text:
How to handle sexist questions toward a faculty job candidate by other undergraduates?
I am an undergraduate in the U.S., and my university is currently interviewing for an open faculty position. The department arranges lunches with the job candidates and current undergraduate students, where we can ask the candidate questions and get to know them. Students fill out an evaluation of the candidate following the lunch (which is in theory taken into consideration for the hiring decision). However, the atmosphere of this meeting itself is quite informal and conversational.
Two of the candidates are currently expecting a baby. The male candidate said on their own that he was expecting a baby. One fellow undergraduate specifically asked the female candidate (in front of 20 other undergrads) if she would be able to balance a new baby and the job at the same time. However, she did not bring this up with the male candidate, who is also expecting a baby. We met with the male candidate first.
As a fellow undergraduate, how could I respectfully address this?

how could I respectfully address this? — This question is unclear. What is it, specifcally, that you are seeking to address, and with whom?

@MadJack As confirmed by many of the responses, this behavior was clearly inappropriate. However, I am unsure whether it needs to be addressed, and if so, with whom (i.e., the department chair, the student, etc?)

The behavior was discriminatory rather than sexist. They asked the female candidate not because she was a woman per se, but because it's (much) more common for women to take extended maternity leave than men. Hence, asking the female candidate but not the male one was discriminatory.

What does 'address' mean? You want to privately give feedback to the interviewer? complain about them to someone else? suggest the dept/university should promulgate more awareness in unconscious bias leading to such questions? give guidance about how to ask about candidates intending to take leave or career breaks? incorporate that into (university?/dept?) interview training? some or all of the above? Your question is unclear, please edit it.

There are two issues at play here depending on if you are formally part of the hiring process.
If you are formally part of the hiring processing asking questions about the family life of a job candidate, man or woman, is treading on thin ice. Even if the information is not meant to be discriminatory (e.g., as a search chair you might want to be helpful and look into spaces in the university nursery), it is just a topic you do not bring up. As a formal part of the search committee, it is reasonable to mention to the person who asked the question that family life is a topic to avoid. You may also want to mention it to the search chair so they can be prepared for any claims of discrimination.
If you are not formally part of the hiring process (e.g., potential faculty tend to like to meet students), the issue is difficult. It is perfectly reasonable, and non-sexist, for a female student to ask a female applicant about work life balance. It is a topic that a female student might have questions and concerns about for themselves going forward. Of course it could be a sexist remark to intentionally sabotage the candidate. Note that any combination of student and applicant sex could be non sexist (a male student may want to understand how their potential wife might would handle the work-life balance and a female student might want to know about how a husband would handle it). Given that, I would not raise it with the student that the question was sexist. Rather, I would point out that while the point of meeting with the candidates is to give undergraduate students exposure, that the students should be welcoming to the applicants and try and put their best foot forward. Asking about touchy subjects is not in the best interest of the department.

+1, but I have one little addition: It is easy for a student, or even a faculty member, to unwittingly find themselves in the role of an extra at an "extended interview" and not being told about it until afterwards (if at all). I have asked speakers at talks some tricky questions and only later realized that these were job talks; I am wondering whether they ended up regarding me as someone's pawn / attack dog... So, do point the problem out to the student, but do not presume without good reasons that the student was being sexist or deliberately attacking the interviewee.

"is treading on thin ice" - I'm pretty sure that in certain locations it's outright illegal, actually.

@DVK: It's hard to say here because the student isn't exactly an employee or agent of the university.

@NateEldredge - "If you are formally part of the hiring processing" is the paragraph heading. IANAL, but I don't think someone not being employee would matter in a lawsuit if it's a part of a formal process.

@NateEldredge - http://law.stackexchange.com/questions/15741/does-not-being-an-employee-exempt-from-legal-responsibility-for-asking-candidate

Why is it reasonable "for a female student" to ask that, but not for a male student?

@Josef  did you read the whole answer. I go on to say a male student may want to know how their wife would handle it.

@DVK: My understanding was that asking about it isn't illegal per se; discriminating based on it is. Though when lawsuit time comes, it seems like it'd be hard to argue you didn't discriminate if you asked and then you rejected the candidate. IANAL though.

@NateEldredge I think the relevant part is "students fill out an evaluation of the candidate following the lunch (which is in theory taken into consideration for the hiring decision)."  How would you prove that the prohibited information did not color the students' evaluation?

@emory Technically you never can since humans are inherently biased. The only way to remove bias from the process is to preform double blind interviews like orchestras do. This is rarely practical or even possible depending upon the job. Someone saying something overtly biased can actually be a good thing since you can remove them and their feedback from the decision making process.

Assuming that the undergraduate falls within the typical range of undergraduates in the United States (i.e. 18 to 25) they may not have enough interviewing experience to know what is and is not an acceptable question. In the United States it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of gender and gendered questions are to be avoided as a result. This should be pointed out to the undergraduate in a manner that assumes good faith since they might simply not know any better. It may be helpful to provide undergraduates with examples of good - gender neutral, not overly personal or invasive, on-topic - examples of questions before the interview.
Also, it should be noted that even in professional environments, people that are new at interviewing make a lot of mistakes in terms of questions about legally protected categories. You may also want to recommend some sort of quick training session to people that are involved in searches. These sessions do not necessarily need to be that long, and even people that have been interviewing for years can always benefit from a refresher given by HR on what may and may not be legal or sensitive areas.
The best way to address it would be at the department level with undergraduates getting some sort of training before they are part of an interview panel. Calling out one person is a reactive response, while providing training to an entire group is a proactive response. In the long term proactive responses generally avoid problems all together were as they never quite go away with reactive responses.

I would stay away from the sexism angle, since the evidence we have for sexism here seems pretty tenuous to me -- the student whose behavior offended you could plausibly argue that she forgot to ask the male candidate the same question or that the question occurred to her only after the first interview, and quite likely there were many other questions on different topics that she asked one candidate and not the other, and that's hardly proof of any malice or discriminatory beliefs.
Despite this, I think the question your fellow student asked was inadvisable regardless of the candidate's gender. Simply, having children is such a common and universal part of human experience that it would be absurd for a faculty position to carry the premise that only people without young children are qualified for the job. If I were interviewing for a position like that, I would be seriously alarmed about any hint gathered during my interviewing experience that my job will be so difficult that I cannot do it effectively and be a parent (or have other extracurricular activities I like to spend a comparable amount of time on) at the same time.
As for what you should do, if you feel comfortable discussing it with the other student in a friendly and casual way, I see nothing wrong with mentioning the concern I outlined above, but try not to be patronizing -- the goal should be to help her understand the issue rather than to reprimand her for her behavior. And as I said, do not mention sexism unless there is much more blatant evidence that that was a factor.
Another option would be to inform your department chair or other faculty member overseeing the interviewing process about your concern that some of the undergrads participating in the interview are asking questions that have the potential to sabotage the success of the recruitment. But honestly, I doubt they will be surprised to hear this rather obvious fact, and I don't think they would necessarily view it as a major concern. The candidate probably realizes that undergrads are less experienced and professional in their attitudes and that this is likely to translate to them saying some awkward or embarrassing things during the interview, and will probably just shrug it off. (In fact, believe it or not, much older senior faculty members also sometimes say foolish things in interviews. And yes, that includes me -- saying stupid things is just a part of being human, and is likely to happen occasionally however professional one makes an effort to be.)

"Simply, having children is such a common and universal part of human experience" -- beautiful.  Such a shame to have this lovely sentence marred by the "tenuous" paragraph.  Consider this analogy: "But Officer, I didn't see the 'No U Turn' sign."  Judges aren't looking for malice or discriminatory beliefs.  They judge behavior, actions and effects.

@aparente001 if you see clear sexism here, feel free to call it out. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone etc. Since I cannot claim to be without sin (of having asked something foolish of a job candidate, or having said something sexist ever in my life for that matter) I don't see fit to make such a judgment call here. Anyway, glad you liked a part of my answer.

Dan, the sexist behavior was on the part of the undergraduate questioner.  Sorry I wasn't clear.

@aparente001 yes, it was clear to me that that's what you meant. I still think the evidence for sexism is tenuous (which does not mean that sexism wasn't involved, but simply that I think it's a bad idea to start throwing around accusations of it or make it the basis for further action). But it's fine if you disagree.

I think our difficulty lies in sexism meaning two different things.  I think you are focusing on the intent, and I'm focusing on the observable, effective discrimination that occurred.  I've had so much experience filing civil rights complaints on behalf of my son (on the basis of disability discrimination), and getting OCR's detailed analysis back of my allegations, that I've learned to set aside people's intentions, and focus on their actions.  Student asked baby care question of the woman but not of the man -- that's an observable, discriminatory action.  Why the student asked ...

... one candidate but not the other is irrelevant in this type of analysis. // May I also point out that having children and working in academia is beautiful and universal and accepted when you are a man, but not so well accepted when you are a woman.

@aparente001 ok, I see where you're coming from. Well, if having children is not accepted for a woman in academia then it should be accepted, which is precisely why I said questions about how to handle having children and a faculty position are inappropriate - both of a man and of a woman. Again, I personally prefer not to focus on the sexism aspect in this particular instance. But that's just my humble opinion, and I'll freely admit that other opinions are completely legitimate and may be equally or more valid.

@DanRomik I would agree with aparente001. While I do not believe the student had any intention of being sexist, the resulting action was sexist. Further, the female candidate was clearly made uncomfortable by this question and responded somewhat dismissively. The students ended up evaluating her as cold and unlikable, and I have to wonder to what extent this question contributed to that evaluation.

@KTK here's a different suggestion about what moral we can learn from this story, again without using simplistic (IMO) labels such as sexism: regrettably, it appears that it is simply a bad idea to involve undergraduates in a process as fraught with sensitive legal and psychological issues as a faculty job recruitment. One way or another, some inexperienced or immature student is going to say something foolish/racist/sexist/rude/whatever that will make the candidate uncomfortable. Again, focusing on sexism here is a mistake IMO, the issue as I see it is much broader and more general than that.

@DanRomik While I am certainly biased since I am an undergraduate myself and thoroughly enjoy being involved in the hiring process, I respectfully disagree with your statement that it is simply a bad idea to involve undergraduates. I have attended 9 such events and this is the first where such an inappropriate question has been asked. Further, it does seem that some kind of training could prevent this issue while still allowing undergrads to be involved.

@KTK thanks, it's interesting to hear the perspective of an undergrad, and in a way I am impressed with your department for being so inclusive. However, my own perspective as a department chair is different. When you are an administrator you cannot be so casual about a 1 in 9 chance (according to your stats) that something will go badly wrong during an interview, with the possibility for very serious repercussions. As I said, in this process there are already so many risk factors that are impossible to eliminate that it would be irresponsible not to eliminate at least the ones that can be. ...

... So overall my conclusion remains the same. Finally, although it's great that you enjoyed your participation, your enjoyment (and the enjoyment of anyone else who is not the candidate) is not the goal of the process and is therefore mostly irrelevant.

I am sorry for stating my opinion, but does one single statement make one sexist?  Can a statement appear sexist, but instead just be a lapse in judgment?  Why is it we automatically jump to an extreme when we hear something that may have offended us, and seek retribution, instead of possibly talking to the person who made the statement in a non-confrontational way, in order to let the person know what he or she said was offensive.  I am NOT saying Sexism does not exist, I am just saying one should not be too fast on the trigger in reporting accusations without knowing more than one viewpoint.

@NZKshatriya I certainly do not mean to suggest that the student is sexist or had any ill intent, but I do believe this was a lapse in judgement on the student's part that resulted in a sexist behavior  (asking the female candidate but not the male candidate about a baby).   A lapse in judgement and sexism are not mutually exclusive, and I believe they actually often go hand-in-hand. Finally, I don't believe anyone has actually suggested seeking retribution or being confrontational towards the student.

@DanRomik Certainly my enjoyment is not the goal of the process (I just mentioned it to acknowledge that my perspective is biased). I do recognize that these odds are not great, but I also believe the risk factor could be greatly reduced/eliminated through some sort of training with the undergrads, without eliminating the benefits conveyed by including undergrads (especially considering that my university is exclusively undergraduates with an extremely heavy focus on teaching and undergrad research, so it follows for undergrads' opinions to be considered at least somewhat).

@KTK While I agree that a lack of judgement and sexism may not be dissimilar, I do have to point out that what one person may see as sexist behavior may not be as clearly sexist behavior to another. What I see as a problem as well is that some seem to want to go to administrations and file formal complaints against individuals for comments that they perceive sexist, instead of addressing the situation on an individual basis first.

@NZKshatriya I think we are interpreting the suggestions differently. I don't believe anyone has actually suggested filing formal complaints against individuals, rather making it known to the search committee/department chair that inappropriate questions have been asked, so they may do what they wish with that information.

@KTK I know here in the USA that asking about conditions such as pregnancy or mental illness is illegal. But If both candidates are expecting a child in the near future, would it not be within the bounds of the hiring institution to try to ascertain which candidate would be the best hire, as far as being able to balance work with either fatherhood or motherhood?  There are certainly a larger number of stay at home fathers these days, hence it could turn out that the male candidate  may choose to say home, and not the female.  Or as also happens, grandparents raise the child.

While the faculty interviews I have been on have seen a good mix of questions from invited undergraduates to my job talks, this won't be the first time an undergraduate asks an inappropriate question during a faculty interview, and it won't be the last.
If you want to go on record with your disapproval, then bring it up with the search committee chair.
Hopefully, you got something else out of the visit with the candidates, so while you are giving your feedback to the chair about the candidates, you could also bring up your disapproval with your peer's comment. It is not your job to suggest improvements to the getting-undergraduates-involved-in-faculty-hiring process, so let the search chair worry about that.

Good answer.  I would soften disapproval to concern,  though.  I am assuming the student who asked the out-of-line question didn't know it was out-of-line, and the search committee does not include undergraduates for the purposes of sneaking in out-of-line questions.  Approaching it from the standpoint of “I saw this; it made me uncomfortable; I don't know if that's what you want from this process” seems like the right tone to take.  Especially since involving students is a thoughtful nod to their importance in the university.  I would think they would be open to that kind of feedback.

The question has some merit, but as your question alludes it should work both ways.   Maybe not worded exactly right but it is a valid question to see if someone has enough time to put into a challenging job given that they have X going on in their life.
I am a manager in the US and we are coached away from saying certain things and I work at such a large (ultra-PC) company that we are told not even to say very basic words (like pregnant/pregnancy).  So yes the question shouldn't have been asked like that but doesn't invalidate the need for a good response.
Where I am going with this is a manager hiring someone to do something that is a challenging position with little/no experience should try to figure out what the mentality of the person is - Where do they put their work on their lifestyle scale?

And I can go back to the biggest fail of my life was a similar
  interview.  I was right out of college and on my 4th interview at a
  huge finance company for a job people dream about.  Not knowing that
  the 4th interview (with several managers) meant I was about to be
  hired, I really didn't give the questions much thought.  The joys of
  being a clueless (interview-wise) 22 year-old.  The hiring manager
  knew I had two very young kids so there was a stress on the number of
  hours I might be working and was told 70-80 could be normal.  They
  beat this into the ground...   Well an hour into this I slipped up and
  said something to the effect, "Do you have positions that require the
  same skill but less work."
Just so there isn't a cliffhanger... didn't get the job.  Should I
  have?  No.  I would have hated working those hours with two little
  ones.  And it might have been physically impossible.  It is a funny
  story to tell about how I sabotaged myself for a job that would pay 6
  figures by year 5.  But no regrets.

So the answer to your question of what you should do?

Don't let people be sexist.  In this situation I would have said something to the person that said it.  Put him on the spot but in private.
Understand that even though phrased wrong the idea behind the question is very valid for a male or female.  If I hear that a guy is on the national rugby team and does that in his spare time, I may question his ability to travel or work long hours.  It doesn't make the question sexist.  A person going into an interview should know what to say or they should be honest.
You can certainly help a person out if a fellow interviewer asks something weird or inappropriate.  Nothing wrong with a leading question to help.

You can certainly help a person out if a fellow interviewer asks something weird or inappropriate... How specifically would you suggest doing this?

@KTK something like I am sure it is not an issue our department is great about family leave. Professor Jones just had a baby and the chair worked with her to come up with a schedule that worked for her.

@StrongBad This seems like a very good suggestion. What alternatives might exist given that I know nothing of the department's leave policies and none of the faculty had children recently?

@djechlin - no.  I am saying these are two things that could take a lot of someone's time.  It could be train collecting or whatever.  Now pregnancy is important and should be protected.  But after that men and women are on equal bearings right?  What I am getting at is - it is OK to ask a candidate if they are willing to put the hours and work into their work.  It doesn't matter the subject.

How does one "not let someone be sexist?"  Sexism is something ingrained in the person, usually by one of the parents raising them, as is Racism....

The question about the national rugby team commitment will not be considered sexist.  The question about mothering commitment will.  This is illogical, but inarguable.  I am a bad person for pointing this out.

This fellow undergraduate asked a question that would in any normal job interview be illegal to ask. And nobody would ask the question, because if that candidate wasn't hired they would now be able to sue the interviewing company and win.
Since that fellow undergraduate has probably no idea about employment law, and has probably no idea how sexist their question is, you should perfectly respectfully advice him or her that if they were involved in a job interview and asked that question they would put their company's HR into an impossible situation and would get a major telling off after the candidate has left, and if they were an HR employee and asked that question they could lose their job for incompetence.

We are not allowed to note the fact that a mother will probably require more time off due to family commitments than a father.  In some jurisdictions it is even illegal to mention the possibility.  All you have to do is remind them of this.
In fact, even MENTIONING this particular 'elephant in the room' will lay you open to criticism.  Just keep your mouth shut.  Let your collegues dig their own graves.

You realize your first sentence is one of the reasons why these policies are in place. You are judging a woman because she is a woman and not based on what the individual might be able to contribute.

Absolutely.  I am recognising that a mother may well act like a mother.  I am also recognising that it is currently forbidden to recognise this.

"act like a mother" I can't help but feel there is some inherent bias and dare I say judgment inherent in this choice of words.

Of course you can dare to say that!  There's no political correctness requirement in any discussion with me!

There is nothing for you to do.
Either

your university does not care about the law, ethics, professional standards, and human decency; or
your university is going to shred the student evaluations so they can have absolutely no impact on hiring decisions (showing the esteem the university places on student opinion).

Either way, there is nothing for you to do (except maybe transfer to a better university).
If your university esteemed student opinion; and cared about the law, ethics, professional standards, and human decency - then they would have trained the student panel and everyone on the panel would already know about this.  There would be nothing for you to do.
If your university shreds student evaluations (which I suspect they do), then they might be in technical compliance with the law.  However, there is no way for the candidate to know that.  The effect may be to discourage certain applicants from applying.

This seems like an awfully presumptive answer.  How do you know there is not a third case, like an honest mistake?  Why not infer that the department goes to the trouble of bringing students to lunch because it wants their input, and that students may not be aware of the law / ethics / professional standards involved therein?

@MatthewLeingang it is indeed possible that the department wants their input and that the students are not aware of the law.  whose fault is that? who could have done something about that but chose not to?

There is also the case that the student evaluation forms have been vetted by HR/legal and are designed to comply with the law.

@StrongBad did the students use the prohibited information to make their recommendations? did the department use the student's recommendations to make a hiring decision? In that case, the department used prohibited information to make a hiring decision.  HR/legal can not sanitize that.


text:
How do you keep track of papers during a brainstorming literature review?
I am often in charge of researching new sub-topics in my discipline for short papers. I find my default technique is:

Search Google Scholar for best-guess keywords
Open relevant-looking resulting paper, skim
Find new references in that paper, open new tabs for those papers while reading first paper
Look at new papers, find new references and key words. Open new tab for new Scholar searches
Decide those key words aren't useful after all
Make valiant attempt to figure out which of the 20 open tabs are still worth keeping open, which papers are worth adding to Zotero, which papers are worth downloading.

Clearly, I am not of a methodical mindset. I'm beginning to wonder if I took 5 sec to add each paper author-year-keyword to a small notepad app on the side of the screen before I opened the article, that might help me keep track of the mess. Or something. Does anyone have a simple workflow for this "brainstorming" phase that would work well for the non-methodically minded? I'm a Chrome/Google type rather than an Apple type, if that matters.

You could try making a mindmap. There are some software tools for that which are fairly easy to use.

If the idea is just to impinge on your consciousness ideas from a not-quite-random selection of papers, I can't imagine a quicker way to find such a selection.  If you have a different goal of categorizing, you might instead look at the dictionary of keyword lists that sometimes accompany papers.  I might come up with an actual answer if I knew more about your goals motivating this endavour.

The biggest problem is by the time I get back to an early paper, I can't remember what I hoped to learn from it. I am wishing for some sort of breadcrumb trail, or automatic "history" of what I've visited that I can make quick notes on. But more ephemeral than Zotero, because I will likely only keep 10-20% of what I find.

My workflow/suggestion would be to keep this all in Zotero. I'm a big believer in keeping the number of tools one uses relatively small and becoming very proficient at using ones favorite tools.
I use a collection  ("Inbox") dedicated to items I may or may not keep and don't have time to read right away. I will then go through those items periodically and either throw them out (remember you need to "Move to trash" or shift+delete - just pressing delete will just delete them from the collection.) or file them in the right collection and delete them from "Inbox".
To quickly remind you of why you saved the items, you could either attach Zotero notes or you could use tags, including colored tags if you can make do with only a couple of short keywords.
Finally, since you will always save items into Zotero right away, you can sort the collection by "date added," which should give you a good idea of the context in which you saved an item.
Since you're using Zotero Standalone, you'll want to use alt+tab to quickly move back and forth between Zotero and your browser.

I am a fan of Zotero but I lose the track of my research when I am having huge number of references.

I use Papers for this, because not only does it let you organize your citations, but it lets you search and import documents directly from the program, rather than having to bring them into a manager.
Basically, I create a new folder for this particular brainstorming session, everything I find that's worth skimming gets imported, and then the ones that don't pan out get deleted.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Would it be preferrable to state that I wish to return my home country in my SOP when applying to a German university?
I was born in a developing country, and I am interested in studying in Germany. I'm almost done with all the procedures, and now an additional piece I have to take care of is to write a statement of purpose. I wrote it as honestly as I could right now, that I wish to study my interested subject, pursue further research and try to make a legal living there.
However, some peers and discussions online suggest to me that I shouldn't mention at all that I have wishes to live there. I find this a bit absurd as Germany seems to be actually making a loss from education and is constantly making news about wishing to hire more "Fachkräfte".
Could someone give me a justified answer on if this would be something which is unpreferable to write or not?

Your claim that "Germany seems to be actually making a loss from education" seems very bold. In the answers to your linked question at politics.stackexchange about this topic I cannot see any evidence for this.

Preferable to whom?

Me...? @JonCuster

I can't imagine that whether you mention this in your SOP or not can make a difference regarding the decision on your application. For sure there are no official admission criteria that would take into account such remarks.

I cannot give you a justified answer, but from my gut feeling, I would phrase it differently.
Why? Although Germany has a lot of immigrants, there are (sadly) still many places where people are not eager to permanently welcome foreigners into their country. The foreigners are diluting our culture and steal our jobs trope is still strong with some people. And you never know if someone like this is sitting in the administration office and it rubs them the wrong way.
Also: What you are doing after your studies doesn't really matter for the university. I would rather write about your perceived quality of the German education system and something that rather implies a short term stay (like e.g. your plan to continue with a PhD).

Well, I mean, elsewhere in the letter I had mentioned that. I said that, there are simply much more opportunities for my interested subject and spaces than in my own country

I'm not sure I follow the second paragraph. How would somebody in the administration office who doesn't like the OP's statement of purpose be an obstacle to the OP being admitted?

I just had a discussion on an admission committee in Germany where the general sentiment was that too many foreign students don't stay after finishing their studies, i.e. migration intention would be considered a bonus. I guess this is just one of those cases where it just depends on dynamics of the committee meeting, and we have no way of knowing how that will work out in your specific case. Whatever you choose to do, its a gamble.

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


text:
Why or why not is it unethical for students to take easier courses in prospect of meeting partners?
I don't understand the reception that this question has gotten.
What I understand is, due to the dating app, there is an influx of male students in classes who become the top %, and they attract all the female students there either through the pretext of homework help, or, general peacocking of intelligence.
The issue I have is, wouldn't it be the same in any class that there are some students who excel and rise in academic hierarchy compared to others? And wouldn't these students be attractive to other academically inclined students anyways?
And ultimately, whatever happens, there is a limit to number of people who can sit in class/ a person can interact with, so shouldn't it all cancel out in the end?

If you had read that question you are referring to, the people in question do not "attract all the female students" but rather harass them and make attending classes uncomfortable for many of them.

It's unclear to me that targeted harassment is the goal of creating the app. I suppose it may rather be exposure. Clearly, if one harrases and they are caught then its very much against their best interest. There is many levels between talking to people vs harrowing @Sursula

Even if it is not necessarly the "goal/intention" to harass, it obviously is perceived as harassment. If the outcome is the same, the motive doesn't matter.

@Sursula There is no indication that it is perceived as harassment by anyone. There have been no complaints other than complaints from students they are not getting attention from seniors. Even OP explicitly mentions that there are no unwanted advances, there is no unwanted flirting, and that none of this qualifies as harassment, even though OP seems to wish it did qualify.

Almost no way of meeting prospective partners is inherently unethical. It will always depend on how you go about "meeting/attracting" the prospective partners.
The unethical aspect comes into play if the way you go about meeting new people makes them or others around them that you do not want to attract uncomfortable, objecified, treated with sexism, etc.
That is what has been happening in the case in question. Behaving like this is shitty in no matter which environment, but when you do this at a place of education (where in a worst case scenario people have even payed a lot of money to learn) and you are not only harrassing others but in doing so distract them from learning or even worse might drive them to drop the course subject altogether, you are causing even more harm.
From your profile I gather that you are a man, and it is often hard to grasp for men that unwanted attention is neither flattering nor otherwise else perceived positively or wanted by most women*.

The arguements you give hinges on "talking to a person who you met by taking a course below your knowledge"="harrasing", and "all attention by a man to given to women in such courses" = "unwanted". Your answer doesn't actually say anything, all it does is make these equalities without explanation. My question was around the lines of, "why did many people consider the equalities as so"

Also, I do not appreciate the snarky remark associating stereotypes to my gender. It was uncalled for and also unneccesary.

@TrystwithFreedom In the question you are referring to, it is not a single person talking to someone, but (semi-)organized groups, which is not the same.

@TrystwithFreedom I did not say "all men". And I do not say that lightly and out of malice but sadly due to the reality that people who ar not men* face. If you are not on the receiving end of actions targeted at a specific demography, it is often hard to grasp to what a large extend those actions impact that specific group of people and it is often hard to take criticism if you belong to the group where those actions originate from if you do not actually participate in them. Just as me, a white person, cannot fully grasp the amount of racism POC experience from white people in general.

I'm not sure there's a sexism angle to this. Women using the app to meet men would be equally unethical.

@Allure Then it would be equally sexist behaviour, just the roles reversed.

@TrystwithFreedom Young men, who, by-and-large, would love it if a group of women made a concerted effort to come and meet them, have a hard time understanding that women constantly receive male attention and don't want more of it in an environment that is not for that. It will come with age, or try talking to a woman in your life about unwanted male attention. Even by college, they will have lots to tell you.

You ask for an ethical perspective, so here is one.
Attending a university course with the sole intention to flirt with classmates is considered unethical by many people because it is an attempt to manipulate the classmates. A situation, which should occur in a learning environment, is manipulated into taking place in a dating environment, and even worse, the "flirter" is putting themselves into a position of power by using their advance in knowledge when they offer "private tutoring" to attractive students as indicated in the linked question.
Immanual Kant wrote:

So act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means.

which can be reformulated to "rational beings must always also be treated as ends themselves, requiring that their own reasoned motives must be equally respected" (Wikipedia). By manipulating a university course into a dating platform, one clearly disrespects the own reasoned motives by the other students (i.e. to study within a learning environment), and therefore this is considered unethical.

The Oxford English dictionary defines manipulate as "control or influence (a person or situation) cleverly or unscrupulously". You've got a pretty poor view of humanity if you think all attempts to interact with someone is manipulation by this definition. Nit all interaction between people have to be instrumental.

You are misusing the term "position of power" that is commonly used in other harassment scenarios. Having more knowledge about the course topic gives the flirter exactly zero power over the woman. The woman can study on her own or with other women, or ask the professor for clarifications. A boss or a landlord (or a teacher that gives grades) are in a position of power. A classmate with good grades is not.

@wimi if you read the question, which OP linked to, you will see that the students in power have offered "private tutoring" to attractive classmates, which surely is a position of power.

@Thissitehasbecomeadump. You seem to misunderstand my argument. The problem is not the interaction with other humans. As Ian wrote, you seem to have a very poor view on humanity (or you treat humans yourself in a way, that I would consider questionable at least). The situation becomes manipulative because the other students had the intention to study but are finding themselves being part of a dating platform, what they had never asked for and which is disrespecting their actual motives. Therefore, according to Kant, this is unethical.

I started this as a comment to @sursula's answer, but its too long. However, I don't want to be seen as taking away from their experience and advice.

In a situation where it is known that there are a large number of individuals in a class who are there with the express purpose of finding younger women to impress with the aim of dating, then any woman will have to treat any interaction with a man connected with that class through that lens:
What is the motivation this person talking to me? Do I need to be sending "i'm not interested" signals to them? Are they really interested us helping each other study, or do they just want an opportunity to be spend time alone with me? Do they really want to help me, or do they just want to demonstrate how clever they are? This takes mental and emotional energy away from the class. Even if they are attracted to the person in question, even having to ask the question to themselves in circumstances where that sort of thing wasn't their purpose detracts from the main purpose.
To an extent women (and all of us) have to have these things in the back of our minds on any interaction with anyone. But when it is known that a large number of individuals are their only for the purpose of dating, then hypervigilance is required.
Coming back to the point @sursula made in the comments to their post: one such interaction is not on its own a problem, but when there are repeated such interactions even if (particularly if) they come from different people each time, this can be a major problem. That is even if no individual's behaviour is harassment, the collective effect on all the individuals on the recipient amounts to harassment. They are harassed, even if no individual is harassing them.
Furthermore, the type of showboating/showing off behaviour described in the question is damaging to the learning environment. For example, there are many reasons I might want to ask the class a question. I might want to gauge the level of understanding in the class of something. For I might be encouraging a particular train of thought. I might want to enter into a conversation with a student that doesn't know the answer where we reason our way together to the answer, thus demonstrating to them, and the rest of the class, the thought processes involved. None of these cases is helped by a smart-alec too senior for the class who just knows the answer.

There may be different opinions on whether an individual taking an easy course with the purpose of impressing members of the other sex is ethical or whether it is a waste of time.
But what surely is unethical is advertising someone else's course as a place to hit on women. It's not their own course so they have no business advertising a change in its purpose. It is negative publicity and will ruin the course experience for most of the women, and convince others not to take it.  It is really surprising that the university does not do anything against it. The university is effectively endorsing the fact that some of their courses are turned into dating events.

It's unethical because it's happening at a lecture/tutorial, i.e. a place of learning. Students attend lectures/tutorials to learn, not to meet partners (although that can be a side effect). Getting suggestive comments at a lecture or tutorial is very distracting from the original goal, and because it is also unrelated to that goal, it is unwelcome.
If you use a dating app or go to your local bar to meet people, and can safely say "I got really good grades in this course", more power to you. You could reverse the above scenario - instead of meeting partners as a side effect, maybe you'll get to teach a more junior student as a side effect. But the key point remains: the people you meet this way are interested in developing the relationship. The same cannot be said for most students at a lecture/tutorial.
As for:

The issue I have is, wouldn't it be the same in any class that there are some students who excel and rise in academic hierarchy compared to others? And wouldn't these students be attractive to other academically inclined students anyways?

Yes - it's obvious who the good students are, and good students tend to flock together. But the goal of these students when they get together remains to do well in the course, not to become life partners (although that can be a side effect).

It's unethical if it is predatory. It is unethical if you become a distraction to serious students. It is unethical if you affect the "curve" lowering the grade of others, though the instructor shares the blame for that.
But beyond the ethics, it is creepy. Do you want a reputation as a creep?
And beyond that, it is suboptimal for your own education, trading grades for learning. You are not taking advantage of opportunities that might advance your career, which has some ethical concerns as well. It is an example of "Self Defeating Behavior". Someone looking at your transcript would, perhaps, wonder why you were taking such low level courses as an advanced student. How will you answer?

Of course you don't put the course on your transcript. You can use most of the lecture time to do other work, so you're not actually giving up that many alternative opportunities. And the opening hours of most bars/clubs do not overlap with lecture times. So in that sense, for the purpose of meeting women it's a highly effective use of these timeslots, certainly not self defeating. It is creepy though, and that's why it's socially more prudent to attend lectures that you can at least feign to have some interest in or benefit from.

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


text:
Pros and Cons of moving away from SO/Family for PhD
I completed my undergrad and masters at UofT (Toronto) in CS (my field is CS Theory/Online learning) and I was interested in applying elsewhere for a PhD. I am in a fortunate position to have received PhD offers from some great schools in the US (CMU and Harvard). I also have an offer to continue on at UofT.
So I'm trying to understand the pros/cons of leaving for the US. I work extremely well with my current advisor in Toronto and we have published a fair bit together at top venues. So staying here means I know I'll have good publication record going. Beyond that, my family and fiance are here in Toronto, so staying means I get to be close to them. It will be difficult for my fiance to move to the US for visa/work permit issues.
While I'm comfortable here, a part of me feels that this is a cop-out as I have been here for all my academic life, especially when I have options like CMU and Harvard (with seemingly good advisors). So I just wanted to know if staying in UofT and not going to one of these schools would close doors (my goal is to become a prof). Would a very strong research/publication record from UofT make up for the lack of collaboration/prestige/academic network that Harvard/CMU would bring? What are some things I should be thinking about in making this decision?
One way of reconciling this was noting that both these universities are pretty close to Toronto. So I was thinking that during the summer, I could work remotely out of Toronto (go to campus as needed) and obviously stay there full time during the semester. Would this be a big/unusal ask for PIs?

Graduating with a PhD from a top school would absolutely make accessible to you future career options that would be essentially inaccessible otherwise, and would make career options that would be accessible in theory, but unlikely, a lot more likely to be within your reach, compared to if you get your PhD from a very good but not exactly top university. That is true for academic jobs, and I believe (but am less able to attest from firsthand experience) that it is also true for non-academic jobs.
Some well-meaning and idealistic people will say all that matters is the quality of the work you do and not where you do it. Of course, that does matter a lot — it’s probably reasonable to say that it’s the main thing that matters — and I wish we lived in a world in which that was indeed all that mattered. In the actual world we live in, where you went to school is one of the many signals employers use to measure your potential worth and to compare you to other job candidates. Whether it’s fair or not or how things should be or not, it’s simply a fact.
Even if we assume a utopian ideal in which all that matters is the quality of the work you do, the reality is that at a top school you will be surrounded by faculty and students who are higher-achieving on average, and consequently have a higher potential to help, motivate, and incentivize you to do top quality work yourself, than their counterparts at a good (even excellent) university that is less of a top school. So even under this utopian assumption, being at a top school still has advantages.
I’m not saying the answer to your dilemma is necessarily obvious. There may be many good reasons to stay in Toronto. But from a pure career perspective there will most likely be a cost to such a decision. It’s a tough decision, good luck in any case!

This excellent answer to another question expands on some of Dan's points about how/to what extent going to a top program makes a difference: https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/154/101 (It might look at first glance like it contradicts Dan's answer, but a closer look will show the two are mostly in agreement.)

@MarkMeckes great link, thanks! There is indeed no contradiction, and I agree with everything the answer you linked to says (especially the “tl;dr” part). In fact, it echoes some additional thoughts I had while writing this answer but didn’t write since I thought that would make the answer too long and tedious.

By staying in Toronto you run the risk of getting a “degree in Professor X” rather than a degree in CS: however good your advisor is, they cannot know everything, they do things in their idiosyncratic ways etc.
Staying at the same place can work, but going elsewhere will vastly enrich your education through exposure to a different departmental culture, access to different resources, methods, courses and organizations.  The long term rewards are often multiples of the short term gains from staying with the same advisor.
Of course you don’t want to leave and take a step down but CMU and Harvard are certainly not a step down from UofT.


text:
Reproducible Studies?
I'm not an academic, but I notice a trend in the top journals where replication studies aren't taken with the same glamour as original studies. Considering mountains of recent research show the majority of studies in many fields may in fact be irreproducible 1 2 3 4 etc, how can journals as a whole be taken seriously?
As a scientist, surely the scientific method must be respected, and one tenet of that method is reproducibility. This fundamental part of science seems to have taken a backdoor seat, and is not taken too seriously it seems. Be it due to funding, lack of prestige, or whatever. The end results are tainted/irreproducible studies that are cited many hundreds of times, distorting the truth of the world.
I respect there are individual initiatives recently to replicate large numbers of studies, but replication should be the norm, not the exception.
My question is, why are prestigious journals relied upon in terms of status, knowledge and information exchange, when in fact the replication rates of their studies are quite low, and there is no guarantee of any study you publish, cite or rely upon actually being accurate unless it's been replicated?

Stack Exchange is not for rants, no matter their possible truth or value.

Zev, feel free to edit the question. But I'm honestly attempting to gain an insight into this phenomena.

I am voting to put this on hold as too broad for the moment.  You are asking three very different questions: 1) How about this reproducibility problem? 2) Are publications meaningful when stripped of technical jargon? 3) What should we do instead of journals?  Please edit to focus on one of these.

I've amended the question to focus on point 1) The reproducibility problem, and the reliance of knowledge and directions of research based on studies that haven't been independently verified.

I retracted my close vote after you updated your question (I won't be able to vote to close again this time around).

When a journal accepts a research paper containing experiments, it is the duty of its editors and reviewers to ensure that the paper contains enough details about the experiments that allow others to reproduce the results without making unreasonable assumptions. So reputed journals should contain papers that allow its readers to reproduce the results. If a reader complains that something is not reproducible, the journal might verify the claims and if necessary withdraw the paper.

@Arani That's a good thing, but before citing a study, in proper scientific spirit, shouldn't the presumption be that the study is in fact wrong until it's been replicated and accepted by a number of independent sources, before it can then be referenced and relied upon? I realize this isn't what happens most of the time, but when it doesn't happen the consequences can be severe (eg:medicine). Even at an undergrad level, students must cite studies that haven't been replicated, and base conclusions off that. But isn't that poor science? Should the practice not be to only cite reproduced studies?

"How can journals as a whole be taken seriously?". Journals need not to be taken seriously by the general public or specifically you. They only need to be taken seriously by the related scientific community and people who publish there. Second, as recent events showed (Obokata case) even if some fraud paper manages to fool peer-review it is discovered very soon and the related people pay the consequences. So, problem solved. Critics of peer-review (like you) must acknowledge that peer-review in its current form actually works as it is evidenced from the recent technological advancements.

@Alexandros,There is no doubt that a vast quantity of published studies have revolutionized and continue to revolutionize our world, but the evidence seems to suggest that more fraud and irreplicable studies are never detected than those few cases that are found and made public. If which studies are correct or not is esoteric and available only to insiders in that community, how are politicians, entrepreneurs or other people who base decisions off science supposed to make informed decisions as to whether the study they're reading is even correct? Why is replication not held as a gold standard?

@Alexandros I thought the OP is questioning why the replication rates of studies are quite low, not critisizing the peer review process. Am I mistaken?

@scaaahu I think the OP "due to the low replication rates of studies" doubts the entire peer-review regime. I might be wrong though.

I think the peer review process and journals are necessary, but the common practice of basing new research or findings off prior findings that haven't been replicated, or citing such studies, or industry/government/academia making decisions based on faulty studies, can and does have catastrophic consequences. I feel all this could be avoided by only citing or basing further research off studies that have been replicated. I appreciate the resources involved in replication are immense, but I think the consequences of not doing so are greater, and I'm curious why this isn't standard practice.

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


text:
Advisor wants to be the first author
I'm a computer science graduate student (Master degree), I have done my thesis defense, and it is accepted. So, the problem is that I want to publish a paper based on my thesis but the advisor wants her name to be the FIRST name! Claiming that she has done enough work to be as first author. So, here how the research has been done:

At the beginning she didn't have any good idea to be done as thesis. Thus, I had to go through existing research for couple of months until I came up with a new idea.
As any new idea, it develops with the time. What I mean is that she suggested few things to be added. However, I added much more things to enhance the algorithm (my idea) and achieve better results .
I wrote the whole thesis, but she revised almost all of it (except Related work and conclusion) because English is not my first language.
She did the mathematical proof ( I mean she found the equations to proof that our algorithm is better)
However, I codded all the simulation programs, and I did the simulations and collected the results.
Also, she stayed in contact with me during the summer (one Skype call a week)

I spent almost two years working on this research, and I don't want to be unfair with her. I would like to have your opinion

I'm not in CS so I don't know what the conventions there are (e.g., in some areas alphabetical order is normal). If you were equal colleagues, it is quite possible that the mathematical proof would be central to a paper and deserve first authorship over your other contributions. In my own field, it would be very unusual for a student to not be first author on the papers which they publish from their thesis, and the advisor is typically last as a "senior author" - in fact, it would look bad for a professor to not commonly have last-authorship papers at that stage of their career.

@BryanKrause Thank you for your response. The mathematical proof is not central because there is  a simulation with correct results. Also, I believe that the most important thing is the new  technique of the algorithm

A simulation is not a proof. It shows a special case, rather than the general. So, the proof indeed may be crucial. Check whether this may be the case.

@CaptainEmacs so finding a whole new algorithm is not important... COOL!!!!

@SHADOW.NET Please be so polite and do not put words in the mouth of people who take their time to respond to you, such as claiming I said "finding a whole new algorithm is not important". I formulated carefully and did not say anything like that. In your description you say a lot of things, but did not say anywhere that you - as you freshly imply here - invented a new algorithm. From your description, it looked like a co-development, in which case, the first authorship depends on many details. I am not saying you shouldn't be first, but it really depends a lot on the details of the case.

Who is going to write the actual article?

In my experience, in CS, it is rare but not unheard of for a professor to be first author.  Usually I think that is really when it is the professor who has taken lead, both in running a project and in writing the text, and typically it is when it is a group project where each student has a moderate contribution but it's the advisor who pulled it together.  This is often the case when the paper is an overview of the project as a whole.
In the case of your project, it certainly sounds like you're getting a raw deal and should push back.  But without seeing the professor's side of the story, it can be hard to tell.  They may have a different view of the relative contribution.
IMHO, even if it's 50-50 or 60-40, the student should get priority.  There's a tipping point where it's more understandable, but from your description, you're nowhere close to it.
Good luck!

PS.  There are certainly related posts you should read, such as https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10059/mentor-trying-to-be-first-author?rq=1

Thank you for your time to answer. Now, if I choose not to publish at all, does she have the authority to go without my consent and publish a paper?

I don't think so, but I can't say with certainty.  I suspect the "someone wants to publish without me" question has come up on SE before, so look around.  I certainly think you should be able to come to some understanding here.  Is there another professor who can mediate between you?

I guess, we can ask  another professor to mediate (but I doubt her coworkers take a side of a student who will leave the country in few months!)

The fact that you're leaving should have no bearing on this at all.  The question is what is fair.  Generally, what's fair is to prioritize the student.  This isn't true if the student's contribution is truly a "small enough" fraction of the overall effort -- for instance I just had a paper where we put all the authors in alphabetical order (though none was a professor -- one was a summer intern).  But from what you've said you have a strong case....

More data seem necessary in order to clarify what's going on there, but if your report is accurate, take for granted her behavior is highly unethical. A thesis is (should be) the result of individual research, and a publication based on it definitely should have you as the first author.
That being said, many research groups are infamously well-known for being run as communist states. That is, research is not mainly an individual task, but a constant "groupal collaboration guided by the leader", where the leader is the one that distributes credit, depending on a plethora of criteria (helping the weakest/oldest student, personal interests, old favors, etc...).
If this is your case and you accepted a lot of help (like your professor writing for you a crucial proof, or doing a full copy-edit of your whole thesis), you got credit in other articles from your colleagues, etc... then sadly you'll have to give in, because you implictly accepted participating in that system. Did this only happen to you or is it common?
If this does not apply, your group is run based on meritocracy, and your professor just did important but limited work, then discuss it with her and expose why you should be the first author. Although, from what you have described, and in my experience, I don't have much hope this would work. I also know a research group where the supervisor signed as first author in every paper produced and there were only two options: accept it or leave.
The supervisor is there to supervise, guide and advise, not to collaborate or help in your thesis. In the future, be very wary about "receiving (excessive) help", because this is what eventually happens: you'll have to pay the favors back.


text:
How much of a disadvantage am I in as compared to my competition as a postdoc applicant?
I defended my PhD after 5.5 years from starting. While my degree granting date is 6 years from starting. So technically, I have spent 6 years on my PhD.
I failed to secure a postdoc position before my defense. And after defense, I got tangled in visa issues which delayed the starting of an interim postdoc position in my PhD lab.
In March, with the pandemic starting, my visa got more delayed and I stopped applying for postdoc positions due to global lockdowns.
Finally, my visa arrived in May and I was able to start my postdoc with my PhD advisor in June. Now, instead of interim gig, I am considering this as an extended 1-1.5 years engagement with a goal of publishing as many papers as possible and expanding collaborations and knowledge.
During my PhD, I had published 1 First Author (FA) paper and 1 co-authored (CA) paper. Since defending, I have published 2 FA and submitted 2 FA papers. I am also close to submitting 2 CA work and working on multiple projects. So technically, I have been keeping busy since graduating.
It's true that I did not get any positions before defense. But it is also true that my initial visa issues (intensified by the covid) added to my securing a job problems.
I have started looking for positions again, albeit only locally (in my country of residence), which reduces my search pool and the possibility of securing one. And am waiting for responses to judge whether my position has improved from last year or not.
My question is, considering my total time taken to graduate, my first postdoc with my PhD advisor (albeit different topic), objectively, how much of a disadvantage am I in as compared to my competition solely based on these factors?

When we look for postdoc candidates we focus on expertise and quality of the work. This we judge from papers, codes and the interview. Soft skills like communication from the interview, and character and general confirmation of our independent assessment from recommendation letters (I sometimes ask for recommendations from people not listed by the applicant, especially if an obvious referee is missing, such as current supervisor). Time taken to get a degree or age is not something I personally pay attention to.

Of course, in the current pandemic, nothing is normal and even knowing when it will be ‘normal’ again is, well, unknowable. Do what you can, keep looking forward, and keep an eye out for opportunities.

None of the things you mentioned seem particularly relevant.

@Anonymousphysicist How so? Aren't they important?

Well, your publications are relevant.  Your question is off-topic.

What would an answer like "you are 40% worse off" tell you?


text:
Co-author in conference presentation
EDIT: I asked the question poorly, so what follows is an edit of the original.
When submitting an abstract for a presentation on research that is based on joint-work, should all authors be listed or only the presenter(s)?

Co-authorship has (almost) nothing to do with conference registration.
Normally, each person who wants to go to the conference has to register for the conference or else, you know, the conference won't let them in. Just like each person who goes to see a movie has to buy a ticket.
And if you're going to present a paper at a conference, then you need to be at the conference, thus you need to "buy your ticket" and register.  If you co-authors want to be at the conference, they have to register too, whether or not their names happen to be on the paper, and if they don't want to go to the conference they don't have to register.
The only way that co-authorship ever connects to conference registration is for certain conferences that require you to pay for at least one registration per N papers (e.g., if N=2 and you're going to present three papers, then one of your co-authors has to buy a registration even if you're the only one going).  I find that obnoxious, but that's the economic model these conferences have chosen.

That's interesting. Do you mind providing any example of such a conference? I am just curious.

@GoodDeeds Here is an example: IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. If you look at the registration costs, you may note the right-most column says "# paper uploads", where regular registrations support 3 papers and student registrations support only 1 paper.

It might be a money-grab, but it might also be a way to encourage new researcher attendance. Otherwise you could have one PI presenting 20 papers with none of the PhD/postdocs present to save on budgets. That is a problem both for new researchers (who already depend a lot on the goodwill of their feudal lord, I mean PI, to start their career) and for the conference audience (because it is hard to answer questions on a topic you spent less than a full-time week on in the last year).

@jakebeal Thanks for the example.

Most conferences require the attendance of at least one of the authors. Others may also register, but usually there is a cost involved. I don't know of any that require all authors to attend. I think it would be unlikely.
So, one is normally sufficient.
It might be useful for more than one to attend, so that the one(s) not presenting can faithfully capture any questions asked, so as not to lose those ideas.


text:
Are German "Dr.med." and USA PhD equivalent?
Where can I find information if the german Dr.med. is corresponding to the USA PhD? Did anyone with Dr.med. apply for USA PhD equivalent?
Thanks for the comments.
Actually I don’t really think this has been answered here. I read the mentioned topics and they don't answer my question.
MD in USA is a title students get after finishing medical school. In Germany this turns you in a Physician, but you don't have the title "Dr.med."
To earn the title you have to write and defend a doctoral thesis. That's why MD in US and Dr. med. in Germany are not the same.
About transfer from US to Germany it says (Grundsätze für die Regelung der Führung ausländischer Hochschulgrade (PDF) auf kmk.org.):
“Inhaber von folgenden Doktorgraden …Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika: „Doctor of Philosophy“ Abk.: „Ph.D.“,…können anstelle der im Herkunftsland zugelassenen oder nachweislich allgemein üblichen Abkürzungen die Abkürzung „Dr.“ jeweils ohne fachlichen Zusatz und Herkunftsbezeichnung
führen.”
This is what I find on Wikipedia, but I hesitate to huse this as my only source:
"There are a variety of doctoral degrees, with the most common being the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), which is awarded in many different fields, ranging from the humanities to the scientific disciplines. There are also some doctorates in the US, such as ... Doctor of Medicine (MD) ..., which are generally regarded internationally as professional degrees rather than doctorates, as they are not research degrees and no defense of any dissertation or thesis is performed.
...
...Doctorate degrees in Germany are research doctorates and are awarded via a process called Promotion ("promotion"). The concept of a US-style professional doctorate as an entry-level professional qualification does not exist.
...
...In German-speaking nations; most Eastern European nations..., the corresponding degree to a Doctor of Philosophy is simply called "Doctor" (Doktor), and the subject area is distinguished by a Latin suffix (e.g., "Dr. med." for Doctor medicinae, ...)."

(1)The capitalization in your question is terrible. Please correct it yourself. (2) There are related questions on our site EU Ph.D. in Germany: Calling yourself "Dr." or "Ph.D." and How can one differentiate between Dr. (PhD) and Dr. (MD or DO)?. (3) Now, to answer your question directly, here on our site, you can find information about it.

I think there may be at least two different questions here. What exactly are you trying to answer? It may make sense to submit the new question on its own.

Why isnt the question clear? Why 2 questions?

(1) According to this article, a German "Dr. med." is only about 1 year of research work on top of a M.D. degree, so it clearly is less than the usual 3-5 year normal Ph.D. programs. So it's kind of a "lightweight Ph.D." which is usually not recognized as a PhD level degree in other countries outside of Germany.
https://forbetterscience.com/2016/05/25/the-decadence-of-german-medical-doctorate/
(2) Clearly, marking this question as duplicate is an error.

The degree conferring the title Dr. med. does not directly correspond to the PhD as it is used in the US. There is some similarity to the MD-PhD dual degrees offered in the US.
From Wikipedia:

After at least six years of medical school, the students graduate with a final federal medical exam (Zweiter Abschnitt der ärztlichen Prüfung). Graduates receive their license to practice medicine and the professional title of physician (Arzt). The academic degree Doctor of Medicine (Dr. med.) MD is a postgraduate research degree in medicine. It is awarded if the graduate has, in addition, successfully completed a scientific study and dissertation. Many medical students opt to perform their thesis during their studies at medical school but are only allowed to finish the dissertation process after their studies.

And, appropriately, from an article titled "An Overview of German MD/PhD Programs":

The problem with combining medical and basic science training in
  Germany is not really a case of too many titles and too little time.
  It is, rather, that the academic titles given to medics and biologists
  are mutually exclusive--or were, until recently. In Germany, medical
  students who undertook a doctoral thesis get an MD (Dr. med.);
  students in biology, including basic biomedical science, got a PhD
  (Dr. rer. nat.). Different programs, different degrees.

You should mention that the "thesis" for the Dr. med. is written in a few weeks, months tops, often already during the study time (springbreak etc...). So it is not comparable with a general PhD, that normally takes multiple years. So I would compare it to the MD, not to a PhD. However, there is also a "real" PhD for medicine, taking multiple years in research in the field - but that one is rather rare.


text:
Should résumés be attached in a mail to a professor?
Say there is a student who writes a mail to a professor asking for a PhD vacancy or a RA-ship position. Should he attach his résumé in a mail to a professor?
I have had contradictory viewpoints on this. Some people ask not to attach résumés in such mails to professors, saying such mails go straight to spam. They instead prefer having a webpage and providing a URL. This is tough, as students (esp. undergrads) do not have a lot to share on a website. Moreover there is a contradiction: if a professor cannot view a résumé in her browser, what is the guarantee she would visit a website and click each of the sublinks? Looks more implausible to me.
There are others who advise applicants to provide a brief bio instead of a résumé or a URL. Again this could turn out awkward: in a bio, "I did my bachelor's in XYZ University" is fine, but "I was fourth in the Department during my bacheor's" looks out of place.

If you "don't a lot to share on a web page", then what exactly are you going to share in your resume?

@JeffE: I think the usual accomplishments like coming first in the Department etc do not sit as well on a webpage as they do on a resume.

Regarding the problem that it could go into the professor's spam box, you can always ask for an acknowledgement.

I slightly prefer attachments.  The problem is that I'm reluctant to reply to e-mails asking for more information, or even to show up on server logs following links, because it may be interpreted as a sign of interest.
Like most faculty members (at least in technical areas), I get enormous numbers of junk e-mails regarding PhD positions or summer research.  The general pattern is that they are form letters sent to large numbers of people, almost all of whom ignore the letters.  If anyone replies in anything but the most discouraging way, then it inspires a potentially lengthy e-mail exchange that will probably just waste everyone's time.
This is a real problem, and I don't know what to do about it.  It's not really fair, but right now the burden is on applicants to stand out from the junk e-mails.  In particular, your e-mail should provide compelling proof that you spent at least as long thinking about it and writing it as you expect the faculty member to spend on it.  If it looks like it could be a form letter with the professor's name and research topic pasted in, then I'll ignore it, as will many other people.  [I should point out that I work in a department with centralized admissions, so I cannot accept students on my own.  This is explained on my web page and the department's.]
For example, a clearly personalized e-mail that discusses the professor's research in detail is good.  Keep in mind that plenty of people are trying to cheat with this.  For example, I regularly receive e-mails saying something like "I found your paper X fascinating when we read it in our seminar", with no further details.  This looks like a form letter, and there have been a couple of times when I've received e-mails from the same sender that were identical except for having different paper titles pasted in, with no indication that they had previously e-mailed me about another paper.  Maybe a few e-mails are genuine, but they sure look like lies.
So when I get an e-mail regarding PhD admissions or summer research, I'm very skeptical that it's more than spam.  There's a five or ten second window to convince me that it's different from the other e-mails, before I set it aside.  If it looks promising, then I'll read further, and I'm a little more likely to do so if any information I need is available right there.  So I'd recommend attaching whatever is needed.

The "ten-second rule" is probably pretty valid. I might take a quick scan at the CV, if one is included, to see if there's any sign that the person is actually remotely in my area. If not, game over, unless they have told a really compelling story as to why I should be interested. (And a few people have actually done that!)

Actually, I prefer to have the résumé or CV attached in the email. If there's not enough detail for me to decide if someone is going to be able to actively contribute to the group, there's no incentive for me to pursue the candidate further.
That said, if someone tells me in the body of the email something like: "I have done X, Y, and Z; and would like to do A and B using method C," then that's OK. At a certain point, the letter does provide enough information for me to determine that (a) the student is competent and (b) will be a good fit for my group. However, my response would be: "That's great—sounds like you're what we're looking for. Can you send me a CV and a list of references?" So we're right back to square one.

I do not mind getting a résumé attached to e-mails. However, a tendency I have noted is that I also tend to get scanned copies of assorted certificates sometimes numbering several tens of Mb files. There is no way I will run through such quantities of information. So if you send a résumé, make it brief and to the point.
As Aeismail points out, also make the mail itself concise and clear as to what you are looking for. It may seem like a lengthy mail may be more polite but remember that e-mails are typically used for brief messages. Your mail will end up as one of perhaps hundred on a particular day and a lengthy mail may be put in the "to do list" and postponed until enough time is free to read it (which usually does not happen).


text:
Is there a correlation between GRE scores and family income?
I've heard a claim recently that GRE scores correlate more strongly with family income levels rather than academic success. Is there any validity to this claim?  Does anyone know of any study correlating GRE scores with this factor?

Even if there is a strong correlation with family income, that wouldn't necessarily imply causality. Also, are you referring to future academic success? Or current academic standing?

Some people's parents keep paying for them to repeat the test until they get a good score?

@J.R. I'm referring to future academic success.

This sounds funny to me.. Interested in any reliable resources.

I think perhaps the older GRE was more useful in determining IQ, as it was an acceptable test for entrance into Mensa. So it could be related to that, and not directly the GRE.

According to this article on the Fair Test website,

The GRE is particularly susceptible to the influence of socioeconomic class. ETS' own research has shown a strong relationship between family background and test scores. One study of applicants who scored between 750 and 800 on the exam found that only 4% of these high-scoring test-takers had fathers who had not completed high school; around half had fathers with bachelor's degrees or more, and of these, a whopping 90% had fathers with graduate or professional degrees. When family income was held constant, most of the test score differences between races disappeared or shrank dramatically.

The correlation between GRE scores and future academic success is much lower, according to the same source.

The ability of the GRE to predict first-year graduate grades is incredibly weak, according to data from the test's manufacturer. In one ETS study of 12,000 test takers, the exam accounted for a mere 9% of the differences (or variation) among students' first-year grades.2 Undergraduate grades proved to be a stronger predictor of academic success, explaining 14% of the variation in graduate school grades. An independent non-ETS study found an even weaker relationship between test scores and academic achievement - just 6% of the variation in grades could be predicted by GRE scores.

Another article from The Atlantic: The problem with GRE

ETS studies have also concluded the GRE particularly underpredicts for women over 25, who represent more than half of female test-takers. Research from as far back as the 1960s leads experts to believe that the inconsistencies in GRE performance trace to a combination of factors including access to coaching, a disparity in educational opportunities that better prepare some students for the test, the content of the test, the way students are tested, and even the student’s own insecurities regarding race and gender. Sternberg puts it bluntly: “The GRE is a proxy for asking ‘Are you rich?’ ‘Are you white?’ ‘Are you male?’”


text:
How to contact professors for PhD vacancies?
I know many master's students who get an opportunity to talk to their potential PhD advisors well before applying. In most cases this opportunity is available by the professors with whom they worked for their master's. Moreover, there are many others who establish a contact with professors by mailing them and enquiring about PhD vacancies.
My questions are:

How important is knowing an advisor prior to applying for PhD?
Does an email interaction play a vital role when the department makes its admit decisions?
If email contact is important, can a student send out mails to 2-3 professors (working in the same area) in case one of them does not bother to reply?
To sum up, is applying of any use (especially in top universities) when you have no contacts and only your credentials to bank on?

Related: How to research about professors wisely?

Ultimately, the answer depends upon what admissions system a department uses.

If you need to obtain admission to a group at the same time as (or instead of) the department as a whole, then it is of course absolutely critical that you make contacts ahead of time! In general, I'd even start contacting people well before the time of application. However, make sure that your contact is substantial. When it becomes time to apply, you will have a better shot.
In many departments, you apply for admission to the department as a whole. After your admission, you select an advisor to work for. In such cases, it's not really critical for you to have a direct contact within the department, since it's not necessarily a given that the professor you want to work for sits on the admissions committee. In such cases, you'll have an indirect connection at best. That said, it's still a good idea to have a contact in a department during the admissions process. You don't lose anything by it—unless the professor has a bad reputation amongst his colleagues (and then you might not want to work for him or her, anyways!). By the way, I would caution strongly against going to such a school if there's only one professor at the department you'd be interested in working for. You're taking a very large risk under such circumstances.

Now to answer some of the other issues raised.
Email or other forms of contact. Face-to-face or phone interactions rank above email interactions. There's no doubt about that. However, an email interaction—if actually substantial—can also be viable. However, a quick emil telling someone you're applying and interested in working for them won't really get you anywhere.
Number of people to contact. There is of course no limit to the number of potential advisors you can contact. To some extent, they're competing for you just as much as you're competing for them!
Can I apply on credentials alone? At most top departments (where application is done at the department level), I think it's entirely possible to apply on credentials and recommendations alone. Having the contacts can obviously help, but not having it won't ruin your chances for admissions, either.

To supplement the other answers, here are some do's and don'ts for email contact.

The worst thing you can do is make it seem like you're trying to cast
  a wide net and don't have a clear focus. That's a guaranteed delete.

Therefore,

Narrow your search to the people whose work you're really interested in
Read their papers (especially recent ones - I've had people email me about stuff I did 5 year ago - I've moved on :))
Think about their work. Find something intelligent to say (even a question).
Email the professor and focus on those questions.

That's most likely to get my (their) attention.

Is joking considered to be intelligent?

Just to add to aeismail's answer:
If you can send an e-mail that demonstrates that

You are a strong candidate
You wrote an e-mail specifically for that professor
You are familiar with some of that professor's work

then it may have an important positive effect.  Ideally, you would be able to suggest how things you know or have done could contribute to that professor's research agenda.
Sending a generic e-mail to multiple professors will not help your case and will probably hurt it.  I mention this because a large fraction of the e-mails I receive from potential students are obviously part of a mass-mailing.

Thanks @David. Now to the most important question: do you read all mails you receive from potential students? :)

Yes, with one exception: occasionally, I receive a very long message that is obviously mass-produced; in that case I may stop reading after a paragraph or so.

How important is knowing an advisor prior to applying for PhD?

Super important.

Does an email interaction play a vital role when the department makes its admit decisions?

Sometimes yes. An email + an visit in person to the university could surely increase your probabilities to get accepted.

If email contact is important, can a student send out mails to 2-3 professors (working in the same area) in case one of them does not bother to reply?

Yes, sure, mandatory! Send as emails as you can!

To sum up, is applying of any use (especially in top universities) when you have no contacts and only your credentials to bank on?

Yes, try to contact and visit the professor you want to work with.

Your answers are valid for European-style systems in which you apply directly to an individual professor; they don't work so well when you have a "centralized" admissions system, as is more standard in the US and Canada. Also, in many of those schools, students don't choose their professor right away, and I would caution against applying to such departments if there's only one professor you want to work for in that department—it's potentially a big risk you're taking.

Very interesting. In Europe we have a centralized admission system, too, but each admitted PhD student can choose his/her supervisor.

I cann't stress enough that email bombing a department is COUNTER PRODUCTIVE. So please think carefully before "send[ing] as many emails as you can"

In the UK, we have to come up with a research proposal and find a supervisor willing to supervise before even applying for a PhD. But this isn't the case in the USA.


text:
Is it better to start the paper title with a verb?
I heard one of my lecturers says that it is always better to start the paper title with a verb. According to the lecturer, the verb leave that impression about something has been accomplished. For example, use Design, develop etc. I tried to find any supportive resources about that but I could not. The other question, is it better to use verb-ing or not (e.g. Developing vs. Develop)? Most of references that speak about choosing title do not pay much attention to the syntax.

Please no "developing". Try "development". "Design" is both a verb and a noun, so you're save.

@tohecz Huh?  What's wrong with "Developing..."?  (About 40% of my publications have titles of the form ing .)

Paving the way for bridging the gap between developing new benchmarking methods for machine learning and addressing engineering issues. I think I should be sleeping now... anyway, gerunds are very common, not only because something "has been achieved" but because it's being achieved, it gives a feeling of "present", which is always more interesting than the forgotten past and the never happening future.

What tense should paper titles use? has some good info about the use of gerunds (verbs).

I chuckled at the fact that someone edited the title of this question so that it starts with a verb.

I hope the answer to the title question is no, because a quick scan of my publication list shows that (unless I missed something while scanning) fewer than 1% of my publications (2 out of 203) have titles that begin with a verb. (Many others, though, begin with nouns or adjectives derived from verbs.)

I see two issues here. The one is the stylistic sense that some people have developed over their life and that is not necessarily always to be generalized. The other is the strictness of such "style advice".
For the first issue: Everybody develops some kind of preferences about stylistic things they like or dislike and things they believe to be (or have worked) better than others. This personal preference does not necessarily coincide with what is generally considered to be good style, which means it could be true in the special environment of this person but it could also be some anecdotal experience that has no broader foundation. Therefore I would be somewhat cautious to take such advice too strict when it comes from a single person and you cannot find it anywhere else.
For the second: Let's consider this rule exists (which I don't know and didn't check), you shouldn't take it as a strict "law". If you have a title that fulfils the rule and you feel good with it, then go for it. But don't try to twist your formulation just to meet this single criterion as the confusion that you create with it might outweigh the "beauty" that you win by starting the title with a verb.
TL;DR: Be careful with possibly subjective "style advice" and don't take style guides as strict "laws".

I am neither a native English speaker nor a language expert but here are my two cents. I recall hearing (more than once) that it's best to start strong. In other words, what you feel your paper is really about should be the first thing you express; if it is doing something that wasn't possible to do previously then a word expressing an action is a good call. Ex: "Refinement of XYZ process using awesome method A".
Otherwise if you are doing something in a different way then it might be good to point out what's new with your way of doing that particular thing; "Multispectral analysis of bioluminesce  in deep ocean habitats" (random made-up example).
In the first example you are "advertising" that you are refining XYZ process and that's the cool thing with your paper, whereas in the second example you are pointing out that you are analysing things in multiple light spectra.
In either way the first word isn't a verb, but could be a noun form of a verb; i.e. to refine -> refinement. The problem with using the "-ing" form is that it might give the idea of continuousness, which is out of place as the work is already done in most cases.
Hope that makes some sense :)

Writing a good title is perhaps the hardest part of authoring. Writing a good title is not so much a matter of style as a matter of good communication. Some key points I therefore try to follow for a title can be summarized as follows

predict and describe the content; recapitulate the conclusion
be succinct and comprise one or possibly two facts
include one active verb in present tense to form subject-active verb-objective
Avoid complicated wording and use no more than three modifiers for any noun

A pair of good sources on general science writing which includes formulation of titles:

Glasman-Deal, H., 2012. Science research writing for non-native speakers of English. Imperial College Press, London

and

Day, R.A. & Sakaduski, N., 2011. Scientific English. A guide for scientists and other professionals. Greenwood, Santa Barbara CA

Select your target journal.
Analyse the most recent 100 paper's titles in that journal. How many start with a verb? How many have colons? What are the median and mode number of words in a title?
Make your title follow the most common format.
That's the first-order effect: maximising the chance of getting published.
The second-order effect is maximising the chance of getting cited. So repeat the above analysis, for the 100 most cited papers from the last ten years, in your  target journal. Adjust citations for length of time lapsed since they were published.
Now try to combine these findings into a happy blend that maximises both your chance of getting published, and of being  cited.

What has not been mentioned in the above answers is that the nature of a title tends also to vary significantly between disciplines.
For instance, in the biological and medical sciences, the titles of journal articles tend to be summaries of the key findings of the paper:

Overexpression of Gene A Leads to Suppression of the X-Y Pathway in Organism Z under Type A Conditions

In effect, the title serves as a minimalist abstract of the paper.
In contrast to this, papers in the physical and mathematical sciences tend to have shorter titles that don't necessarily say much about the content of the article:

Technique X for Studying Y in Material Z

or

A Proof of Theorem X for Conditions Y

Titles in the humanities can be much more creative, and use wordplay, literary quotes, and allusions:

"Touches of Sweet Harmony": A Study of Organ Construction in Shakespeare's England

Now, your title need not fit into the specific norms of your field, but in that case, you better have a solid reason for doing so.

A lot of people are giving the exact opposite advice I would give. Most papers go un-cited! You absolutely don't want to be too conventional. If you want to analyze titles experimentally do the following

Get together with a bunch of postdocs, grad students and professors in your field.
Pick a popular journal in your field to analyze and a date range, at least 5 years older than the current date but not too old to be ridiculously obsolete.
Everyone choose 5 papers they remember being really important that received a lot of citations, 5 really important papers that received few citations and 5 middle of the road papers
Look at the titles. Is there something different about the highly cited papers' titles?
If the answer is yes consider going with that, if the answer is no, use your own style and creativity, and ignore most things (although you should follow some common sense).

This actually sounds like a fun party idea. Note the methods are probably really flawed since I just thought about this. Feel free to comment below on an improved experimental design.


text:
I have a bunch of incomplete degrees. Any chance to get in decent Masters?
I have a bunch of incomplete degrees. I nearly finished one bachelor's but the 16h work days made me focus on work instead of academia. Then I tried with other degrees but never got far in any of them.
Now I found a bachelor's and master's that I want to pursue. Would I still have a chance to get in a master's degree in the UK, USA or Canada if I keep a decent GPA during bachelor's? I imagine Ivies are out of question. I also have 5+ years of work experience and a disability (hard of hearing) which has been steering my life choices for a long time, I.e. I thought it's better to devote myself to work in order to gain skills and make myself attractive in work market just in case something goes wrong with my current work.

In what area are you planning to do your Master's? Will that area overlap with the area of your work? Simply speaking, is there a chance that your work experience adds weight to your application? Another question: if, suppose, you devote yourself to work, will that make you a happy person? Or will that fill your future life with regrets?

Thanks for the questions. I intend to apply for a degree in line with my work. I think I'll be happy to be able to think strategically and have some intellectual discussion. I'm also gunning for a chance to participate in a research though I need yet to invent the topic.

Is there a negative to just trying and applying? I understand that you want to do the bachelor anyway?

@Karolina If your desired Master's is to be in line with your work, then you should get maximum out of your CV. When applying, explain that this is a mature decision based on your experience in the area. Potential advisors like applicants who are mature and know exactly what they want and why they apply. Also, you may consider mentioning in your CV only the degree you intend to complete. You may, though, mention that you "took courses" on various subjects. I wish you good luck with your Bachelors -- and then, hopefully, Masters!

Thank you guys for the help. I don't see any negatives in just trying but I was wondering how to frame my application so I do get accepted. Some of more prestigious universities have programmes that fit in with my work experience so I think I'm going to be trying out that route.

Are you planning to do a bachelor degree first? If so I don't see any reason why you would struggle any more in the application than anyone else who did that bachelor degree (and got the same marks as you)

Start with finishing your bachelor degree.
You haven't finished your bachelor's degree, and you want to get a masters? I'd say the first step is to finish your bachelor's. Apply for it, and then talk to them about recognition of prior knowledge for the partially-completed degrees you attempted.
Depending on how relevant the courses you took in your previous degree are to the degree you're applying for, you may be able to start off basically where you left off with your previous degree.

Work experience is sometimes considered more important than other scores as it shows your have worked in real world environment. I believe you should highlight your work experience in your experience and you will definitely be a stronger candidate as compared to those who don’t have work ex. In addition, if you took the courses from accredited schools and is related with your field of work you might be able to transfer those towards your MS. Good luck! With your bachelors and future masters

It might depend on field,  but if you do get a bachelor, get a good grade in that,  then I don't see you having a problem getting admittance to a UK masters degree.