have higher weight. Try your best not to get a series of Ds this round, and end your final semester in a high note.

I understand, but I don't think it is possible at this point... that's why I am asking.

@mty, fields and institutes matter, but GPA > 3 should at least prevent automatically being screened out. There are other ways to compensate a relatively weak GPA. Work, internship, research experience, other exams like GRE etc. Keep this goal, and the sooner you figure out what field you'd go into, the better as you can start getting relevant resume items to strengthen your portfolio.

If I understand you correctly, you have been doing rather poorly in your current major but will change to another where you expect to do better. Assuming that you do, in fact, do very well in psychology and all of your later grades are better than your earlier ones, you may be ok. You can explain that you were ill suited to your first choice of study and changed, and now you are doing fine.
That would be a winning position for some, but not all, institutions, but you have what you have in your background. Make the most of your future, of course, and work harder, if necessary, to be a success.
Short story: Not a great position, but not necessarily a losing one. Make the future count as you can't change the past.


text:
Academic position in the UK, do universities in the UK pay for dependent tuition?
I'm an assistant professor in the US and I would like to move to the UK. My daughter will be starting college this September and I was wondering if universities in the UK offer any tuition waivers if my daughter enrolls in the same university? and which universities in the UK would offer something like this.
Update: it's worth mentioning that my daughter and I are US citizens. we don't hold any UK or EU citizenships.

I have never heard of this practice in the UK and I very much doubt that any UK university would do this -- it risks accusations of corruption. In the UK, tuition fees are paid directly to the university by the government (via the government-owned Student Loans Company), meaning that the student never handles the money themselves. For these reasons, I think it would be extremely difficult, or in fact impossible, to negotiate such a fee waiver.

Like @astronat I have never heard of this happening in the UK. It is not offered at my current institution as far as I am aware, I did look.

The obvious place to look would be the handful of private universities, but I'm not finding anything relevant on their websites.

@astronat as an international student, I don't think they would qualify for loans.

I am an American and was an assistant professor in a UK university. They laughed at me in the polite British way for being a stupid Yank when I asked about benefits like this. With the single pay spine and the craziness of British tax law, they wouldn't even know how to do it in a formal way.
If your daughter attended your school (department in US speak), they could probably work with you to wave the international fees and only charge you home fees (9k a year), but with Brexit looming, you cannot really count on any future promises (or even a guarantee that she would legally be allowed to attend a university).

Good summary. Welcome in Britain.

The school would not have any discretion on the fees charged. The fees are set by national regulations (see here for England). The university must have proof that these regulations are met in case of a government audit. As you know immigration is a sensitive topic here at the minute, so I don't think a university would take a risk on this for a student who almost certainly doesn't meet home requirements. Of course a private institution could charge whatever they want.

@mg4w there are of course scholarships and other pots of money that can be misdirected.

@StrongBad, yes,  but that isn't changing the fee status of a student (which is a legal matter). At any rate I think this sort of thing would be a very hard sell to the other faculty as they would surely want the same for their dependants. So unless it is offered to all I don't think it would happen.


text:
Can I apply for an NSF grant to create a new course, and how to create a budget for it?
I just started a tenure-track assistant professor position at a historically black university (School of Architecture). I would like to create a new course from scratch, the course is offered at many similar schools but not in my school. To be able to teach this course, I need to obtain some equipment/hardware that is valued at $15000.
Can I apply for an NSF grant for the purpose of creating this course? I saw some grants that are dedicated to improving STEM education in HBCU, will my course fit within these grants considering that my course is related to building science? And what other budget items (besides equipment) I have to consider, i.e. my salary, a TA salary,.....? I'm currently finishing my PhD and never applied for a grant before, so any input would be much appreciated!

https://www.nsf.gov/funding/index.jsp

You should reach out to your PhD advisor, department, and office of research. Surely one of them has experience with NSF grants for this type of thing. You'll have to find the relevant NSF program, which isn't always trivial. You'll probably also want help with writing it, since it is a big endeavor in itself!

If you think this question is on topic please mark the question up. Some people just marked off topic, this brings down my reputation which will ultimately lead to banning me from posting further questions.

Another possible funding source is the US Department of Education.  Something like this could easily be part of a grant funded by the HBCU program at ED, but such grants are typically much larger (hundreds of thousands of dollars per year) Chances are that the institution is regularly submitting those larger proposals to ED, and you could probably get a project like this included in such a proposal.

In general, NSF EHR would typically not fund something like this- rather they want to fund research in STEM education that produces fundamental knowledge about teaching and learning and that has a broader impact on teaching practice at other institutions.

I'm re-opening, as (1) the question was edited with clarifying comments, and (2) I really fail to see why this was closed in the first place. As currently phrased, it's asking for advice about grants, not for a specific grant.