text:
How can I politely reply and educate students with unreasonable requests?
I am a professor at uni, and I have been experiencing a number of unreasonable requests from students on these days, some of them arguing that they need a special treatment due to the current Covid-19 situation, such as students asking for:

additional exam papers with full solutions (there are already three past exam papers with solutions available).
a list of the exact topics that will be examined in each of the exam exercises (this is, if the exam contains five questions, then I should provide the corresponding five topics).
providing the exact structure of the exam, such as one question about definitions, two questions about chapter 1 of the lecture notes, one question about chapter 2, ...
labeling slides and clearly specifying if they cover a topic that will appear in the exam or not (not just if it contains examinable material, but if the exam contains a question about the topic in the corresponding slide).

I want to reply to these requests indicating that they are just asking for too much (I may as well send them the exam with full solutions), and to teach them that the point of the exam is not to regurgitate memorized solutions (i.e., life does not work like that).
What is some advice on potential ways of replying and covering both aims: being polite, but also educating them about how unreasonable/entitled those requests are?

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

Let's assume your teaching practices are the best possible.  Students want you to change your teaching practices.  You should respond by explaining to students why your practices are effective (do this even if they don't ask).
Examples:

additional exam papers with full solutions (there are already three
  past exam papers with solutions available).

Studying the three past exams will help you learn what you need to learn from this class.  Additional past exams will not provide additional help.  If you have extra time, I suggest you ...

a list of the exact topics that will be examined in each of the exam
  exercises (this is, if the exam contains 5 questions, then I should
  provide the corresponding 5 topics).

All the topics listed on the course syllabus are important things for you to know.  Therefore, any of them might be on the exam and you should study all of them.  If it was not important enough to be on the exam, then I did not teach it.

If these types of responses are not true, then I suggest changing your teaching until they are true.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please only post a comment to suggest improvements to the answer. Before you post a comment, check that your line of thought has not already been debated in the chatroom. Also read this FAQ.

First, let’s offer a bit of sympathy where it’s due: students are a population that’s suffering right now in some unique ways due to the pandemic. Being a student can be very stressful at the best of times, and my impression is that for a lot of them it’s now more stressful and challenging than ever before. So my first recommendation is to try to be less judgmental. What may seem like an unreasonable request to you may simply be a student’s way of coping with the extreme situation they are finding themselves in, seeking creative solutions, and asking for help when they recognize they need it.
The right mindset for addressing these requests should therefore not be about “educating” the students and showing them the error of their ways, in my opinion. Students have enough normal stuff on their plate right now, they don’t need to be lectured on the reasonableness or unreasonableness of their requests. Frankly, I think at the moment you should stick to teaching the material, handling whatever course logistics there are to handle, and being as accepting and kind to the students as possible. Whatever “educational” energy you have should be directed towards the course material rather than on imparting life wisdom. You’ll have plenty of time to help them with that when the world goes back to a more normal state.
So basically @JeffE and @cag51 have it right. If the request is unreasonable, just say no and try to do it in an empathetic way. Elaborate explanations are not really needed. But sympathy, and a sense that you understand what they may be going through at this difficult time, are.

+1 for "be less judgmental" and "they don't need to be lectured".

"a sense that you understand what they may be going through at this difficult time"—students may be asking these questions because they don't feel confident that they have the tools to be successful on the exam (something that may be exacerbated by the present situation). Acknowledging and trying to address that need, while maintaining reasonable boundaries around what help you can provide, could go a long way. What other mechanisms, without compromising the integrity of the exam by giving too much away, could you provide to help students succeed and feel confident going into the exam?

In other words, a "no" may feel more empathetic if it's paired with help of the sort that you actually can provide and an understanding that more such help may be desired right now.

I like yours the best for the less judgmental. Having to teach my 3 kids (my wife does 90% of the work there) and we both still have to do our 8-10 hour days, I can totally get the distraction. And I'm sure the first couple of weeks have become 'fun and sleep'... which is now catching up with them.
That said, this is life. It sucks. It isn't fair. And if the Prof says you need to know it, you need to know it. Studying is hard. Learn to do it.

"First, let’s offer a bit of sympathy where it’s due: students are a population that’s suffering right now". Students ask these things (Items 1 through 3 anyway) all the time even before COVID-19.

@LordStryker so what? The question is about students “arguing that they need a special treatment due to the current Covid-19 situation”, so that’s what my answer addresses.

@DanRomik Do you think that what I stated is not worth pointing out?

@LordStryker I don’t have an opinion. It sounded like an implicit criticism of something I wrote in my answer, but if it’s just a side remark that you thought was worth mentioning, that’s fine.

@DanRomik "be less judgmental"

I agree with JeffE's comment: just say no. Students already know why these requests would normally be unreasonable, they just need you to explain that these norms haven't changed. So, taking your first example, I would reply as follows:

Hi Name,
No, I will not be providing more than the three that are already
available. While I empathize that the public health crisis has produced an unfamiliar and stressful situation, I believe three practice exams is already a very reasonable number.
With kind regards,

Well, "say no with_an_explanation..."

haha, fair enough.

"Students already know why these requests would normally be unreasonable"
Do they? It's not unheard of similar requests in normal times.

... Students [are] asking for ...

Post this in a common forum.
Dear Students:
I am preparing my best to continue with the course to cover the same topics, give the same format of assignments or exams, and adhere to the same grading metrics.
The resources that have been available in the past for this course are still the best that I can make available for you to study going forward.
I will keep you informed should anything in the current situation demand a change in the course topics, course assignments, or grading metrics. I will address any contingencies that you have individually.
Now, as for the "unreasonable" emails, the reply is:
As noted, the resources that have been available in the past for this course are still the best that I can make available for you to study going forward, especially in the current situation. I will let the entire class know when anything about this should change.
Do you have issues that are not concerned with requesting other study resources? I can try to help.

This is well-written, but you’re really over-explaining things by a lot. If OP is stretched so thin, it would be a waste of their time to spend this long writing an email to their students explaining that they’re stretched too thin to meet request for extra materials. My advice: keep the explanation short and to the point and focus on teaching. The students also have better things to do than reading your long, super-articulate email and digesting it on top of the twenty other emails loaded with COVID-19-specific information that they received today.

I agree with @DanRomik. Furthermore, I find that often when I have an urge to tell off the whole class like this, it's really only in reference to a small number of students (like, 2-3 is enough to hog my mental space), ones who are quite likely to not be in class/not paying attention/not reading an announcement like this. So the whole effort tends to be a total waste. Inform individual students as needed, briefly. Save full-class communications for the core course content.

I concede that it was verbose and have shortened. Also, to distinguish this, I suggest it belongs in a forum post (an Announcement to the entire class) rather than as a one-to-one email.

I find this more rude in tone than the accepted answer. A student who asked for additional resources will feel they are being anonymously shamed, and a student that did not ask will find their time wasted with unimportant mass messages when they are currently receiving many. In addition, the language used here is formal, impersonal, and detached, to the point of meaninglessness; this is a class-wide announcement which boils down to “nothing as of yet has changed in this class,” and it takes three whole paragraphs.

@Eric:  Well, shorter still then. From my side of the fence, the first, most important message that all students have wanted is a validation that their instructors have not gone AWOL. I don't control what students "feel". I can control that I should not have to talk down to them en masse or one-on-one to make my message "direct", as the accepted response suggests. In any case, I've said my piece and appreciate the feedback. Perhaps best to leave the rest well enough alone.

@JeffreyJWeimer You can control how students feel; that is the function of tone. And changing your answer to be about giving "a validation that their instructors have not gone AWOL" is now nowhere near answering the question.

The modification now answers the question.

@Eric: Thanks. Your insistence on improving this is a lesson that I take back for myself.

Do you have a module guide? It should state why the curriculum for the course covers what it does. Forward it to them or copy and paste relevant excerpts. It might also be advisable to have a FAQ doc that you can share with students updating it regularly.

For what it's worth, I wouldn't consider (1) unreasonable - I'd consider it something that a strong student might well ask you. You're assessing them on their ability to be good at passing your exams. They're asking for more opportunities to get good at passing your exams by working hard and practising passing them. As long as all of the students have the same opportunities, that seems perfectly ok - they might all learn things by doing that. The counter-argument that a student might get good at passing your exams but not good at the underlying techniques can surely only be an indictment of your exams as a measure of their abilities - a high mark in an exam should imply strong skills, or what's the point? If the issue at hand is that you might want to repeat questions from previous years in your exams (which it seems to be, given that you're talking about memorisation), maybe that's the real problem, and it might be worth thinking about just making new/more original questions? If you do that, then you can share more past papers and solutions with all of the students without causing yourself any real problems.
Conversely, (2), (3) and (4) are clearly more likely to be asked by weak students who want to avoid having to learn all of the material. To those students, I would simply say that since the purpose of the course is to make sure that they've learnt all of the material covered, and telling them which bits to ignore would defeat that purpose, you're not going to do that, and you recommend that they learn the whole course thoroughly to put themselves in the best possible position to get a good mark.

The suggestion regarding (1) seems to neglect a difference between shallow learning by pattern-matching exam questions and solutions and deep learning by engaging with and working through the material taught in the module.

@DmitrySavostyanov: I guess that aspect was intended to be covered by the comment "The counter-argument that a student might get good at passing your exams but not good at the underlying techniques can surely only be an indictment of your exams as a measure of their abilities". If one's exam questions are such that pattern-matching exam questions and solutions is an effective strategy, perhaps that's worth addressing?

That being said, I'm also not altogether convinced that a certain amount of pattern matching, in the sense of knowing which techniques to apply for which problems, isn't part of what you tend to want the students to learn, in any case. I mean, rote repetition of answers without understanding them is bad, but knowing that you should apply technique X for problem type Y isn't really.

In my personal view, knowing what one "should" do is rather pointless without them knowing why it should be done in this way. However, I appreciate that people may approach it differently.

Maybe your course puts too much emphasis on exams, especially high stakes exams. All your examples are just about testing. If I were evaluating your course, I'd look at that if you are getting a lot of such questions.
Students need to do a lot of things to learn, but exams are a poor way to measure what they have learned, rather than memorized. Most exams, anyway. They need practice, reinforcement, and feedback.
One way to both quiet the questions and give them a bit of practice is to ask them to answer their own questions themselves in writing. Tell them if they submit written answers to their questions then you will comment on them. A comment needn't be extensive. Even "close, but not quite" may be enough.
Yes, this is a directed way to say "go away and do your homework" but it is actually what they need to do to actually learn. If it seems a bit harsh, maybe you can come up with something milder but with the same goals.

All courses put 100% mark on the exam, this is not something I control, but this is at the university level. Perhaps in your country you have full control, but here the university defines how the final grade is defined. Students have tutorial sessions, with a teaching assistant, also quizzes, class tests, and etcetera. Giving them much more is just focusing on quizzing rather than teaching and learning, which is what you are trying to advocate against?

Makes me sad. I have no control over such bad practice. I give your university an F on education. Many people have asked why Harvard is such a vast storehouse of knowledge. The answer is that the first-years bring so much with them and the graduates take so little away. Perhaps your university is like that. Not your fault, perhaps, though you are contributing. The questions you get are perfectly predictable and not unreasonable.

Most universities impose evaluation formats and even impose quotas on final grades (e.g. the mean should be larger than 60% or so). This being said, students' attitude is also to blame, as they aim for good grades, believing this will dictate their future. However, I am sure nobody gives a corn about my grades in uni.

exams are a poor way to measure what they have learned, rather than memorized — Only if you write exams that test memorization!

@JeffE, what you say is true. But, I'm afraid, that what I said is also true.

@JeffE, that has to be done carefully. I had a college physics class that would teach the equivalent of A+B, then on the test would be A-B, A*B, and A/√(B+A^2), as if somehow all of those were obvious derivatives from what was taught. There's a not-so-fine line between testing rote memorization, actual understanding, and cognitive leaps that some people don't understand, since they are beyond the students level of understanding they believe it all to be obvious.

@computercarguy I had some courses with such tests and I loved those courses. That's your chance to actually try and solve problems instead of reproducing solutions.

Examination is a perfectly reasonable way of ensuring that students (as opposed to their classmates, or anyone else who might help them with coursework) has learned and understood material. Setting exams that require memorisation of material is poor practice, unless the intended learning outcomes are indeed that students recall something by rote. There are alternatives to examination, that fulfil the same objectives (oral examinations for example), but they are rarely cost-effective.

@Buffy it's a bit presumptuous to "give an F on education" to the university systems of whole countries.

@fqq, maybe, but not if they've earned it. Often F grades are given when the recipient hasn't even tried to do better.

@fqq, your "presumptuous" is actually my fear that too many people are left behind by such a system. It makes too many assumptions about people and how they learn. I've been at this game for a long time.

@Džuris, I agree that can be a fun way to challenge yourself, but it shouldn't be done on a test. I had physics tests where they would test you about where (in 3D coords) a cannonball would stop rolling, given a weight, size, initial velocity, angle, and height of a cannon and ball, as well as the wind speed and direction, non-Earth gravity, and coefficient of friction and hardness of the ground. And they wanted to know now long it would take to reach that spot, max height, and total bounces. This was 1 of 90 questions on a 2 hr exam. All was taught individually, in a 200 level semester.


text:
Switching fields after MA
I am a Ph.D. student at a top 15 program in my current social science field, I'll call it field X. My research is interdisciplinary standing at the intersection of field X and another field Y.
I genuinely like graduate school and my work here, but as I've developed as a scholar, it has become apparent that my true passion (and resultant new research questions) lies clearly in field Y. How frowned upon would it be to master out of my program in field X and try to move to field Y? I've heard mastering out of a Ph.D. program is a huge red flag when reapplying, and I think I'd enjoy a future in field X more than any other job save for a future in field Y. I also feel very indebted to my current program and advisors as a result of the resources they've invested in me.
Would it be advisable to give up on a future in field Y and remain in field X? Or would moving not be so terrible since it's due to a genuine (slight) change in research interests rather than not liking graduate school, or clashing with advisors, or anything like that?

Can you switch fields in your current department/program?

Is field Y valued enough by X that you could complete your PhD in X and then apply for postdocs in Y?

I doubt that you have any need to move and disrupt your trajectory. If your research is truly on the cusp, then you can probably move seamlessly into field Y even with a degree in field X. People change fields fairly regularly, especially if the change isn't radical. All of my education was mathematics, but lack of job opportunities when I finished pushed me to computer science where I had a long career.
The only problem, I think, would be in finding your first position. You need to have some contacts in field Y, perhaps professors, who will be happy to support your entry into the field, regardless of your doctorate.
And there is great value in interdisciplinary work in any case. So, building a circle of collaboration with people in both fields would probably be an advantage to you in the long run.
Once you are employed in some permanent position (tenured or similar) your choice of research is pretty much up to you. No one will care, anymore, that your degree is in a related field.
Having a degree in field X needn't lock you in to working only in that field.

I do not think moving out would be so terrible.
In fact, if you express yourself as you have here, it shows your intellectual maturity and that is impressive to most colleges and universities, to know that a student is courageous enough to find what they are truly passionate about and “move” to it...
You might start out applying as a special student for a semester. Special students are non-degree students that receive credit.
Admission can be very competitive commensurate upon where you apply.
I recently answered a question about applying to Harvard university at the graduate level as a special student.
I worked in the admissions office at Harvard graduate school,
in the office of special students.
It may be a “backdoor’ way in to a top school, but it is just as competitive as regular students, because you must be admitted both by the graduate school (at Harvard), as well as the department chair of the field in which you wish to study.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Taking my research idea outside my paid job
I'm doing a (paid, contractual) remote research internship with a research institute in Germany. My job is to come up with novel ideas, write papers for technical conferences and try to publish them. My supervisor here is A.
There is another individual B from a different institute in the USA, who has expressed interest in a research collaboration with me. However, this arrangement is informal, wherein he would provide his comments on my ideas and help me publish them. He would also be one of the authors of the resulting paper.
Now during my regular work with A, I had proposed a couple of ideas to him: he liked one but said the other was not promising. It so happens that I do think that the second idea is promising, perhaps even more so than the first idea that he liked.
So my question is, is it legal and ethical for me to take my second idea to B and ask him for help in getting it published? Before I start this endeavour, should I perhaps ask A in unequivocal terms whether I can take my idea elsewhere? If A has no use for the idea he shouldn't have a problem in allowing me to do so (I hope, but I'm not sure). Is this a reasonable question to ask a supervisor?
I feel like this is a grey area but I also think that the idea I have is a good one, and I don't want to waste it (by getting it published before someone else comes up with a similar idea).

If the idea is valuable you should talk to an attorney.
You want to avoid encumbrances.  If there is some small chance that if the idea hits it big, A can claim some ownership, the thing to do is to get a letter stating that A waives all claims around this idea.
There are also time-sensitive issues surrounding your situation from the perspective of protecting IP.  In your conversations with A and B, you might have "disclosed", starting a clock starting for patent procedures.
Again, if it's important, this is what lawyers are for.

Legal questions need to be answered locally by qualified lawyers. You may have contractual obligations that make this impossible. Many such people do have such constraints.
But if you have constraints you can ask for a release to take the idea elsewhere. Apple computer got started partly because HP didn't object to the Woz taking his ideas outside the company, thinking that personal computers had no value. He was explicitly constrained in general, but got a formal release. (Later he was asked what he thought of HP, a company so short sighted. His reply: I love that company.)

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


text:
Evaluating an opportunity for undergrad thesis in computer science
I am a pre-final year undergrad student of computer science. I am interested in getting into research. I have already done some research, but it has not been very formal, and I have not been able to devote a lot of time to it due to college coursework.
In my final year of college, my university allows me to pursue my undergrad thesis at any university / research institute where I can find a professor willing to advise me. I have been able to find such a professor in Germany, who is willing to advise me for 8 months, and his group is very relevant to the kind of research I want to pursue in future.
However, the problem is that the institute is not very well known, at least in my country. But the Google Scholar profile of the professor is decent enough. The group in which I'll be working does seem to be doing good work, although the project assigned to me currently is one on which just a single researcher is working. Also, what surprised me a little was that the researcher is just a master, she doesn't even have a PhD yet. But the work being done by her seems to be good enough and state-of-the-art.
Another criterion by which people suggested I can judge the state of a project is the funding. If a project is well-funded, it probably means it is in good shape and is going somewhere. Well, I don't know about the funding of the project exactly, but they are offering me quite a large stipend which points to the fact that they are not exactly low on funding. Also, many of my friends have applied for theses abroad and have found that obtaining a funded position for an undergrad is very hard. Considering I have a well-funded position is probably a good sign then, right?
How else can I go about evaluating this opportunity? Are the things mentioned above important to factor into this decision? Any other points I should consider?

You write "In my final year of college" did you mean 'university' in place of 'college'?

I'm sorry, I come from a place where we use the terms 'college' and 'university' interchangeably. By college/university I mean my bachelors (undergraduate) program. So final year of college means my final year of the undergrad computer science program.

@JamesBond Your original post is okay. "college" and "university" are often used interchangeably.

They aren't used interchangeably everywhere, hence my question, which is worth clarifying because answers will deviate considerably if the OP meant another meaning of college.

If it's a public university in a decently-sized city and it has university status as defined by german law it's probably fine. I haven't been back home in a while but IME we don't really go in for rankings that much, everyone I know chose their university mostly based on location. There are some individual departments that are stand-outs in their specific area, but universities overall are assumed to be pretty much decent. I don't know that we have any "superstar" universities like Harvard or anything...

@nengel Re "superstars": Well, there are TUM, RWTH, and KIT in my line of work, for example.

@OlegLobachev: I agree, there are stand-outs in specific areas. But would someone from a literature department agree that those are the best universities?

No, but I would imagine, that they have their own strongholds.

Master's
Someone doing his PhD in Germany typically has a Master's. So, it's not a sign of a failed PhD or something. And you genuinely don't need a PhD to do world-class research, even if it would be a sign you have more experience with a degree.
So, din't worry about the research assistant not having a PhD, rather think if he/she is good in his/her research area. From your question I infer that this particular PhD student is good.
Funding
As for funding, there are two possibilities: the student assistant rates (which are typically around 8/10 Euro/hour for up to 80 hours/month) or a research/teaching assistant position. They are stacked after having/not having a Master's, the typical rates are E12 and E13. You can google the the rate in corresponding federal county ("Bundesland").
An easier way is to look for third-party projects at the website of the professor / his group.

Update:
Rankings
There are multiple university rankings out there. Something like CHE focuses on German universities and splits up based on the major. You might want to look that school up.
Costs of living
A German university imposes a rather small (bureaucratic) fee. It's not the tuition typical for US universities, but rather like 200-250 Euros in a semester, i.e. half a year. It brings a cheaper food in mensa and a bus ticket with it. This would not put a huge dent into your finances, but you'd need to consider it.
However, the costs of renting a flat / a room in a shared flat and medical insurance can be rather high and range from 150 to 500 Euros for living and 80-250 Euro for insurance. You would find rental costs in your typical website for renting (I am actively avoiding ads here). The insurance is probably stated in university's checklist for foreign students.

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


text:
How to get through the rigorous phase of PhD?
I am currently a PhD student working out research and also doing mathematics for my PhD research. Most of the time these days I spend on studying -- maybe 15 to 16 hours per day. I believe that I joined the PhD as an active student, but now I am not as active as I used to be in the initial years. My productivity is less these days as I try to avoid mistakes in my research. I have started feeling nervous in front of my colleague as I don't have any publications until now.
I always try to prepare my best but these days fail quite frequently and make silly mistakes which are annoying. Sometimes I even forget the basic definitions. Looking at myself during my initial two years I find myself a fool these days. I think this is called the rigorous phase of PhD where your ideas have to pass rigorous mathematical proofs and I am quite independent these days.
Question: How to get through the rigorous phase of PhD?

You will never stop making silly mistakes which are annoying.  You just have to get used to them.

Stay away from your laptop/computer. Disconnect from the phone. Go for a walk and come back after a few days. (Do carry your phone with you though). Worked wonders for me back in those days (although I did come back after a few hours :) - the duration depends on how much of "healing" you have to do...

15-16hrs/day x (5 days a week? 6? 7?) is burnout territory. Disconnect for a weekend, go hike in the mountains or sit by the sea and watch the waves break, or whatever works for you. Time off is as important as time on.

Take a (short) vacation immediately.
By working 15-16 hours a day you are making yourself too exhausted and tired to be effective. That is also probably why you make mistakes. You should take a break that is long enough to reset, and when you come back aim at reasonable working hours (depends on a person and circumstances but for most people this is 40-60hrs/week).

Frankly, I think, as far as actual creative work is concerned, reasonable working hours is even less - at most 20-25 hours a week of creative work.  Of course there are plenty of other tasks you have to do that don't take as much mental effort.

@AlexanderWoo: Don’t underestimate how much people’s temperaments vary — I’ve known a few friends/colleagues (in both academia and the arts) who could manage well over 25 hours a week of creative work, for at least several weeks at a stretch, very fruitfully.  15–16 hours a day is probably unsustainable for anyone (and doesn’t sound like it’s working for OP), but some people really are capable of a lot.

May also be worth stressing proper nutrition to the OP in this circumstance; if working 16 hrs a day I wonder how much of a break is allowed by he/she for that.

@AlexanderWoo I agree about 20-25 hours of creative work. The 40-60 was total work hours.

@JNS agreed. Also, it's good to budget time for exercise and other self-care activities, which will make the OP more productive.

I worked long hours on my dissertation, getting 4-6 hours of sleep per night, trying to fix the software I was writing. I was stuck on it for a couple of weeks and I'd only made the problem worse. I finally snapped, and walked away from the whole project. After a few nights of 8+ hours of sleep, I looked at it again... and fixed the problem in two hours. Looking back, I can count dozens of occasions where the three extra hours of work at night only caused me to spend two hours in the morning fixing tiredness-induced errors. Those extra few hours are usually better spent resting than working.

@PLL I think the difference is people who can be very creative for a very long time do not demand and expect it all the time.  They have no problems recognizing their need of downtime, and usually knows they do not sustain these periods indefinitely.

i spent on study i in a day from 15 to 16 hours I do study [...] My productivity is less these days as I try to avoid mistakes in my research. [...] I always try to prepare my best but fails these day quite frequently and making silly mistakes which are annoying [...]

You have already identified the problem.  You're over-worked and under-productive.  First, I would take a vacation over a long weekend.  You need a break.
After your vacation, you need to better manage your time so you will have a sustainable work schedule.  From your post, it sounds like you may need to build better time management skills.  I've seen grad students waste time doing the following
1) Spending several hours reading 1 paper.  Spend a set amount of time (like 30 minutes) reading each paper and note down what you don't understand.  Join a reading group and bring your questions there.
2) Taking too many classes at once to "get them out of the way."  Sometimes your advisor will push you to do this.  If this is the case, stand firm, and set some other goals with them.
3) Constantly rework a paper, or otherwise pour time into a fruitless research topic.  Part of your post mentioned you feel behind on the number of papers published.  Bring this up with your advisor and focus on upping that number.  This may mean publishing shorter papers or publishing in less prestigious journals.  Once you zero in on a good research topic, it'll be much easier to turn out high quality research papers.

The only thing I disagree with is, "Take a vacation over a long weekend." A long weekend is not a long enough vacation to recover from this level of burnout! I would suggest at least a week's vacation, including both adjacent weekends, and longer if possible.

@Kevin, I agree that a week would be better, but depending on class schedules, a week may not be doable in the very short term, and I feel like taking Thursday - Sunday off now is better than taking a week off a month from now.

Your experience does not sound incredibly different from my own.  (I finished my math PhD less than a year ago.)  That said, I can tell you about a few things I did that made a big difference for me during my thesis years.

Deliberately set boundaries for your work.  For example, I never did anything academic while eating, and I never worked on Fridays after 6:30 p.m.  Those times were deliberately for my brain to rest.
Commit to doing something non-academic to force you to get away from your desk.  I volunteered with a local church for a few hours a week.  It was only a small commitment, but I found that I benefited greatly from the time away from my work.
It's a cliche, but exercise also made a big difference for me.  You don't have to be super intense to get the benefits--I would usually run or lift for about 45 minutes three or four times a week.  Take advantage of your university gym if you can!
This is my most important point:  Do NOT allow yourself to feel guilty for spending time away from your work.  You've been in mathematics long enough now to know that revisiting a problem after a short break can grant you new insights.  Just like the people in other answers have said, grinding out 16 hour days can lead to a significant drop in productivity, so you should aspire to have more productive work with less hours spent--that begins with the implementation of breaks.

Even though I was very obsessed during the year it took to write my dissertation, I had to choose to allow gaps and spaces in my time, i.e., a walk every two hours, or a break for a meal, or a switch to another aspect of the research. What you have described is a form of burnout as a result of being overly focused that leads to numbness, boredom, and dissatisfaction. A day entirely off every once in a while will also work wonders for your mental landscape.

Being in Ph.D. from the last five years, I will tell you my experience.

Most of the time these days I spend on studying -- maybe 15 to 16 hours per day

This really is a  problem. I fell you are missing a very beautiful part of the research. Don't think that you are studying for 15 to 16 hours, but feel you are conducting research for that much of time and enjoy that and take that as fun.  Feel that your research is going to be helpful to the community and you will see your name in the world of science where your name will be engraved on scientific journals and will be counted as a good researcher. Have fire and passion inside you and go ahead with that.
Another important thing is that you need to give your brain enough rest so that your mind and body are again ready to go for work.
Some important points:

Have a nice sleep. Due to pressure from your peers, you may not be able to have a good sleep. So set timetable of you sleep for e,g sleep before 11 and get up till 6, nearly 7 hours of sleep should be enough for you to reset your brain and body.
Play some sports (gym, jogging, etc) daily at-least for 1 hour that is going to increase your productivity a lot.
Very important is, don't compare yourself with your peers. Don't bother what they are doing and focus on your goals.
Keep yourself calm and don't bother that you don't have any publications till date. Think this is not the end of the road and you will publish a lot more world-class research papers.
Have confidence in yourself and say that you are going to do it.

More importantly is to have passion for what you are doing, leave everything aside and take research as fun. Without enjoying your work, it is going to be really difficult with the passage of time, eventually decreasing your productivity.

This sounds like the classic negative spiral.  In broad strokes,here's how it works:

You work hard because you're conscientious and because the material is hard
You work long hours and start to skimp on physical activity, recreation, etc.
Your tiredness makes you make more mistakes than usual and not to learn as efficiently
Your mistakes and frustrations increase your anxiety
Your anxiety leads you to work harder and longer hours, and further deprive yourself of healthy breaks

Sometimes it's helpful in these situations to check in with one's primary health care provider.
You and your doctor might want to consider medication to support you during this challenging period.  Or perhaps not.  Regardless, it can still be helpful to check in with him or her, in a number of ways:

S/he can have you fill out an anxiety screening questionnaire, and have you come in for a follow-up after a certain number of months, to see how you're doing.
S/he might suggest a therapist.  Cognitive therapy has a good track record with these anxiety situations.
Sometimes an underlying physical health situation is exacerbating the anxiety, and making some improvement in the one can help with the other.
The doctor will have your long-term health in mind and may suggest some simple preventative measures intended to improve your general health.  It's surprising how much this can help a person's outlook on life.
Talking the situation over with the doctor can help one gain perspective.

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


text:
Is it common that advisor has no idea about what is going on and totally helpless?
Before going to graduate school, I had been under the impression that professors were necessarily extremely intelligent.  I had also assumed that professors would tend to be smarter than assistant professors or postdocs.
Now after more than 1 year in my research group, I know that I was very wrong.
My supervisor has no clue to assess student work. They even need help to understand basic calculations, and they cannot help me with questions about papers.
My advisor often fails to understand basic content in my own reports after repeated explanations, becoming angry with me over it.
Questions:

Is this a common situation for PhD students to find themselves in?
What can I do to improve the situation?

It sounds like she is unusually and wildly incompetent.

Vote to close as there's either no question here (it is just a rant), or the only possible answer is opinion-based

I suppose most of the answers will be opinion-based?

Not common, but possible. Not all professors deserve to be professor, some got there in curious ways, and despite concerns of many of her (often former) colleagues. One advice: run.

"Before going to graduate school, I had been under the impression that professors were necessarily extremely intelligent. I had also assumed that professors would tend to be smarter than assistant professors or postdocs." Experience will tell you that inherent intelligence has little to do with actual capability.

Depends on your definition of "common", but there are certainly tanured professors who stop trying, 1 in 10 (?).

@iayork Not a rant. Most of ac.se is opinion-based.

No, it is not common.
However, everyone in academia probably will meet someone like your supervisor along the years. Incompetence and unprofessionalism can be found in every corner of society and academia is not an exception.
If you are able, change to another supervisor as soon as possible.

Yes, it is common in my environment. The rule.  (I'm not speaking about anyone else's environment.) Only very good advisors can overview the work of many students, assess their work, and help them.  The majority of advisors have huge groups and have time at most for the formal administration of the group: getting money, distributing the tasks, collecting the results.  If they didn't have huge groups, they'd suffer repercussions from the chair, who says, in short, that the department badly needs good people to cope with thousands of students pouring in. So, most professors in charge have no time for science, only time for getting money for supporting their people.
IMHO, there are two things you can do:

Change the group and/or
Get a supervisor within your group who has a clue.
Read a lot yourself,  travel to conferences, and speak to other people to get their opinion, i.e., use the community ressources.

Beware: each of the above items is easier said than done, and I know this. How to actually carry it out would be a different question, which, IMHO, is outside the scope of the OP.

As far as (1) goes, the answer to this is country specific and probably  institution specific.
As for (2), you need a change and should check Hexai's answer for things to do. I would propose another one: Completely switching country/institution. Surprisingly enough it might be easier to go to a new institution /country, even one of higher ranking, than to switch between groups/advisors.
Also in my experience, if you end up in one of the top places, especially in the States, you might still find people that are not interested, but rarely will you find clueless people.
One last warning: sometimes people can be much more intelligent than you give them credit for, especially when you are young. There might be another level you have no visibility to. As climbing to your level made you realize professors are not gods, maybe the next level will make you understand they are not as clueless as you thought them to be either... Make sure you are not miss-understanding...


text:
How do grad schools train grad students to be teaching assistants?
I am an international student and doing Ph.D. in Physics at a US university.
My teaching assistant (TA) duty is to tutor undergrad students. I am supposed to solve whatever problems undergrads bringing to me. The problem is that I do not know which problems they are having to prepare in advance. Every undergrad from every lab, class in the physics department can bring whatever homework they have to me to ask. Also, I am an International Student and when I was an undergrad, I did not use the textbook undergrad here in US use and many problems are totally strange to me. Sometimes I cannot solve their homework problems. I felt very embarrassed and sorry since I wasted their time, sitting there for 15 -20 minutes to wait for me to solve it.
I am not a terribly bad student, I consistently perform about 80 percent for all the courses as well as standard exams like GRE Physics. But I feel like I am not smart enough to pursue a Ph.D. Sometimes I can come up with very good solutions for grad problems but I am not a fast thinker to solve some undergrad problems which might be solved in a very simple way.
Do grad schools train grad students to be teaching assistants? I think the Ph.D. students need to be prepared to do good TA jobs, isn't it? For example, if someone teaches labs, they should know the content of the lab for that day to come in preparation? How can I become a better TA given my described task?

Do you prepare for your office hours? e.g. by going through the homework that they are supposed to do on your own beforehand?

the problem is that I don't know which homework they supposed to have. Every undergrads from every lab can come to ask

@oldman " undergrad from every lab, class in the physics department can bring whatever homework they have to me to ask." Does that mean that undergrads could potentially bring you questions about E&M and special relativity in the same office hours and you'd be expected to answer them?? Forgive me, but that sounds borderline insane. I'm not sure that most faculty could solve all problems that quickly.

@chipbuster yes, it is exactly what I mean. They can bring either Mechanics, E&M, wave, relativity or whatever in my office hour. I think the organization in my department is completely a mess. But If I am smarter, I should be able to handle the undergrad problems.

Do you think you would have an easier time of it if the students came with an existing answer that you could critique? Although it would certainly be helpful to offer guidance if you know how to solve the problems at hand, it might not be strictly necessary, or even the best way to tutor a student.

@oldman I'm no expert, but I'm starting to think that you're not the problem here. There's a reason we don't expect professors to randomly give lectures on any subject in the curriculum on a one-hour notice--there's a difference between having taken a class in something and having it fresh enough to be able to teach it........
Have you tried asking other TAs in the department how they handle it?

@BryanKrause yes I do.  Students tend to spend about 15-20 minutes and they need their problems to be solved fast. And as I said, some problems are totally strange to me, so I find it is very hard to give them the guidance while I myself still think how to solve that

@chipbuster  I asked 1 or 2 people and they said all the problems were easy and that I am a grad student, I need to be able to solve undergrad problems. I don't think they will confess the truth. I am not arrogant but my department ranking is about 400 and given my 80 percent for GRE physics, I think my background is better than some grad students here, and If I cannot solve, then it might happen with others also.

@chipbuster: But this sounds similar to an open "math lab" situation, where TAs have hours and are on tap to answer any possible questions on undergraduate mathematics -- and exists at every institution I've been part of.

@DanielR.Collins Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with this concept. Would you usually have multiple TAs at such a lab?

@chipbuster: Yes, that's true; likely multiple staff members at once -- and if one is better a particular topic then they likely field it. (For what it's worth, if you web-search "math lab", then you'll find lots of hits at U.S. colleges; quite likely one at your institution.)

@chipbuster: We do have 2 TAs at once also. But the guy on task with me do nothing and so rude that no one wants to ask him. So I am the only person helping students during the office hours.

"to tutor undergrad students" and "I am supposed to solve whatever problems undergrads bringing to me" contradict each other, I'd say...

How do grad schools train teaching assistants?
Some graduate programs offer specific workshops to teach the fundamentals of teaching. However, being a good TA usually comes down to 3 things:

Proper understanding of the material
Experience in teaching beforehand (I am a much better TA now compared to a few years ago)
Preparation (this is necessary even if you are experienced)

Nonetheless, the content of your actual question (and corresponding comments) is quite worrisome. It is absolutely not the responsibility of a TA to be prepared to answer any question from students of every lab, especially without previous preparation. I would dare to say this is not even the responsibility of the professor teaching the course. I have yet to meet a professor who doesn't feel the need for previous preparation when teaching a course for the tenth time, nevermind teaching new courses for the first time.

From what I see, no one actually trains TAs. There may be a workshop or two that will tell you to be consistent when grading and to not get into unnecessarily close relationships with students, but that's it.
As for your particular situation, I find it weird that you have to solve whatever problems students bring you; perhaps, you're misunderstanding your duties. First, students are supposed to do their homework themselves. Second, you cannot possibly know the contents of all courses. I'd imagine that your actual duties are: 1) if you know the material the student is asking about, you help them navigate through it but you do not solve the problems for them; 2) if you don't know the material, you send the student to some other TA. Anyway, try speaking to other TAs about these issues, they'll likely give you some advice.

I would add a third, possibly more likely duty: To help the student find the resource they need to learn how to solve their problem. These are usually the sorts of skills that grad students have already mastered to some degree, and often have little to do with the content of a particular course.


text:
Applying to PhD programs - One reference just quit his job
I am applying directly to several Professors for a PhD. As part of my applications I usually attach a CV, two references (one is a professor, the other is a research project leader in industry), and if asked I add a note transcript too.
My second referee just told me he quit his job as project leader. As contact info I had attached his work phone and address. Obviously, he will no longer be reachable at those.
What makes things worse is the fact that I recently submitted two PhD applications.To professor A: I sent it a month ago, and he recently replied asking me for my note transcripts. Regardless if he is satisfied or not with my academic performance, when he calls/writes my second reference, the fact that he is unreachable would be a red flag. To professor B: I sent the application a week ago, and have not got any response. Same problem applies, he won't be able to reach my second reference. In such case, he would probably not even bother to ask for my transcript.
What would be the correct course of action now?

Have you considered emailing your potential supervisors to update them with the new contact information of your referees?

+1 to @DmitrySavostyanov's comment. This is a great opportunity and a valid reason to immediately email your potential supervisors (reminding them of your application in the process) and give them your reference's new contact info. They will certainly understand that this can happen.

@DmitrySavostyanov The referee who just quitted is between jobs. Would his home phone/address be adequate?

Consider asking him about the preferred contact method.

Professor B just contacted me asking me for my transcript and two references. So I guess he just skimmed my CV and skipped the last page where I list my references. I will just send him the new reference list with the new contact info for the second referee and not mention anything regarding his resignation. Will a reference with a @gmail and non-work contact information look suspicious?

The first thing you need to do is check if your reference is still willing to act as a reference even though they have changed jobs. In general, they will, but if they have retired or left the field completely maybe they do not want to. Potentially, a reference who works in industry has signed some sort of non-compete agreement or an NDA that does not allow them to write a reference any longer. Once you either get the referee's new contact information, or a new reference, you need to email your potential supervisors.
In the email, you need to tell the potential supervisor what happened. A job change is pretty typical and does not look bad in any way. Having to change referees is a little more problematic, but just explain briefly what happened.

I don't see much of the problem here. You are applying to a PhD not a faculty position. The second reference should or might be contacted by email. The fact that he quit his job has no relevance (unless he tries to politely decline serving as a reference for you).
Otherwise, just ask your second reference to email directly the reference to the Professor.
The point being is that the bureaucratic side is unimportant.

authors: Акбар Соллех

authors: Сергей Рудомётов


text:
How to answer these two questions?
I have two question that I don't know what they mean. I am writing a master degree (Computer Science) thesis.

Explain how this study will contribute to your academic field?
Write down the main academic sources written in this study? (Are they asking about reference of my information? )

Please need help to understand these two questions.

The first question seems pretty clear: how will your work advance the state-of-the-art? What are you proposing to do, that hasn't been done before, and will be useful? The second one is a little less clear to me (even as a native speaker); I assume they mean the most important past work (that someone else did) that is relevant to your work.

Hello James, could you please clarify the context of your questions? Also, I think it might be hard for people to support you in answering these questions, as they are subject to your work. For clarification of these questions, I think @cag51's comment might be helpful enough to be considered an answer.

Imho this is a valid question about academic terminology: phrases such as "contributing to the field" are obvious to an experienced researcher but might not be for somebody new to academic research.

What question are you going to answer and how does that advance previous work and do  something new.  You can list how previous work did something good (A and B), but failed to get to C.  You should also mention how the work may open other doors in future:  new research that might follow if successful, techniques to be used on other problems, and economic/social impact.  [If you are purely doing a review of previous work, I would at least mention how you intend to clarify the state of the field.]
List any important prior work (e.g. the A and B above) that your study will build on; list any important references for key techniques used in the research.  [The syntax of the question is a bit strange but if you anticipate your masters will produce new primary work (as opposed to a review), experimental or theoretical, you might also want to mention that you plan to do that and to publish along the way.  But this would be more of a parenthetical. However, it is a positive thing to say.]

P.s.  Just write something and then get it reviewed (not here, but with senior students or advisor).  Sometimes it is easier to criticize a real example than answer questions in the abstract.


text:
Benefits of being a journal referee from an individual's perspective and its hidden dynamics
What are the benefits of being a journal referee from an individual's perspective?
What hidden dynamics serves as the undercurrent for referees to be tough or lenient? The dynamics could be academic or social.
What makes some people refuse to be referees even if they are experts on particular papers?

Does this answer your question? https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7556/why-do-academics-write-peer-reviews?noredirect=1&lq=1

Q1: Why do academics write peer reviews?, What is the benefit of review a scientific paper as a referee?, Q3: When is it appropriate to decline a review request?, How to decide which papers to review?

Q1: an opportunity to stay at the forefront of research output in your field (to see great work first); opportunity to prevent your field from being diluted with poor work.
Q2: ideally there should not be. If there is, the peer reviewer is doing it wrong. If it exists in a situation, it is ultra context specific and weird.
Q3: other life and work obligations (simply not having enough time); conflict of interest.

If it's a PhD student's paper, I will err on the side of being more lenient in borderline cases.

My field has double blind peer review to prevent just that. The idea is all papers up for publication in a journal should be held to the same standard.

I am just saying that this depends on the field and the person. I don't think my attitude is "ultra specific or weird" in my field (pure math). It's a fact that the quality of people's writing improves with time and experience. Judging people who have just begun to learn how to write math by the standards of people who have had decades of practice is definitely not fair or reasonable in my book. This is of course not to say that one can compromise on the actual correctness of the results.

Benefits of being a referee:

You see research first
You earn some good will
It may be a factor in getting tenure
You may get paid (I do statistical reviews for two journals; they pay statistical reviewers but not content reviewers)

Reasons for being tough or lenient.

Different journals have different standards for reviews. Generally, more prestigious journals will, I think, have stricter standards.
Different people are, by their nature, tough or lenient. As long as the reviewer is consistent across papers, this isn't really a problem. The editor will get use to you.
Unfortunately, even with blind review, experienced reviewers in a small field will be able to tell (with some error) who the authors are and this may influence the review. The worst is if it's conscious.  But there is a lot of unconscious bias, and it's hard to fully cope with that. This is one reason to have multiple reviewers.

Being a reviewer is considered a "service to the academic community" in grant applications and is also considered when applying for a job. Depending on how prestigious the journal is, your reputation will benefit from reviewing activity.
In addition, you can keep track of the latest trends in your field and what are other researchers working on at the moment. It's very good to keep yourself updated.
I am not sure what you mean exactly with "lenient": reviewers should pay attention to the standards at the state of the art in their community so that the paper is improved enough to get published. Rejection should be suggested only when the paper has major flaws that cannot be corrected in the timeframe of the review process.
I recently reviewed for the most important CS conference in Europe and saw that the reviewing guidelines were very strict. Out of 8 papers I reviewed, only one was accepted, and almost all the papers were good-quality articles that would have fit in a Q2 journal. But they aimed at being better than a Q1 journal.
Regarding your last question, there is a movement against big publishing companies, according to which it is unethical to provide free work for a for-profit company that charges the university back to access the papers.


text:
Does my PhD dissertation need a copyright notice?
I'm in the final stages of preparing my dissertation. I've noticed that former graduates from my department have included the text "© [student's name]" at the bottom of their title pages. Is this necessary to include in a dissertation?  What would be the consequences of not including it? (I'm in Canada, if it matters.)

You do not need it to assert copyright, but it may well be standard format - check with the department or the thesis secretary (not sure they exist anymore - their job was to make sure that the thesis format would work with the microfilm archiving folks).

I think at the U.S. University I did mine, it was a rule of the University to put in the Copyright notice, and there is no harm in doing so.

My University had several other formatting rules; thankfully, my dissertation met them all.

Consider that there's a lot of plagiary of theses these days (sometimes bad machine translations into other languages), so anything that leads an automated search or plagiary detector to the version with your name and copyright statement is useful.

In most parts of the world this isn't necessary as copyright is automatic on creation of a work. There are some exceptions, but in Canada it won't be necessary. There is no reason you can't, but it is typical to add "All rights reserved" as part of the statement when needed.
Many years ago you needed this, and you also needed to register the copyrighted work with the government providing a copy (or large parts of it). But it became automatic many years ago.
See: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/h_wr02281.html, and especially the FAQ at the end for the specific answer to your question.

Thanks! Can you expand on "all rights reserved"? What does adding this phrase accomplish?

It probably doesn't mean anything anymore, but just a convention. The list of rights is at the link in the answer: Translation, Interpretation, ... When you publish you give up most of those rights to the publisher in return for a license for some things. And if you give a CC license (for example), you yield some of those rights also.

The Buenos Aires Convention demanded "all rights reserved" or something similar be added; since all signers of that convention have now signed the Berne Convention, it's now moot.

@prosfilaes, yes, the US was late to sign on to international copyright conventions. The Buenos Aires Convention was joined long before the Berne. Canada has a different history, of course.

It wasn't until 2000 that the last member of the Buenos Aires Convention signed the Berne Convention, that being Nicaragua, and eight other nations of the Americas waited until the 90s to sign Berne (the US have signed in 1989). It's only been twenty years that you didn't need a copyright notice to protect a work in all nations of the Americas.

@dB' In addition to its obsolete usage as a legally required part of a copyright declaration (like prosfilaes said), "all rights reserved" can be used as a confirmation that the document is not released under a Creative Commons license or some other open license that automatically grants certain rights (e.g. to make copies) to anyone receiving a copy of the document. So if you do want to share your dissertation under a CC license, best not to make it say "all rights reserved" if you can avoid it. It'd just be confusing.

This is not a matter of copyright; it's a matter of your university's dissertation format rules.  Check those.  If they say you have to include it, then include it.  I've seen sillier formatting rules enforced on PhD theses.

However, there's nothing to say you can't handwrite in the © symbol and name on your title page.

'Needed' - no.  People add it because they see others adding it and they can assume the others know something they don't.  It's a form of cargo culting - following a ritual without understanding the meaning.

Some people add it for this reason, and some people add it for other reasons, e.g. they want to make it clear to everyone that it is copyright.

As others have pointed out, a copyright notice is not strictly necessary.
But:

If your thesis includes graphics, text, datasets, software, etc. from others, then you should retain their copyright notices.
You should mark the remainder of your thesis as belonging to you. This helps anybody that includes your content in their work.

In the software engineering, it is common for every project to have a LICENSE file. If a project includes another project as a dependency, the dependency's LICENSE file is kept intact.

In many places I know, a thesis would come with a cover page where the candidate confirms being the author in an academic sense, which is different from copyright law.

@o.m. so what are you saying?

Software license is a different thing then copyright. Without the license nobody can be use the software without your permission. A thesis can be legally read, cited, and thrown away - that's basically all you want to do with somebody else's thesis.

@usr1234567, I was referring to software licenses in the context of copyright and redistribution of source code and binaries. You may have been confused because "license" can also refer to purchasing a copy of a compiled software program for usage.

I understood the last paragraph, but I think the analogy is wrong.

I'm saying that there tend to be special requirements for a thesis on marking, which go beyond the (non-)requirements by copyright.


text:
Is it appropriate for professors to ask students to type notes for their classes (with or without paying students) in United States?
I wonder if it is appropriate for professors to ask their students in class to type notes (in latex whatever) for the classes they are teaching and if there is any "elegant" way for students to turn down such request of professors they are taking classes with.
There are several specific scenarios that I am interested in asking about:

Professor asks students to take turns to type the notes for the classes and the notes may be used for publication under the professor's name (with students appearing in the acknowledgement in some way), and professor pays students for doing that.

Professor asks students to take turns to type the notes for the classes and the notes may be used for publication under the professor's name (with students appearing in the acknowledgement in some way), and professor does not pay students for doing that.

Professor asks students to take turns to type the notes for the classes and the notes is just a shared free document for academic purpose, and professor pays students for doing that (simply as an act of kindness).

Professor asks students to take turns to type the notes for the classes and the notes is just a shared free document for academic purpose, and professor does not pay students for doing that.

Which of the options above are appropriate/inappropriate (and why)?
Since if the students are enrolled in the class and it might be hard for them to turn down the professor's request since their grades are "controlled" by the professor (one more question: is it appropriate for professors to make notes-typing a course requirement?), or simply that students might meet professor everyday and there might be invisible pressure for students (especially for graduate students). I understand this must be some grey area in university teaching but it seems to me it is also very common in the graduate level (especially for special topics) courses (but I haven't seen any professors paying students for doing that).

By "publication" I mean publishing the notes as a textbook or monograph to publishers like Springer, APS, etc, profit or nonprofit. And as a consequence the public have to spend money to get access.

Are you asking as a professor, or as a student?

@Buffy I am asking as a person from a purely objective point of view.

Does having a shared set of notes contribute to students achieving the learning outcomes for the course?  And what do you mean by publish? Put on a website? Incorporate into a commercial work? Be part of an article evaluating the effectiveness of this as a learning tool?

@Elin Sorry I should make it clear. By "publish" I mean publishing the notes as a textbook to Springer or APS etc... (profit or non-profit). Under the professor's name.

"a shared set of notes" always has a possibility of "contribute to students achieving the learning outcomes for the course". It will be just a matter of big contribution or small contribution and whether students feel it's worth it.

Well students often don't think group projects are "worth it" but the data on learning says otherwise. I could see reason to think that having students do this, especially if they collaboratively edit the draft, could contribute to learning.  It's hard for me to imagine a real book based on student notes though.

@Elin actually this is not the same as the "group project". Student may already have the hand-written notes. And now they are supposed to type it up...

I didn't say it was the same, I said that the "students think it is worth it" standard may not be a good one.

If students take lecture notes on a class, and the professor later writes a book based on the class, then even if they don't consult the students' lecture notes, the professor could get sued for plagiarism. (And there indeed would be similarities ... the professor's book would be based on what they said in the class, and the lecture notes would also be based on what they said in the class.) So asking the students for permission to write a book based on the lecture notes might just be a sensible precaution.

@PeterShor Your first sentence is very surprising to me. So the credits of class materials are not solely the professors'? what would be the base for "plagiarism"?

@NoOne: Lawsuits don't have to actually be based on facts. If the professor's textbook happened to use some of the exact same sentences as in the student's notes (because the student took down the professor's words) how could you prove that it wasn't plagiarism?

@PeterShor Proving a negative is pretty difficult, wouldn't it be up to the students to prove that it was plagiarism?

@GrumpyCrouton: "Proving a negative is pretty difficult" — this is exactly why some professors might think it's prudent to have the students sign the agreement that the professor can use the lecture notes for their book.

Is it a class on typing or note-taking?  Because then it would be more legitimate.

“By ‘publication’ I mean publishing the notes as a textbook …. And as a consequence the public have to spend money to get access.” Huh? Are textbooks not in libraries in the US? And does it even matter to this question whether the public has to pay?

It would be unethical for a professor to publish something written by students under the professor’s name without express consent (which is to be given free of any coercive pressure) and coauthorship for the student. (See this recent discussion on a related type of abuse.)
It would also be self defeating and something that no competent professor I’ve met would ever wish to do. Students do not generally write notes at a level that comes close to the level most professors can write on their own. Publishing someone else’s subpar notes under your own name is a sure way to hurt your own reputation even if you do technically get some publication credit.
Setting aside the publication issue, it’s fine to have note-taking as an official course assignment if there is an educational rationale, which there often is. For example in mathematics graduate programs we try to get students to work on improving their mathematical writing skills, which are extremely important for success in research, and some writing assignments of this type are not uncommon.
If note-taking is not an official course assignment but the professor simply asks students to do it on a voluntary basis, the request should be made in a way that makes clear the students should feel free to say no. To put pressure on the students to do things they don’t want to do and that are not an explicit course assignment is unethical, regardless of whether the professor publishes the notes or not, and regardless of whether some payment is exchanged.

I really love your second paragraph. Especially "Students do not generally write notes at a level that comes close to the level most professors can write on their own"... and when students are taking turns to do this, there would be 20+ different styles/notation sets and numerous typos...

I never thought of it being "unethical" this way in that it could backfire, but Dan has a very good point here.

Why would typing up notes be worthy of coauthorship? Acknowledgement, sure, but authorship? Surely not.

@JackAidley well, it’s a bit ambiguous I think. My interpretation is that what OP likely means by “type notes” is “write notes based on the professor’s lecture”, which if done well (though it rarely is) involves not just copying but also paraphrasing things the professor said and wrote in class, adding clarifying remarks, filling in missing details etc. Thus coauthorahip would be warranted. But if OP just meant the clerical act of taking someone’s handwritten document and typing it up verbatim on the computer, then I agree with what you wrote.

@DanRomik: Fair enough.

There maybe an educational rationale to write notes, but not to type them as asked in the OP. Something written/drawn on a blackboard may not be easily expressible in LaTeX or whatever typesetting system in use; trying to work around this will take precious time from trying to understand the lecture.

@Ruslan the fact that it’s not easy makes the rationale stronger, not weaker. Research mathematicians have to know how to communicate their ideas effectively in writing to other mathematicians using the standard medium for doing so (LaTeX). A mathematician who doesn’t have this training will be disadvantaged and have diminished career prospects. So I’m not sure where you’re coming from with this comment.

@DanRomik taking lecture notes and taking notes while reading a book have an important difference: a lecture happens in real time, while a book-reading can be paused to figure out how to express a particular thing in a typesetting system. If you try to make this pause at a lecture, you'll miss something during this pause (or would you stop your lecturer because of your technical difficulty?). Even if you don't, you'll still lose attention at the content.

Actually, I might be taking the OP's requirement too literally, like "type in real time". If it's supposed to be like "take notes however you like, but have them typeset by the end of the course", then I retract my comments.

To Dan and Ruslan, as the OP I find it interesting to read your comments. In my question I didn't say whether students are typing during the class or after the class. By I can tell you from my experience that if notes-scribing becomes the requirement for the course, then many students would choose to type in the real time to "save their time", even if that means they will not have enough time to understand the professor's lectures. Writing math expressions can be very time-consuming when it comes to matrices and long equations, compared with hand-writting.

@NoOne To say nothing of the fact that it's impossible to take detailed notes after the fact, unless you have somehow recorded the lecture. I can't see even a particularly clever student typsetting in LaTeX in realtime, unless they have first created a document template with macros specific to the professor & course.

@Ruslan and NoOne, the real-time versus not real time question is a distraction. As far as ethics is concerned, what matters is that the professor reasonably believes the assignment will provide an educational benefit to the students, as opposed to assigning it for some corrupt, self-interested reason. It could be that the professor is making a bad decision and that the excessive, real-time note taking ends up distracting the students from the course material. But making mistakes and being unethical are two very different things.

Is it really unethical if the professor pays and/or acknowledges the students, as mentioned in the question? And I also think it's reasonable to assume that the professor would edit the notes before publishing them, to bring them up to his standard of quality. Basically, it seems like he's asking the students to students to be stenographers, to save him lots of typing.

@Barmar see my response to the comment by Jack Aidley. I am assuming the students’ contribution is of a creative nature. If it’s just stenography, then you are correct and coauthorship is not appropriate.

I have several personal experiences to add to others here.
I was one of four graduate students in George Mackey's course who volunteered to take complete notes. He then used those to write a book. We were thanked in the acknowledgments. I learned a lot. See The Mathematical Theory of Quantum Mechanics.
Once when I decided to write a text after teaching a course I contacted a student who I knew had taken really good notes. I thanked her in the Preface for providing a zeroth draft.
In several courses I taught, students rotated taking notes and posting them on a course web page. (This did not work out particularly well. Most days I think it was useful only for the note taker.)
In none of these cases was pay involved.

Maybe it would be helpful (to compare with other comments/answers) to say something about how close the students' notes were to Mackey's actual book.

@Kimball Mackey's text was clearly his work and words. not just an edit of our notes. It was a long time ago, so I can't say for sure how much what we provided him made its way nearly unchanged into the book. Not much.

There are a couple of issues, but, assuming that students don't volunteer and aren't paid, the most important consideration is whether it has an "educational" purpose or not. As you state it, it sounds like you think it doesn't, but I've required my students to take notes, though not for my own use. In fact I've required them to give me back (verbally upon questioning) the most important lesson from either the current or previous lecture.
But there is a clear educational purpose in that. Had I asked for them to be turned in to me to be reviewed, there is still an educational purpose.
I can easily imagine that the professor, indeed, is just forcing them to learn better study habits exhibiting that. But if it is done for purely selfish reasons then it would not be ethical.
However, the professor already has the information, though maybe not in a typed format. They could actually ask for a scribe to take down their lectures if they lecture completely extemporaneously, and pay the scribe.
I was once in a senior level undergraduate course where the students actually had to teach the course. We were given (or chose, I can't remember) topics that we would need to prepare a lecture for a few weeks ahead and we created and presented our lecture. The prof was there and gave us feedback later. I don't remember doing a great job and of getting appropriate feedback, though there wasn't any embarrassment generated by the prof. But we sort of knew whether we were doing a good job or not. The prof was actually one of the best teachers and the best lecturers, so it wasn't laziness. Just a teaching technique.
However, if you are a professor considering any of the scenarios you give, then you should check with the department head that they agree that the motive is educational progress of the students, not exploitation.
And if you are a student who objects to this, explore whether there is an educational purpose, perhaps with the professor and perhaps with a department head. If there is not, then you have a legitimate right to opt out.

I have experienced this in a couple of instances myself.  I took a graduate level Natural Language Processing course in my undergraduate, where the professor would have a student, rotating each class, be a scribe for the lecture.  This was more of a volunteer thing where a student took notes for a particular lecture and posted them on the discussion board so that other students could go over the notes and understand the lecture better.  There was another case in an honors undergraduate theory class where the professor had students similarly scribe lecture notes in LaTeX, with the incentive that the best scribed notes would receive a small amount of extra credit.
However, as far as paying students for this goes, I haven't seen or heard of an instance of this, because from my experience this would be highly unethical.  Same goes for taking notes, and the professor taking credit for it, it could happen, but it's just really unethical for the professor to take full credit for something someone else wrote.  I have seen instances where professors have posted notes taken by students, but those instances the professor simply just cited the students who took these notes.

Thanks for sharing your experiences. But why do you believe that it is highly unethical for professors to pay students to take notes rather than ask them to do it without paying? I believe it is a little bit unethical for students to ask for pay, though.

@NoOne Unless they're doing it as a paid job, if this is a volunteer thing among a lecture section it's unethical for a professor to pay a student in that class to scribe for one or a few lectures in a class they're taking.  Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, and OP may be referring to paid note-takers or TA's taking notes, then it's more ethical, but I haven't seen fellow students get paid for taking notes in my experience.

Is it appropriate for professors to ask students to type notes for their classes (with or without paying students) in United States?

I don't think it's appropriate for a professor to approach individuals to do so, in any situation you've listed, this is because it may seem like undue pressure. Proposing a general solicitation for a volunteer seems fine, however.

Prof pays student for published notes: Seems fine to me.

Prof does not pay student and publishes notes: It's unclear what you mean by "publish." If it's just on their website, then sure? As long as it's not directed at one person. If it's a textbook for which the professor is (nominally) paid, then I do not think this is ethical.

Prof pays students to prepare notes for class: It would be unusual (what if there's not enough slots for everyone?) but not unethical.

Prof facilitates shared doc, no payment: Sure, this happens all the time.

As another example, if familiar with one university would sometimes request a student volunteer to share their notes with a student who had a disability. I do not know if they were paid for their notes.

Requiring all students to do something which makes some students uncomfortable is probably a good thing! That is, as long as it's relevant to the class or their careers. It gives those students a chance to improve their weaknesses.

@jpaugh What? Your comment seems unrelated to my answer.

Your answer says that it's unacceptable for the professor to approach individual students, unless they are volunteers. I disagree, as long as each individual is required to do it, and it's relevant to the course somehow.

@jpaugh If each individual is required to do something relevant to the course, that's just homework. What I am saying is that a prof should not pick a student and say "Can you take detailed notes for me?" That is undue pressure. It is OK, IMO to stand up on the first day of class and say "I will pay a student $10/week to send me detailed notes," and see if anyone accepts.

Approaching individuals is the opposite of requiring everyone to do it, so I'm not sure how you got there

Ok. I see your perspective. I'm thinking of a scenario where the prof says, "Amie has to do it today, and Tom has to do it tomorrow." Each individual is "singled-out," but it is implied that everyone will (eventually) be singled out.


text:
Citing works in a list without having read them
I know this may seem a duplicate question, but I haven't find an answer to my question and I am scared to ask my supervisor.
I am doing my literature review in sociolinguistics and I have different reputable sources: articles and books.
Most of the authors quote the same famous works while describing that they made a contribution to the discipline.
Many of these works are well known and not easy to find (old).
So, is it ok if I write "[...] These themes were examinated by other scholars (e.g. Smith 1970, Doe 1977)", without having read those two books by Smith and Doe, but having read reviews and studies that explain them?
I have just read a dissertation which was written in less than 1 year after fieldwork and it has hundreds or references: I can't imagine the author actually read it. It seems common to me.
Can somebody clarify?

How can you cite something to support, or not, your arguement without reading it?

Well, if I am reading studies that ALL mention the fact that Smith and Doe studied Italians in New York, I would say that it's OK if I say the same thing.
Obviously, if I go into details of the study, or I quote something, I must read it. But this is a mere list, just to give references.

To give you an example, this is from a thesis that was accepted in my university. The introduction of this thesis is all like this. I cannot believe that the author has read all the papers he cites and he wrote the thesis in one year, while also analyzing data etc.
Example: https://imgur.com/EsKUHMU

There are two answers that are not logically exclusive:

When you cite something, you should be reasonably certain that the source pertains to the situation and that you are representing its information accurately.
Many scholars cite materials they have not read closely, have read in parts, or that they have read through another source.

Usually, you need to read or at least consult a source in order to verify that your understanding of the source is correct.
For example, in my field (English), I read most texts I cite, since many texts are primary or archival sources that I interpret closely, or secondary sources that I engage with directly. I need a high level of understanding to respond to other scholars directly. However, there are some secondary sources that provide minor support to what I write. I skim, reading enough to understand the argument or to find the chapter or section I needed. I've never cited a source without at least looking at it.
In many STEM fields, the tendency is to cite more and with infrequent quotation. Especially in introductions or literature reviews, providing a representation of available knowledge is more important than responding to an individual author or argument. For many of these sources, the texts may have been read or skimmed, in whole or in part. For an article, they may only read the abstract and the results. How close they read those sources often depends on the level of specificity in their reference. Is it one of several works on a rat behavior, or are you indicating a specific result? At a minimum, I'd expect such authors to look at the source, even if they don't read in full.
In whatever field you're in, the presumption is that the cited fact or argument is accurate. So you are responsible for certifying that the information is accurate. If you use the source extensively, you should read it. If you use the source quickly, you should at least look at it and double-check its credibility, even if you don't read it in full. Don't rely on secondary summary alone. The Office of Research Integrity (a unit of HHS) has this advice in an article titled "Citing Sources that Were Not Read or Thoroughly Understood":

The reader should note, however, that there might be instances in which the practice of citing sources that were not read may be acceptable. For example, an author may simply wish to point out a well-known discovery or theory and provide the reader with the original citation. When this is done without misleading the reader into believing that the author read the paper detailing the discovery and is thoroughly acquainted with its contents, then no real harm is done. For example, in a paper on intelligence testing I may want to refer the reader to the psychometric properties of the X test and write: “for a review of validity of reliability of X test see reference Y”. Although I am clearly aware that reference Y reviews validity and reliability for various intelligence tests, including test X, my citation of this work does not imply that I have read and processed its contents. I am merely aware that relevant material may be found in that reference and point the reader to it. However, if in a different paper I were to write that “Smith (1879) studied the effects of X on Y and concluded that X is as important as Z and both are critical causal variables in the incidence of Y” such a statement strongly suggests that my summary of the study is, in fact, based on my reading of that paper.

ORI rightly points out that whether and how closely you need to read it relates directly to whether I'm claiming an author addresses a general topic or whether I am specifying a result. If I'm doing the latter, I had better ensure with my own eyes that I've seen and understood that result. That is why they provide this general guideline:

GUIDELINE 18: Generally, when describing others’ work, do not cite an original paper if you are only relying on a secondary summary of that paper. Doing so is a deceptive practice, reflects poor scholarly standards, and can lead to a flawed description of the work described.

You need to be able to stand behind the claims you are making, with reasonable certainty.
To what extent reading a source before citing it is necessary for this will vary, as will how detailed any such reading needs to be. What reasonable means will also depend on the context.
Examples:

If all you are claiming is that a particular source covers a particular topic, it takes very little effort to verify this. Checking the abstract would usually suffice. The risk in getting it wrong is small, so trusting other people on this doesn't seem too dangerous.
If the precise conditions of a mathematical theorem matters for whether or not it is applicable in your setting, you better double-check that the actual theorem says what you need it to say, rather than relying on an abstract, etc.
If you are weighing in on a philosophical debate, I would not trust a critic of a particular work to accurately depict the original authors views - reading the original (carefully) seems unavoidable here.

Citations typically serve three distinct purposes.
A citation can be there to substantiate your points, and to provide evidence for whatever you are saying. A mistake here can bring down an entire paper, and relying (purely) on an indirect source seems very risky here.
Citations are also the scientific currency. This means that citing a secondary source in place of a hard-to-verify original one is problematic, because it does not give proper credit. Here is where citing completely inaccessible works will show up occassionally.
Finally, (as in the example in the question) citations can be there to provide broader context. For these, a balance between taking effort to verify them, taking the literature consensus for granted, and simply not mentining them will be the way to go.
If in doubt, state that according to source X, in source Y the following happens.
There is no reason here not to have Y in your bibliography. Omitting it only makes it harder for your readers to track down Y, and it can deprive the authors of Y of a deserved citation.

The short answer to your question is no, you cannot cite works without having read them. But there is a solution:
The fact that you are reading multiple works that explain what Smith and Doe did in their research will work well enough for your literature review. If Source X and Source Y say that Smith and Doe did work on certain themes, then say "These themes were examined by Smith and Doe, as later scholars argue that they did Z" (Source X, Source Y), where Z is whatever Sources X and Y say.
While it is certainly better to read the original source material, a literature review can still be effective if you explain how you came to know what is in the original source material. Additionally, it is possible that Sources X and Y misrepresent what is in the original source material; if you cite the original with someone else's interpretation, there is a potential for many problems (both with scholarly knowledge and another with academic dishonesty).

Barring limitations like the destruction of sources, the inability to find "old" sources is usually not an acceptable excuse for not including them in a paper. There are many avenues to obtain hard to find sources, like InterLibrary Loan, for example, which should be a service you can use for free at your university. Ask a librarian if you need help.

I have just read a dissertation which was written in less than 1 year after fieldwork and it has hundreds or references: I can't imagine the author actually read it.

It is important to keep academic work honest. You would be surprised how much extra reading one does when they are passionate enough about a subject to write a dissertation on it, and besides, this is not a viable excuse for cutting corners.

No, it is not. But in that specific case, I checked the bibliography and there are at least 50 PhD thesis plus many other books and articles.
I don't think that a person can read all that material, write their dissertation and transcribing interviews and analyze them in just one year. I think he mentioned those dissertation in the literature review because they are well known in the field and quoted by others.

@Stef: Did the author provide any discussion about the purpose of the bibliography? I wrote my 220+ page Ph.D. thesis with 900+ references in about 6 months (the work mainly based on previous 6 months' research), and the last two sentences of my Ph.D. thesis abstract are: We conclude with two historical chapters containing some refrences [sic] that do not seem to be generally known. An extensively annotated and cross-referenced bibliography of over 900 items related to our subject matter is provided. ("do not seem to be generally known" was a huge understatement, by the way)

(a few minutes later) On the other hand, I don't think I actually cited any of the references that I had not at least seen firsthand. Indeed, I went to great lengths to obtain photocopies of virtually every one of my references (cited or not) since at the time I was in close proximity to 3 major university libraries, and I was fairly sure that in later years I would never again have the opportunity to get some of the papers (this being before the internet, whereby now most everything has been digitized). Also, I wanted to ensure accuracy in the titles, page numbers, etc.