text:
I've been admitted to multiple PhD programs, how should I choose between them?
I've been admitted to more than one PhD program, and I'm having a very hard time making a decision.
The programs I'm accepted to have advantages and disadvantages with respect to one another. How do I weigh the relative importance of difference aspects of the program in order to make an optimal decision?
Ultimately, this is not a decision that anybody else can make for me, because everyone has different values and priorities, and the right decision for me may not be the right decision for somebody else. However, you can help  by giving me more information about how different features of a program will affect my experience in graduate school and my future career.
The offers under consideration differ in a variety of ways:

Ranking
Advisor
Research group
Funding
Other considerations

I need to know more about what kinds of things are important and how these will affect me, so that I can make an informed decision about balancing competing criteria.
Note to readers: This is a special community wiki 'canonical' question that aggregates advice on a very broad topic - see more information in this meta post. Each answer here relates to a different metric that one might take under consideration. If you have a new "critical" metric not in the list above that you believe should be an important part of the decision, post a new answer. If you want to add something related a metric that's already represented in its own answer, edit that answer.

A simple rule of thumb: by far the most important are supervisor and topic. Everything else can be sorted out. Do you get along with your supervisor (and can he provide the support that you need)? Do you love the topic? (You'd better do, as you will spend 3 years of your life with it, it's longer than many a marriage). Both should be an unconditional yes.

@CaptainEmacs I partly disagree, not only supervisor and topic are important but also the research environment in university and possibility of interaction with other people are also very very important factors.

@optimalcontrol You have a point - but I think the OP has difficulties with prioritisation. If research environment is fine and the two points above are not, this cannot be compensated. However, the other way around might work. Plus, I caveated it: "rule of thumb"...

First and most important criteria is Passion. Please Take up a program or subject to which you are really passionate about and you are sure that you will never get tired of it. Rest Everything will fall in place.

Advisor
Your advisor will be a really, really, really key part of your PhD experience, and can make all the difference between success and failure.
There are many different advising styles, and you should learn more about potential advisors to find one whose style works for you.
walkmanyi sums it up:

Many don't speak about this too often, but with an advisor you are not only choosing a field of interest, but you are choosing a mentor. By all means, you want to "tick well" with him/her. There is not much good for a PhD student having a star researcher advisor whom they see once in a quarter and who is a sociopath on a personal level (this is a bit too extreme, but think about it as a continuum between extremes). Choose somebody with whom you will be able to work, whose example it is worth to follow, from whom you want to learn, not only the scientific stuff, but also workstyle, level of quality he/she strives for, etc. These soft reasons are often more important than anything else.

Fomite has a fairly comprehensive answer on how to judge potential advisors by looking beyond their recent publications:

There are a few things I would generally look at in a potential advisor beyond just their research/publications:

Who were the co-authors on their papers? Are they actively collaborating with people in your field - people who could be potentially useful for post-doc posts, etc.? Do their students often show up as primary authors on publications, or are they invariably buried in the middle of a long list of authors?
Personality. This goes beyond just do you like the person. Do they prefer frequent updates, meetings and the like, or is the occasional check-in enough? Are they a morning person and you prefer working nights, or the other way around? If you send a long email, would it get answered, or do they not often fail to answer emails? I've had some professors who I'm very fond of nevertheless would make poor advisors because of wildly disparate working styles.
How are their students funded? Your funding stream can have serious impact on your completion time and productivity. If every semester, its a desperate Pick-N-Mix of funded side projects, TAships, etc. you're going to have a lot on your plate that, while potentially an interesting experience, will slow down your progress.
Where do their students end up? Do they have decent career trajectories? Are they supportive of alternative paths like industry or government?
Rank and age. A young professor might be more aggressive and eager, on the other hand they're less established, don't necessarily have the same level of institutional support, and if they're not yet tenured, its possible they'll disappear. An older professor may be more established and stable, but might not use "cutting edge" techniques, or feel less of an internal drive to publish.

Henry adds that there may also be some benefits to having an advisor who is generally well-liked by his/her peers:

I'd add to your list how your advisor is viewed in the rest of the field. Not just on the quality of research (though that's important too), but again, how much people like your advisor personally. Again, a small factor, but having other people in your field like your advisor can make a difference.

But really, the best way to find out about a potential advisor is to talk to their current students, and we have plenty of questions for you to ask!
Piotr Migdal says the most important question to ask is

Are you happy with your PhD in general?
It covers a lot of issues, but usually you don't want to do a PhD in a place where students are unhappy and frustrated. The good thing is that if students feel really bad, they rarely hide it.

but he adds a few more, too:

General contacts on the line student-advisor (How much contact and support can you expect, both for research and administrative stuff?).
Funding (Is it a problem or a non-issue, e.g. for attending a conference?).
Research (What the actual research looks like? What is the toughest part, biggest emphasis on, the most time-consuming part, etc?)
How much time does it typically take to finish PhD? Does it happen often that someone drops out?

Suresh suggests asking:

does PA [potential advisor] have time to meet with you when you need help ? Or does PA [potential advisor] want too many meetings ?
how much guidance are you given ? Too much ? Too little ?
is the relationship "work only" ? Do you talk about non technical academic issues ?

Theresa Liao has some more good questions to ask current students:

Do/Did you (the current/former PhD) enjoy working in this supervisor's research group?  Do research group members work with each other collaboratively and help each other? And ask the PhD student to elaborate.
This question tries to get at what the research group dynamic is. This is fairly important in my opinion - the last thing you want to concern yourself with is politics in the research group. I have seen PhD friends frustrated by this.

Ideally you should ask this question in a less formal setting (some grad school visits will have time for social events). And sometimes you meet grad students who are comfortable sharing their experience openly. If you are not comfortable asking this question, as it can be an awkward question for the supervisor's current PhD, you can simply observe the interaction between group members, and between group members and the supervisor.

Is the supervisor generally available? Does it take a long time to arrange a meeting to meet with the supervisor (used to be the case with my supervisor because he was so busy)? Does the supervisor respond immediately and effectively (another friend's supervisor tend to leave questions to last minute)?
Are group members expected to work 24/7 or 9-to-5? Some supervisors expect you to reply to emails immediately, and some work strictly business hours.
Does the supervisor take a hands-on or hands-off approach? Are students expected to be really independent with lots of freedom, or are they guided/directed along the way with less freedom?
Does the supervisor support his/her students to consider career paths outside of academia? Some supervisors only want their students to go into academia, and it will be harder to discuss options with such supervisors.

For Q2-Q5, the right answer will depend on your own preference - what you want is a supervisor whom you will work well with.

The relationship with your advisor is probably the most important thing - to be blunt, there's no point being on the highest-ranked program if you're going to quit because of the stress.  This answer also touches on how the advisor can help deal with some of the other issues.  I feel like it needs a Tl;dr as it's so comprehensive - maybe I'll be able to help with that when I've got time.

I second Chris H's comment.  Advisor is key.  I have had students who went chasing after 'brand name' (high ranking) universities but got burnt because their supposely famous adviser is hardly to be found or has a crap personality.  So they dropped out.  An adviser's ability to produce good research is also key.  I've had a very good student go with an adviser who happens to have a pot of money.  The adviser has a poor track record.  After three years in, the student hasn't got a single publication.

[pardon the sarcasm] Although this answer is good, how can someone who has never met potential advisor know in so much detail about him/her? Should they pack their bags and make an (overseas) trip to interview all the advisors of all the universities from which they have an offer? :)

@morpheus As it says in the answer, "the best way to find out about a potential advisor is to talk to their current students" (and Skype works just fine for that)

Funding
On questions related to self-funding a PhD vs. accepting an offer with funding, most answers point out that lacking funding has broader implications for your experience in graduate school - it's not just about the debt. There is a strong consensus that it is not a good idea to accept an offer without funding in any field and country where funding is typical.  In some areas, however, such as  humanities studies in the United States, a funded Ph.D. is not typical.
In some fields and locations (e.g. computer science in the United States), a standard PhD offer comes with funding. In situations like this, JeffE says:

Do not accept a PhD admission offer without funding. If they really want you, they'll pay for you.

and elaborates:

A typical PhD offer from a strong department includes guaranteed funding in some form. My department promises five years of funding to every incoming PhD student, assuming they make steady progress toward their degree. (Do not accept a PhD admission offer without funding. If they really want you, they'll pay for you.) Most of our students take 6 years to finish, but in practice, (100-ε)% of our students are funded for their entire stay. A typical theory student in my department is a TA for 2-4 semesters and an RA of fellow for the rest.
When a student is admitted, the department is making a contractual commitment to funding that student, assuming they make adequate progress toward their degree.

This is echoed in an answer by ff524 on another question.
vadim123 warns:

Choosing the no-support program is a large gamble. You should take it if you're confident that the program made a mistake in not offering you funding -- you have tremendous talent that for some reason has not been revealed in your record. Absent such a situation you should take the support.

On a similar question, L Platts points out that a program offering funding is likely to be more committed to your success, which has broader implications for your experience in the program (not just your debt):

If option A is research council funded (or is funded by a high-profile UK body or another funder demanding results for their money), this would weigh heavily in my decision to take it, even if it is at a less prestigious university. There will be consequences for the group and department if a council-funded student fails to finish by the four-year deadline, and this means that both the supervisor and institution are absolutely committed to the student succeeding and solutions will have to be found if things start to go wrong.

Paul points out that many programs won't even allow self-funded students, for good reason:

In science-related graduate schools, it is quite often the case that students will not be accepted into the program unless they have some sort of support (i.e. department assistantship, scholarship/fellowship, etc...). Students who try to do it all on their own often find themselves under even more pressure than a funded student. On top of trying to pass extremely difficult courses and pursue original, cutting edge research, they may find themselves also working multiple unrelated jobs that barely make ends meet for rent, much less tuition and all other debts incurred along the way. Often, unfunded students succumbs to financial pressures and drop out to pursue more financially stable opportunities.

and continues:

I believe this is a major reason why self-funded students are often not even allowed in graduate programs: statistically speaking, their success rate is likely too low to merit taking a chance.

ending with this bit of advice:

My advice to you:  If you're offered funding, take it!.  If you are accepted into a graduate program and are not offered funding  and don't have any other source of funding apart from yourself, then don't try to do it all on your own.  The sheer cost of graduate school, combined with the uncertainty of you graduating from the program, along with the nightmare of trying to pay off student loan debt for the rest of your life (even bankruptcy will not save you from student loan debt); it's just not worth it to you.

You may be wondering whether it's a good idea to rely on the possibility of getting funding after you enroll in the program. ff524 says that it's a gamble:

It's not impossible to get funding after beginning the program (e.g., if you really hit it off with a potential PhD advisor who has grant money to spare). But this depends very much on luck and circumstance, not just on merit; so unless you like living dangerously, it's not an advisable strategy.

Having said all that, if you do go the self-funded route, Paul has some reassurance for you:

You need not worry about the existence of a caste-system among graduate students. You will not be treated any differently than any other student if you are accepted into a program and not funded.

and Suresh says not to worry about how future hiring committees will perceive this:

All a recruiting committee should (and does) care about post-PhD is the quality of your work (for faculty positions there are additional issues). No one cares about how you were paid to do that work.

Ranking
In deciding how to weigh the ranking of each department under consideration in your decision, it's important to realize how the ranking of the department where you get your PhD will affect your future.
In this answer, JeffE says that the quality of your research is by far the most important factor in faculty hiring in his field:

Nobody in theoretical computer science cares where you got your degree. Really. We. Do. Not. Care. We only care about the quality and visibility of your results. Publish strong papers and give brilliant talks at top conferences. Convince well-known active researchers to write letters raving about your work. Make a good product and get superstars to sell it for you. Do all that, and we'll definitely want to hire you, no matter where you got your degree.

but suggests that the quality of the research you produce during your PhD will depend on the environment you're in, which in turn depends on your department ranking:

In my experience, where you get your degree is strongly correlated with successful research. I got my Master's degree at UC Irvine in 1992 and my PhD at UC Berkeley in 1996. The biggest difference I saw between the two departments was the graduate-student research culture. Every theory student at Berkeley regularly produced good results and published them at top conferences. When the FOCS deadline rolled around each year, the question I heard in the hallways from other students was not "You know the deadline is coming up?" or "Are you submitting anything?" but "What are you submitting?", because "nothing" was the least likely answer. Everyone simply assumed that if you were there, you were ready and able to do publishable research. Publishing a paper wasn't exceptional, it was just what you did. That cloud of free-floating confidence/arrogance had a huge impact on my own development as a researcher.

In other words, he concludes:

getting a PhD from a top department definitely helps, but more by helping you become a better researcher than by making you look better on paper.

xLeitix offers similar advice here: don't go to a particular university just because of its high ranking, but make sure that the environment in which you do your PhD is one that enables you to do high-quality research.
Corvus strongly emphasizes the importance of surrounding yourself with high-quality peers, which you're more likely to find in a highly ranked program:

I think what matters most is the quality of the students who will be your peers. You need to surround yourself with students who, from day 1, expect nothing less of themselves than to produce novel scientific research of the highest caliber, present it at top meetings, publish it in top journals, and forth. Ultimately you will learn more from your peers than from your advisor. A sufficiently talented and ambitious cohort will hold the bar high for you and push you to excel whereas a sufficiently talentless and unambitious cohort will help you make excuses for your own failures to reach your potential.
In my experience, top schools with top graduate programs have the sorts of students you want to surround yourself with. Second tier regional programs may, but I have yet to see it.

eykanal adds that if you're interested in a career outside of academia, then ranking matters more, even irrespective of its impact on the quality of your research:

When looking for a job in academia, potential employers will look at many factors, including publication record, research success, research track, who your advisor was, etc. The school is important but other factors are involved.
When looking for a job outside of academia, they will look at your GPA and the name of the university from which you graduated. In this case, your university could easily be a "make it or break it" part of the deal.

If you're concerned about being outclassed by the other students in your program at a top school, Dnuorg Spu says not to worry:

My experience as a student at a Extremely Well-Ranked School is that other students are very supportive, and empathetic to the experience of getting through a tough program. In short: don't worry. It will be ok.

and JeffE adds:

Do not listen to the Impostor Syndrome.

(More on that insidious impostor syndrome here.)

Research group
This answer by JeffE is so perfect, I'm just going to quote it verbatim. He says that asking about the quality of a research group is the wrong question,

What you should be asking is "How can I judge which research group will best support my educational and career goals?"  And yes, this is a very different question.  And while lab productivity may be correlated with the future career prospects of its members, the two are not identical.  Some great researchers are terrible advisors.

Do the lab's students have a consistent strong track record of publishing new results?
Are the lab's students strongly represented at conferences, workshops, and the like?  In particular: Are the lab's students given ample opportunity to present their research outside their home department?
Are the lab's students given ample mentoring and support, both in developing their own research agendas and in applying for external fellowships, lab exchanges, internships, postdoctoral positions, faculty positions, and so on?
Are the lab's students given ample opportunity for substantial intellectual contributions to the lab's published research, or are they just lab/code monkeys?
Does the lab's research agenda closely match your own research interests and abilities?
Most importantly: Where do the lab's former students work now?  (The worst possible answer is "We don't know.")

Almost none of these questions can be answered accurately without physically visiting the lab and talking directly to the students without the PI present.  If travel is impractical, use Skype / Google hangout / Facetime / whatever.  Or telephone.  Or, if all else fails, email.

Publishing is key in academia, so to get a sense of a research group, it's also a good idea to look at publications that have come out of the group, as suggested here:

How many articles are published, particularly in high quality journals relevant to the field of interest
Is there a consistent strong track record of publishing new results?
Their history of representation and contributions to conferences, workshops and the like

Alumni and placement
Different programs and adviors produce different types of students. Here are some questions to ask yourself:

Does the school fit into your career goals?
Where do students from your prospective advisors and programs end up? Do their career paths align with yours? Do they require post-docs? If so, how long?
If you want to go into academia, do the alumni hold professorships at schools you want to work at (e.g., Ivy League schools tend to hire more from other Ivy League schools, Big 10 schools often hire from other Big 10 programs)?
If you want to work in a government lab, does your program place students in those lab?
Do students from your program work for industry? Are they the companies you want to work for? (e.g., Big-Pharm, Google, etc.)
Would networking with the students in the program help your future career goals? These students may be potential collaborators for the rest of your career.

As an example, my graduate program places most people in industry, consulting, and government, but only a few in academia. Job placement is a point of pride for my PhD program, but many programs do not publicly disclose where alumni end up or only showcase students who end up in academia. This posting on Eco-Log talks about placement more. I wanted to be a government research scientists so my program was a perfect fit. Also, I was co-advised by a math professor who places many of his students at Department of Energy labs because he previously worked at one.
Similarly, for life sciences (e.g., biology, ecology, natural resource management), students getting a PhD in a USGS Co-op program greatly increase their chances of getting a job as a government researcher or having the network to get USGS or USFWS grants as an academic.
Placement is important if you want to avoid potentially long post-docs; academia and other research jobs can be difficult to break into. Both Nature and Science talk about this.
Also, many posts on this site focus on the post-doc experience because it can be more stressful than the PhD experience for some. For example, see When should you move on from a postdoc position?, Failing postdoc?, Is there a stigma in computer science toward too many postdoc positions?.
In summary, think about where you want to end up after your PhD and try to choose a program accordingly.
Edit This new post talks about placement after finishing a PhD: Is it a red flag for a PhD program if their graduating students cannot find postdoc?

Also, I could not find any answers on Academia.SE talking about job placement. Please edit in any that I missed and let me know what key words you used for your search.

Other considerations
Sometimes all of your offers are equivalent with respect to the "key" considerations, and you may want to take some "minor" criteria into account.
aesmail reports:

I applied to six graduate schools in my field, and was accepted at all of them. The criteria I used to whittle down the choices were:

Did I like the people in the department I was visiting?  (This surprisingly did eliminate one school.)
Did I want to go to live in the city where the school was for five or so years? (One more down, four left.)
Could I find enough people I was interested in working for, so that if I didn't get my top choice, I'd still be happy with the projects I'd be taking?
Can I financially afford to live in the city? (One more down, two left.)

At that point, however, the remaining criteria were all competing with one another: one school offered me a lot more money, the other had a lot better location. Both offered plenty of research, and both had excellent reputations in their field. Ultimately, for me, the location, combined with the slightly higher general profile of the school I attended, swayed the balance for me.

Dan C. emphasizes the social and cultural benefits of leaving your comfort zone:

One big advantage of changing schools is that you meet new people. Most people have a few things they're really good at. By meeting new people, you get to learn the new things that they are really good at. More generally, you get to experience the culture of a different place and group of people (both academically and socially). This helps to give you a more developed sense of what is normal (reasonable to expect), and likely will expose you to new insights. All else being (close to) equal, I suggest that you move.

On a similar note, ff524 addresses the advantages and disadvantages of continuing in your bachelors/masters department for your PhD vs. leaving your academic comfort zone:

If you stay, you won't have to interrupt your research to apply to other schools and transition to a new group. Staying where you are is a "safe" choice.
If you go somewhere else, some of your weaknesses (which you are able to ignore in your current position) may be exposed, and you'll have to work on improving them. And you will probably meet new collaborators (especially if you go to anther country) and be exposed to new ideas and techniques that will be difficult to learn, but will make you a better and more capable researcher.
So the answer to your question depends on what you want to gain from your PhD: Do you want to get a degree and some nice publications? Then staying where you are sounds like the easiest way. Or do you want to improve yourself and broaden yourself as a researcher? Then you might be better off leaving.
Having said that - of course, even if you stay, you can still challenge yourself and improve yourself and your capabilities. But since you don't have to "prove yourself" in your current position, there's nothing forcing you to do so - you'd have to be exceptionally self-motivated and disciplined.


text:
Would you discourage your undergrad from taking a year off to work on a self-devised project?
The student is in fourth semester and wants to learn about a certain technical field on his own and try out a more complex project on that knowledge.
The project idea is unique, but unlikely to be successfull, as similar projects in the past have not been. He would learn something, ideally.
Would you say it is injudicious to discourage him or would you actively discourage him? The project is an electronics project.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it possible to submit a PhD thesis based on published journal papers without spending years as a grad student? If so, what part of the world?
In what academic cultures is it possible to submit a doctoral thesis without being enrolled into a doctoral program?
What I mean is this: if I had some scientific journal papers and I assemble a dissertation out of it, can I submit it and organise only a defense and not a multi-year process with other duties?

Are you thinking of the sorts of things mentioned in this Q&A?: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44382/can-you-get-a-phd-based-on-work-or-life-experience

I think only the Jessop answer at that link is relevant, actually. But this seems rare. Is the question here theoretical, or something you are interested in?

Please define "being enrolled into a doctoral program". What this means will be different in different countries, if it applies at all.

Doctoral program: an organised course that has an entrance examination and includes duties on behalf of the participant. What I ask is this: if I had some scientific journal papers and I assemble a dissertation out of it, can I submit it and organise only a defense and not a multi-year process with other duties?

This process is known as PhD by publication in the UK but the process differs depending on the university. More information here: https://www.findaphd.com/advice/phd-types/phd-by-publication.aspx and an example from my own university: https://www.port.ac.uk/study/postgraduate-research/research-degrees/phd-by-publication.

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


text:
PhD Application - if/where to explain reasons for poor GPA 10 years ago
This is a follow-up to my previous question. I'm currently in the process of applying for PhD programs. I finished college with a poor GPA 10 years ago; since then, I have become a successful scientist in industry.
Some of the applications have an interesting question, on the lines of - "does your academic transcript properly represent your abilities" - which I assume is a space to explain why a poor GPA happened in one's past and how one has moved on.
My top choice program, however, has no such question. I did email a prospective guide and had a quick phone call with him about my interests, where he agreed we would be a good match and asked me to add his name in my essays so my application would be routed to him.
I've read several articles on how a statement of purpose should highlight only one's strengths and not gloss over poor performances (especially since they were 10+ years ago), but I'm concerned that without an explanation my application wouldn't be given a second glance. In the best case, I would be invited for an interview and at that point I could explain what went wrong and how I've moved on from it.
So what would be my best bet here?

Mention nothing in my essays, focus only on the positives and hope that the other facets of my application would intrigue the adcom to a point where they'd ask me for an interview?
Add a short blurb as to what went wrong, but without going into the gory details?
Go all in and explain everything?

Have you looked at the many similar questions posted before this one on Academia.SE? What did you find, and how does your question differ from them?

@BryanKrause I did, and I'm seeing contradicting advice, for instance https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/61213/when-to-explain-poor-performance-in-a-statement-of-purpose says to not mention anything negative in the SOP, while https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60238/should-i-explain-my-poor-performance-during-undergrad-due-to-mental-illness-wh?rq=1 advises to mention it. Of course, situations are different and there's no one-cut answer to every situation, so I thought I'd ask for advice here

Clearly they are different circumstances: in the first one there is an isolated poor grade with no associated hardship or explanations (just excuses), in the second there is a period of mental illness that is overcome. See also https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5163/should-medical-conditions-that-affected-performance-be-stated-in-personal-resear https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32112/how-much-detail-about-mental-health-issues-should-one-include-in-special-circum and others

My point is really that you are just going to get rehashed answers to those other questions, and this one should really be closed as a duplicate of whichever one you find fits your situation the best. StackExchange is not meant for individualized Q&A, it's meant for generalized questions that can produce broadly helpful answers.

Explain poor grades in your statement of purpose/essay, which is where evaluators are going to look for it. These statements can be up to a couple of pages long, so you can (and should) spare a paragraph (or two, if necessary) to the topic. The explanation must be detailed enough to give a reader a picture of what happened, and the confidence that the underlying problems have since been addressed.

The linked questions and other answer give a good approach for most students, but your case is a little different. In your case, the relevant fact is that the poor GPA was 10+ years ago, and in the interim, you have become a successful scientist.
Given this, your poor academic performance 10 years ago is not a negative that needs to be smoothed over; it's more of a "fun fact" about yourself. You should broach it in your statement of purpose as such: mention it briefly without making excuses, and then go into detail on your success over the past decade.
The key challenge will be hitting the right tone. The SOP should be a professional, fact-based document; it is not a time for introspection, oversharing, or therapy; at the same time, you do want to introduce yourself to the committee and share this "fun fact" about yourself as you explain what your purpose is in applying to this program.

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


text:
Friendship with Professor okay?
My professor and I walk to and from for every class I have with her, I am a female senior student and my professor is in her 30's. I've gotten to know her really well, we even had a random dinner together. I go to her office hours everyday and share a coffee or cookie. I go to her for many incidents, including a man who has been harassing her and me. She has a partner who she mentions all the time and she even tells me about her family situations back home. We've had several meetings with the University officials and discuss them afterwards. We email constantly, I consider her a friend or a mentor.
I'm curious to know where the boundaries are between my Professor and me (student)? What is the difference between a Mentor and Friend for professors and does it apply to me?

Answer to the title: yes, no problem. But the title might not reflect the question very well?

To the extent this is a problem it seems like it's more your professor's responsibility to worry about than yours, doesn't it?

To be clear, you do not have romantic feelings for her?

There's a line in "Good Will Hunting" movie, where Will hugs his psychiatrist and says: Does this violate the uh...patient-doctor relationship? And he responds: No, unless you grab my a**. (you get the idea...)

In my opinion professors are normal people and can have friends as everyone else, as long as it does not affect your grades and how you are treated in the classroom. I used to give classes where I taught my friend who I started studies at the same university with (he took a few gap years...). In the classroom and when grading exams and homeworks I treated him exactly as other students.
There is also a possibility that your institution's code of conduct has regulations pertaining to this situation. Nevertheless, they should be more of concern for your professor than you.

For sure, if OP ever finds herself saying "But I thought we were friends?!" in response to a purely academic action, there's a problem. In truth the real betrayal would be covering up an academic deficiency to preserve the friendship.

A level is friendship is fine. There's a difficult dividing line for the friendship may prevent the professor from being impartial.
From my own perspective, I'm interested in my students and want them to do well. I'm also keen to know how they're getting on with their studies and their preparation for employment. That automatically brings with it a level of friendliness.
In many cases, I also have a duty as a personal tutor. Part of that means keeping an interest in a student's welfare and helping to put support in place when necessary (it doesn't necessarily mean that I'm an expert in this support, but it does mean knowing who to refer students on to for it).
In many cases, it's much better to talk over a coffee.
A student might find me eating lunch in the canteen and that might be the best time for the time they feel comfortable talking to me. To me, that's generally fine too.
And I certainly know of professors who go above and beyond the call of duty to keep in contact with students when they're worried about them, for instance when there may be mental health issues involved. That can be the right thing to do in some situations.
Likewise, I've often gone out of my way to support students who want to push themselves academically or explore their options. I want students to do well, so if that means staying late to talk through ideas, sometimes best done with the aid of a beer, that's fine too. Likewise, I've encouraged students to join extra-curricular activities that might benefit them (such as tech communities), some of which I attend, so there can be some social crossover there too.
There are definitely former students who considered me as a mentor (and, I still stay in contact with many of them - some still consider me a mentor even years after they graduated).
I still remember when I started university, the very first meeting between a small group of us and a tutor involved him pouring a large glass of whiskey for everyone in the room (probably an expensive whiskey, but I wouldn't have known the difference). And, there were a lot of social events which, if you didn't take part in them, the tutors would have been worried about you. So, culturally, a certain level of friendship would be both expected and encouraged.
Now, that doesn't completely answer the original question regarding where the dividing line is.
For the example given, this does sound like a very close relationship. The danger would be if other students think that the friendship has crossed the line, or that they feel that they are missing out on a similar level of contact.
If the professor is happy and able to teach and assess you impartially, that's fine. But if the way her time is being monopolised (for instance taking up her office hours every day) means that she's not able to concentrate on her other duties, you might want to cut back, if only to be fair to her.

"A level is friendship is fine." Did that sentence get mangled? I don't understand it. ("A level of friendship is fine"?)

I am friendly with my students, but I keep boundaries, even if I would like some of them as friends.
Yes, you can say you treat them the same when grading etc, but this can lead to problems of appearance, for you and them, and also disappointment in the student if they don't get that there can't be any special treatment (even if they understand it on a rational level, it may not be that way emotionally).
This is especially so with students in my department (ie these students are likely to take my classes, or be subject of discussions during department meetings etc).
I see mentoring more of a professional thing, though the mentoring can include non-subject-matter topics too, such as how to successfully network, navigate political and administrative hurdles, advice on interpersonal conduct. A friendship is personal.
Once a student graduates, it becomes a different context and I am, and have been, in contact with former graduates without feeling any compunction about it.

Yes, it's fine.  It is also a great way to get references, since they are more familiar with you beyond your grades, they can give better recommendations.
As a grad student, I went drinking with many of my professors.

Well, Marty McFly befriended a 60+-year-old professor when he was a 14-year-old High School student, and subsequently went on wild adventure with him.  That turned out to be pretty popular and socially accepted.  (Watch comedian John Mulaney make fun of this friendship here.)  There are few limits or boundaries to human friendships.

Good question, since there can be problems in a situation like yours, but this sounds OK to me.
I met one of my closest friends 40 years ago when I was in my 30's and he was a student of mine; we became friends right away. I was friends with with my undergraduate teacher and PhD thesis advisor, though that didn't happen until after I'd finished my degree.
I hope you're as lucky.

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


text:
Are there any good statistics on students who are second generation in higher education?
We do a lot of statistical analysis on students who are first-generation HE; the first generation in their family to attend University.
But are there any similar studies on students who are second-generation HE - ie, whose parents were first-generation?

Have you a reason for asking this? I find it hard to think of a justification for the research?

@Buffy Well, it might be interesting to compare the two groups.  (But I'm a computer scientist, not a sociologist.)

@BobBrown, "might be interesting" is hardly compelling. Is there any action item you think might be suggested by the research. On the face of it, it just sounds like a study for the sake of a study. I could be wrong and would like to know where I'm wrong. I note for the record here that we now have Mr. Green, and Mr. Brown. Colorful.

@Buffy  Well, I have a statistician friend who could probably get half-a-dozen papers out of such a comparison.  What?  Not that kind of action item?  We, or at least I, assume that students with college-educated parents do better.  Is it true?  Do generations matter? If so, what causes the differences, and what can we do to help the disadvantaged group?

@BobBrown, I suspect that some of the first generation research also tries to answer the question of comparing first generation v other than first get, but probably not singling out second. That is my quandary. I was first generation and did well. My son was second and didn't like the academic life so didn't do well. My daughter is a professor. But if the last ten generations of your family are college educated there might be a relationship. Though some kids will balk at following into the family "business" (i.e. academia).

The main justification is a theory proposed to me recently: first-generation students are often a success within their family. Second-generation students often have grown up with their parents having the benefit of HE, but not yet having a financial cushion against their failure. So while the first-generation students can make their families proud if they pass, second-generation students can only "continue as before" by passing, or kill the dream if they fail.

@Buffy “Might be interesting” is a perfect reason for asking this question. We are not evaluating a grant proposal here.

@Buffy just an example: how fast do differences in educational opportunities diminish across generations?

This is a standard reference request and pertinent to Academia, so it's squarely on-topic. Voted to reopen.

What you need is studies that control for parental education. If none of them have a university education then they are the first generation, if one of them has a university generation then they are not the first generation. So the "effect" of that variable makes the comparison you are after. Parental education is a fairly standard variable in this literature, so you should be able to find such references quickly enough.

Parents receiving high education does not guarantee they are the first generation. They could be the second, or even third generation themselves. Student's parents receiving HE only indicates the student is not the first generation.

The OP defined first generation as being the first to enter tertiary education, so parents receiving higher education guarantees they are not the first generation. I suspect you mean "Parents receiving high education does not guarantee they are the second generation.", and add one generation to all mentions of generation afterwards.

In that case, that is in principle true, and that is why I said "not the first generation" instead of "second generation". However, in practice when we go that far back in time there are very few people who got that level of education. Maybe in the USA, where you had a noticeable rise in university enrollment after WWII, but in most other places the big rise in university enrollment started around the '60s. Moreover what is the effect of your grandparents or great grandparents on your education after controlling for your parent's education?

I mean parents receiving HE does not guarantee the parents themselves are the first generation. The OP is asking studies on students who are second-generation HE.Parental education is not sufficient for that info.

BTW, we are not talking about what's happening in Academia. I believe the question is off-topic.

No, per the definition of OP: first generation means parents have no HE, second generation means parents have HE, third generation parents and grandparents have HE, etc. So parent without HE guarantees first generation. parents with HE could mean, second, third, etc. generation, but in practice it will almost always be second, with the possible exception of USA where educational expansion happened a bit earlier.

The OP specifically asked students who are second-generation HE - ie, whose parents were first-generation?

I think we somehow agree, but approach it differently and we would solve this in seconds if we were to talk face to face.


text:
Should I Serve as an Undergraduate Thesis Advisor?
I was asked by a former student if I would supervise their honors thesis. The research paper that they want to develop pertains to a paper they submitted for a class last year on a topic I specialize in. I want to say "yes," however, I am an adjunct in a different department. Usually the supervision of the honors thesis paper takes place by a full-time, salaried faculty member who is not paid additionally. As a part-time adjunct in the U.S., I am paid by the course. I would really like to supervise the student, but I do not want to do this for free as it also requires meeting with the student throughout the year regarding edits and revisions. (In addition, at my current university, I am not expected to meet any service requirements as a part-time employee; neither would this help me to get a full-time job with them as their resources are quite drained.) When I have held positions as the supervisor of independent study courses or theses at other universities, I have received at least a small stipend for performing such service. My questions are:

If you've served as the supervisor for undergraduate theses before, what is the range of stipend you've received, if any?
If you've been an adjunct or part-time faculty, have you encountered any similar issues with advising?

Update: Good news! I sent an email to my chair and my department is going to offer a nominal stipend for me to supervise the student's thesis. It doesn't hurt to ask!

I served as thesis advisor for an undergraduate during my part-time years, without pay. That student was the President's Scholar when she graduated.   When a full-time position opened up, I got it.  During those part time years, a vice president of the university asked my dean, "Who is this guy? He volunteers for everything."  I might still have gotten the full-time position if all I'd done was meet my classes; I'll never know.

That's good to know. Service! But yes, I was just told that there is no pay for this volunteer position to mentor students (unless my department can find money/provide a stipend). However, it is a project that I do like. We'll see -- I'll also talk to my union. Thanks!

@BobBrown For any one case as yours there will be thousands where it does not work out like this. I think it is not right to expect from people in academia (and anywhere else) to do unpaid work. If it is "morally better" to work for free and be intrinsically motivated, than we should all be paid an unconditional basic income (which I am totally down with). Unfortunately we live in late capitalism, which puts us into dilemmas like this one. :/

@nico Agreed. I'm actually surprised I was given a stipend.

I suggest you approach both chairs (your department and the student's) to say that you would like to do this and ask for some compensation, even if it's only nominal.
When I was chair I always pushed for fairer compensation for part timers, who often did more than just meet their classes. Sometimes I was successful.
Good for you for wanting to do this in spite of the unfortunate working conditions.

Ideally, since you are paid by the course, this is worth a course stipend, which I suspect is very low. I don't know if it makes any sense to ask for that, but that is what its value is to the college.
Hopefully the college pays its faculty a living wage already, so advising is just part of that contract, but adjuncts don't get the same consideration.
I know one or two adjuncts who might do it for less, or even for free, but they are long term adjunct faculty with very good salaries at research institutions and they might just do it as a sort of hobby, but those people also are otherwise connected to the regular faculty and so have some intangible benefits (collaboration and such) that makes it worth their time.
But, talk to the chair and explore options. The college has a responsibility to cover fair compensation for its faculty. It also has a special interest in treating its advanced students well. Maybe the chair has some options other than stipend that would be valuable to you.

Note that for regular faculty, while there may not be an additional stipend for advising such projects, the chair has options such as a future course reduction or paying for a distant conference. These aren't normally open to adjuncts, but something might be available.


text:
How to deal with a student who most likely has a mental condition, and keeps arguing with me in class?
I am a TA for an introductory computer programming course at a university in the US. There is one student in particular who, during lecture, will argue with me about every point I make, which eats up a lot of lecture time and becomes un-enlightening for the students, as I am mainly repeating myself to answer the question/respond to the argument.
The student doesn't have previous knowledge in the programming language, so I don't think he's some conceited maniac trying to prove that he's better than me. Simply put, I think the best inference is that he has a sort of mental condition.
For instance, if I show an example on the board, he might blurt out that it's wrong, and try to explain why. While I appreciate students double-checking me, almost 100% of the time, the examples and points that I make are not incorrect, and after explaining it, he becomes quiet for a little bit to process what I said, and tries to point out another flaw. Essentially, he would try to challenge me if I said "1 + 1 = 2", if he could.
These debacles can go on sometimes for up to two minutes before I have a chance to move on. Very frequently, he asks questions/challenges me on things that I just explained or went over, so the class doesn't benefit from this, and it's generally a non-productive use of time. Often times, I will say something like, "If you'd like to discuss this more, we can during office hours," which is a statement that he seems to ignore completely, and will continue his questioning even after I've said this.
Additionally, when I am helping individual students in the classroom during work time, he will shout out to me from across the room to tell me something or ask me a question, and when I say "I can help you shortly when I'm done with Sally here," he will sometimes leave his seat and approach me directly, interrupting my conversation with the student.
How do I deal with a student like this? It seems like he has a mental condition of some sort, based on his interactions and mannerisms, though I've never received a notice from the university's disabilities department. The reason why I bring up the possibility of a mental condition is because he is set off very easily, so I'd like to handle the situation as delicately as possible.

In my Canadian university we have a Student Services department that handles situations like this and they have a process for identifying students who might be at risk for harm to self or others though it doesn't seem like it has reached that point with you. At least reach out to a similar department  (and your prof) and they might come back and say "Oh yes, we're aware of him..."

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

I have responsibility for students with alternate needs within a Computer Science department and thus have professional experience of the situation you describe. It is not uncommon in our subject.
Our experience is that computing attracts a higher proportion of students on the Autistic Spectrum than do other disciplines. We are operating with about (my personal guess) 2-3% (of total cohort) diagnosed and perhaps double that number undiagnosed.
Some of these students are often not aware of the rest of the class being present and treat teaching as a personal one-to-one dialogue with the teacher. They act as they would sitting with you across a desk. Sometimes it is more extreme and the social norms and boundaries of even working one-to-one are not clear to them. Although, as a spectrum condition, each person may be different, it is common that they wish to understand every point of minutiae before they can build the big picture understanding; becoming detailed obsessed is often a common trait. This leads to question after question as a form of quest.
You should seek advice from a more experienced professional in your institution. It is likely that the student's condition is known, but details are often considered confidential and perhaps not shared with you, because that is what the student may wish. The student may be receiving support elsewhere, perhaps in the form of mentoring. If that is the case then the mentor may be able to assist in explaining the social situation to the student and also give you guidance on how to reply.
Sometimes such students are not diagnosed with any specific condition and are not receiving support as it has never been needed. They are likely to have achieved high grades in earlier studies and the good results have propelled them through to your class.
For a student who is unaware that their behaviour is different from others in their class it is more difficult to handle. I ask such a student to speak to me in a one-to-one appointment in my office. I do not assume that they have any named condition, as this is not really relevant. I just talk to them to explain how lectures work, clarify my role and how I can answer questions. I often have to explain, sometimes in great detail, what makes a good verbal question in class, what makes a good verbal question, what makes a good written question for email, what makes a good question for the class VLE, what makes a good question for StackExchange and so on. It is often the case that no one has ever explained how information is obtained. It does take a degree of tact and experience to do this, which is why I suggested seeking more experienced advice.
Remember, some of the achievements in our subject have been made by people who others found difficult to work with. Look at the movie "The Imitation Game" and you can clearly see (in a fictionalised portrayal) Alan Turing is shown displaying tendencies similar to those you describe. I'm sure if you had a current student with similar attributes you would have been pleased to have had the opportunity to have someone so similarly gifted in your class.

I would also add that in many cases, it is the student's own discretion whether or not they reveal or make known any mental disorders they may have - so do not assume the student's condition is 'known', nor that they necessarily would want it known.

@Zibbobz _ yes I agree. I should have said that.

One of the annoying things that constantly happened during my undergrad studies is people would constantly try to correct the instructor in the lower-level courses. Take calculus II: The instructor would be writing on the board and talking, and every so often he'd write something wrong in the equation. These were book problems we were literally looking at, so 99% of the time someone would blurt "Don't you mean.." or "Shouldn't that be..", so the process stalled multiple times a class. Completely unnecessary IMO, but the practice disappeared all together when you got to the junior/senior year.

"You should seek advice from a more experienced professional in your institution".  In the US, at least, virtually every university has an office of disabilities, and they can provide training on working with disabled students and possibly provide screening if that's felt necessary (and of course with student cooperation).  In some cases, they may already know of the student and can give even more detailed support (including acting as a very good liaison if the student is amenable to that).

Keep in mind that (like The Social Network) The Imitation Game is highly fictionalized, and that the historical Turing may not have exhibited the same type of autistic behavior depicted in the movie.

@Zibbobz,  I am not trying to out the student in any way - I'd just like to cope with the situation to make class a little easier for all the students. But yes, I agree.

I appreciate the answer, @BrianTompsett-汤莱恩, and will try to see if I can help the student try to phrase the questions in a constructive manner, but will definitely ask other professors what their experience is first before I talk to the student directly, if that situation occurs.

@CMosychuk When to correct actual mistakes on the board is always a hard thing to judge. We had a first-year maths class in which the lecturer seemed incapable of doing simple arithmetic at the board without making mistakes. In that case, interrupting every time was essential because, if we didn't, he'd continue the calculation for another three lines, then get stuck and spend forever trying to figure out where he'd gone wrong.

Further to Kyle Strand's comment, I would ask you to strongly consider removing the movie comment. A comparison of The Imitation Game with Alan Turing: The Enigma (which the movie is meant to be based on) makes it very clear that the Turing displayed in the former probably has very little to do with the historical Turing. This is not to say that he was an easy person to work with but that movie is not really OK to use as a historical referent.

I have tried to make amendments to address the several sensible points raised.

@CMosychuk if the professor makes a few mistakes and no one corrects him/her, then presumably everyone is busy scribbling down the prof's rubbish into their notes.

@homersimpson I understand your concern, and your desire to help the student in any way you can, but coming from this as a student who was in the situation you're describing, I would highly recommend that you not approach it at that angle.  If they are trying to keep it from interfering with their academic career, confronting them with it (even just bringing it up) could make them very upset - even moreso if it turns out you're wrong about your suspicions, or if they've never had any diagnosis at all.  Just tread cautiously.

"I do not assume that they have any named condition, as this is not really relevant."  Yes, exactly; +1

He could also write a document explaining these things and distribute it to all of his students at the beginning of the term.

As a fellow TA, I would definitely recommend that you discuss this issue with the professor in charge of the course as taking matters into your own hands without his knowledge (especially with special cases like these) could cause problems. When discussing the issue with the professor, I would refrain from using the phrase "mental condition".

Brian's answer is good, but this is the first thing you should do.

What would you prefer over "mental condition"? At some point you have to bring up the fact that he may have a disability and that seems like as good a way as any.

Diagnosing any sort of mental condition requires an expert's opinion. The OP should explain and discuss the actual events that are taking place and allow the professor to make the final judgement. Furthermore, using the term "mental condition" about someone when you clearly aren't qualified to do so might imply that you have a certain bias against that individual.

I like your answer, except the last part. Any reasonable person will understand why you use the term "mental condition". If had no arms would you say he didn't have a physical condition? Political correctness like this is hindering solving the actual problem.

Diagnosing a physical condition like "having no arms and legs" does not require any specific qualification but diagnosing a mental condition usually requires a psychiatrist's judgement. In any case I did not mean to say the student does not have such a condition. I merely suggested that the OP refrains from using this type of language and allow the professor to derive such a conclusion himself, based on the actual events that have occurred.

The problem with diagnosing metal conditions, without proper training, is they are notoriously difficult to pin down. Your diagnosis may be completely off base and lead you to a less effective way of handling this student. Autism is somewhat more common in engineering than other disciplines, but it could also be narcissism, or he could simply be an entitled jerk. A more experienced professor will have a much better chance at figuring out the root of the problem, and how to effectively handle the situation.

@lasse There are physical conditions which have behavioral effects (like brain injuries) but have no exterior clues. These shouldn't be treated in the same manner as a mental condition (clinical difference and coping mechanisms can be different)

It's more a case of describing the "signs" and the impact they have as opposed to communicating a (presumed) diagnosis. Something along the lines of "I've noticed that he/she does x when y happens, and this has the impact on/consequence to the class z" perhaps.

I don't think anybody is suggesting OP attempts an actual diagnosis - but saying "It's occurred to me that the student may have some mental condition, so I thought it best to seek advice in how correct to handle the situation" is fine.

'I'm wondering if the student might need additional support to accommodate a disability...' seems to me perfectly acceptable. I agree that suggesting the student has 'a mental condition' is a bad idea, if only because this terminology is understood as prejorative. (I'm not suggesting the OP means it in this way and the prof will probably realise that, too,, but more neutral terminology demonstrates sensitivity and avoids potential misunderstandings.)

@Azor-Ahai Don't focus on the cause. Simply point out the behavior that is the problem when talking with the professor (and, if necessary, the student). Not only because it's polite, and because you're not an expert in such diagnoses, but you do not want to give a reason for a potential lawsuit for discrimination.

I understand that. What @OllieFord said is what I mean, and I was curious what you would rather say in that situation.

@cfr Some would disagree with you that a "mental condition" is the same as a "disability." I'm also not sure "disability" is any more neutral than the already very-neutral "mental condition."

@Azor-Ahai Maybe it varies culturally. Here, 'mental condition' is very, very far from being neutral. 'Mental' is a prejorative in this context and something very commonly used as an insult. In any case, my point was not whether they were the same but what might be said, and, even if you're going to say something along these lines, I doubt you're in a position to diagnostically distinguish something classified as a 'disability' from something classified as a short-term psychiatric illness, for example. ('Disability' is legally defined to include long-term conditions in many places.)

Note: This started out as a comment to vonbrand's answer, but grew a bit too long, so I turned it into a separate answer of its own.
While asking students to defer any distracting (irrelevant, too advanced, based on a quirky misunderstanding, etc.) questions until after class can indeed be a good way to deal with such interruptions in general, it may not work very well for some students with autistic spectrum traits or other behavioral patterns like those described by the OP.
Not only can such strongly detail-oriented students get fixated on the apparent error, and become unable to process further material until it has been resolved, but if they also have poor social awareness, they may not even find it easy to realize that others in the class don't necessarily share their inability to get past the (apparent) error.  From their viewpoint, they may actually feel that they're doing the whole class a favor by insisting that you resolve the issue now, so that it won't undermine the validity of everything else that you're about to teach.
(It should be noted that, in some cases, this could actually be a valid reason to interrupt your presentation.  If you were presenting a deductive argument, following a novel line of reasoning that had not already been independently verified many times, and if there really was an error in one of your early steps, leaving it uncorrected could indeed cause everything built upon the erroneous step to be meaningless.  This is, of course, not a very typical scenario in undergrad teaching, but it may seem that way to the student who is new to the subject, and having a hard time accepting your presentation of it.)
What might help, if your problem student seems unwilling to defer their questions until a more suitable time, is speaking with the student one-on-one and suggesting that, if they spot what they think is an error, they should write down a note of it (to let them switch their attention to other things), briefly mention it to you, and then try to set it temporarily aside and concentrate on other things until you both have time to look into the matter more closely (which might be e.g. after class).  Do reassure them that, while you don't have unlimited time especially during class, you will at some point (it may be helpful to be specific here, e.g. reserving up to 15 minutes after class for such things) at least take a look at any potential mistakes they've noted down.
You might want to also suggest that, if the student still thinks there's a mistake even after you've looked into it and found none, they should go over it using their textbook at home, carefully prepare a written analysis of where the error is and what the correct answer should be (with test cases, for a programming class) and submit it to you and/or your professor.  (Obviously, get your professor's OK before involving them here!)
On one hand, this will help reassure the student that the issue they noticed will not get forgotten or swept under the carpet.  Also, the odds are that, if they do carry out that analysis, they'll eventually find their own mistake without you having to spend excessive time and effort chasing it down with them, quite likely producing less stress for both of you.
Finally, if the student does find and document an actual mistake, do remember to thank them, note the mistake during the following class, and briefly present a corrected version of whatever material the mistake was in.  In the (perhaps unlikely) case that this does actually happen, it will help raise the student's confidence that you're not trying to hide or brush off any actual errors in your presentation.

Excellent answer. It is just too bad that we (as teachers) more often than have no training/guidance on what to do in such complex cases.

Excellent. Yes this matches my experience too, and was what I tried to capture in my answer.

Straight out of the Tao of Teaching (if such a holy scripture would exist). To try to get this type of student conform to a more conventional/passive student-teacher dynamic would likely be an exercise in futility and frustration for both sides. Instead, the solution proposed in this answer does not require the student to suppress their immediate problem solving instincts at all, it in fact even manages to empower them --along with their scheduling, prioritizing, summarizing, and researching skills-- while also mitigating the main problem of classroom interruptions. Brilliant answer. +1.

The tactic to use "in the trenches" is to just say "That is an interesting point, but goes beyond (or to more detail, or...) what I'm prepared (able, have the time here, ...) to cover right now. Please check back with me after class, and we'll agree to meet to clear up your doubts". If they are really bright (but just socially inept), you might suggest more advanced study material to work through and discuss, or direct them to the teacher to do so.
You have an obligation to your other students in the first line, and wasting their time (or boring them, or even confusing them by going into intricate details they don't grasp) isn't in their (or your!) best interest. But you should also consider the outlier. Maybe you can help them by guiding towards more social behaviour.

Don't forget to take care of yourself. I had a similar student a couple of years ago, and decided I just had to gut it out. That was the wrong choice, of course. I almost didn't make it through the class! I'd sit in the parking lot for 30 minutes dreading what was ahead of me. As a part timer, I didn't know what resources for support and advice were available to me.
Your instructor, and your fellow TAs, can help, as well as the resources mentioned in the other answers.

Note: I'd comment but I can't due to this being my first reaction on this part of StackEexchange.
I fully agree with Ilmari's answer, and I'd like to add that you should be wary of your approach to his "Mental Condition". It may just be him struggling to understand, and forgetting that he's disturbing the class.
And although many people here suspect an Autism Spectrum Disorder (And they're probably right) I'd like to emphasize that this is a very broad spectrum, and Autism is one of them. I'd advice you to not call him an Autist at any time, especially don't call him that when his disorder is something else in the Autism Spectrum. As someone who has Asperger's Syndrome (An ASD) himself, there is nothing I hate more than people calling me an Autist because they think it's the same thing.
And educate yourself on the broadness of this spectrum, especially when you actually find out his disorder. Some can be handled with ease, others require a very delicate approach. There is also the odds of Perpetual Development Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (PDDNOS) which is the hardest to deal with as it is (as the name suggests) almost literally the "None of the above" checkbox (No offense to anyone suffering from this disorder).
Remember that most of these disorders do not actually make it impossible for him to function properly, it just makes certain situations harder to deal with for them, as they do not always realize their actions are different from others.

One challenge of being inexperienced is that, by definition, you don't have a sense of the "normal" variation in student behavior. There are several good answers already, but I am not sure if any of them have mentioned this:

Invite a more senior professor to sit in the class for one day, observe silently, and then talk to you in private afterwards.

This way, you can get a second opinion about whether the student is truly unusual and disruptive (in which case you need to handle it outside of class) or whether they are challenging but relatively typical (in which case you need to adjust your teaching).
In a typical department, there are several people who you could ask: your advisor; your teaching mentor, if that is a different person; the course coordinator, if there is one; the administrator in charge of undergraduate courses; or the department chair (particularly in a smaller department).

And if that student stops doing it on the day the professor sits in?

That would be a great day :)  I took it from the question that the behavior was quite frequent ("every point I make"). My own experience with such students is that, as long as the professor sits out of the way and doesn't make a big deal of it (no announcements or anything like that), students with the kinds of problems described won't change their behavior much.

Then it's worthwhile for the OP to try. +1 for the idea.

Asking somebody senior to sit in is disruptive in itself, and might make matters worse. But presumably you can find out what other classes the troublesome student is taking/has taken, and ask around the teachers/TAs, or even fellow students. Also check if there is some record about the case.

I am not sure it is disruptive in itself. In a class of 5, it will certainly stand out. But in a class of 30 or more, if the person comes in quietly and sits in the back, without saying anything, it does not need to be disruptive.  It's also common enough to have someone observe your teaching to write a letter of recommendation, which can be done without disruption. @vonbrand

If a colleague wandered in to one of my classes, even the one with 95 I had once, it would certainly stand out like a sore thumb.

All the current advice is very good. Talk to your Professor. Talk to student services/disability services. Experiment with different approaches. Defer all the questions until after class. And I especially love Ilmari Karonen's answer, which is the most likely to succeed I think (don't just skim that one, read its last four paragraphs especially).
That being said, if worse comes to worse, talk to your union rep/HR, and see what support they'll give you to kick him out of your classes (either temporarily as a response to his disruptions, or permanently as a final solution to his behavior).
Obviously, this last approach is not to be considered lightly, and you'll want to find out what the protocol is before you do anything. However, that option should be on the table. Even if you do not care about your own well being, you should consider how those constant disruptions will affect the other students. It's your responsibility to make sure your other students also get what they've signed up for.

In many cases, this is not an option for a TA - even as a last resort. They may not be considered an employee at all and there may be no union at all. Not always so, but not at all infrequent.

@cfr, It doesn't matter, I was talking about HR in the most general sense. He should talk to whoever is in charge of the department responsible for his pay check. After all, I am sure that the department would care if he cancelled a class because a student was being too disruptive and refusing to listen to reason. Or if a student had a tantrum and the TA feared for his safety. Talking to his Professor is good, and he should definitely do that to see what (s)he tells him, but a Professor may not have the cumulative experience, nor the appropriate HR training, to resolve a situation like that.

It is better to go through the prof if at all possible. I admit that not everyone will do this, but a prof who lacks the relevant expertise should seek additional support for themselves and the TA if required. You can't support TAs effectively if they don't tell you when they are having difficulties. And the prof almost certainly has more experience than the TA, at least (even if it is a first job they were probably a TA) and has overall responsibility for the quality of the education the students receive.

What can we change?
First off, let me say something which will keep you out of hot water: different people have different learning styles and this is not necessarily any sort of "mental condition" -- it could be, but it might not be. Therefore tact requires that you completely stop being suspicious of the latter: if you are sneakily telling yourself "it's okay, she's just autistic" then you strongly risk accidentally blurting that out to either a friend or a colleague, and once that's out of the bag your job could be impacted by the results. Just admit honestly to yourself that you don't know, and that it is one of the possible explanations for why your student is a "problem student".
Now, I agree that the student's learning style shares some similarities with some aspects of Asperger syndrome or possibly something on the autistic spectrum, regardless of whether or not he/she has those. So, what changes can you make that would be friendly to that sort of learning style?
Use more neutral language.
If you are saying "Here is how you solve that problem" then you might be silently implying that either (a) there is only one way to solve it, or (b) your way is the best way. There's usually a lot of different ways to skin a cat.
For instance, in my field of physics, very often there is some thermodynamic property which you can easily see by looking at fuzzy things called "total differentials" but which would have to be more rigorously made by appealing to certain definitions of certain limits -- someone who has done all of the needed rigorous work will probably come to the easy way and say "yes, but that's a load of crap, you do not know that these properties hold!" and indeed they're right, it's a heuristic rule (not a proof) to re-derive the property.
Similarly in computer science, e.g. we do amortized analysis by appealing to "potential functions" which we choose to make our proofs work; someone who has actually carefully analyzed the algorithm and the time costs of every little part will probably think that your approach is full of crap. Opt instead for vocabulary like "Here's one way to see that this is the right answer..." that makes it more clear that you're not telling people how it has to be done, but just how you like to do it.
Make the class a little more predictable.
This learning style benefits from being able to review material in advance, on their own. Don't be afraid to ask them to review the material in advance to understand how it all works.
Make the class a little more structured.
Right now, you have advertised that you're open to all questions at all times, and you're getting upset with a student for asking all of his questions whenever he has one! I get that you're also upset with his tone and whatever, but you need to change that tendency.
To fit with the last point: always introduce this by saying "hey, at our next class, as a heads up, I am going to slightly change the rules of this recitation section...". Remember, if you're making a change it has to be predictable!
Try to either make a slideshow or write on a board so that you never have to erase anything; if there are multiple slides/boards, number them. This gives a consistent way to reference what's already been said and when, and removes the pressure to get in a question before the board is erased.
Have clear rules about how questions will be asked and when they will be answered. For example, tell everyone that whenever someone has a question, you'll judge whether you can answer it in less than 30 seconds or not; if not then you'll write it down in a notebook with the slide number and the asker, and then you'll keep going -- 15 minutes before the end of class you'll have an alarm go off to remind you to go into "questions mode" where you go back and answer these questions in sequence. If this does not reduce the number of questions, again, give advance notice that each student will receive a maximum of 5 questions to ask during that period. The important thing is that this remains consistent for everyone -- if any question takes longer than 30 seconds to answer, write it down, come to it at the end of class. They must be firm rules: "If you have more than 5 questions that I have to write down, I'll take photos of these boards with my phone and will answer them during my office hours."
If you can get a 30 second hourglass that's even better, because then you can advertise it to everyone else as a sort of game: tell people "I'm trying to get better about quickly and concisely getting to the heart of the problem!" and people will respond well.
Try to set up an incentive system.
For example, maybe you will always try to resolve every question in 30 seconds with your little hourglass timer, but you will up-front either say that a question is "easy" or "hard" for you. Now buy a big bag of candy or some other sort of reward (stickers are still fun, right? Or whatever). Then the rule can be: if someone says that their "hard" question was resolved after 30 seconds of explanation, you both get a candy. This encourages the student to still ask their question, but to maybe try to "boil it down" to some essential basis that can be answered much more quickly.
What do the above approaches center around?
Those sorts of changes encourage that the "problem student" gets to study your approaches on his/her own, chooses 5 questions that really speak to their own conceptual difficulties with your approach, and has a set time where they get their questions answered. In addition they will hopefully try to reduce the scope of their problem to something precisely wrong with what your approach is, rather than trying to advocate their approach in place of yours.
This student's learning style is actually really refreshing! They are not a robot -- but they do really just want things to be simple and consistent. To understand the human side, think of it as a "cut through the BS" type of learning style: all of these extra rules and social considerations are a huge extra mental cost where you're trying to negotiate certain social relationships as well as get your questions answered to your satisfaction -- but why accept that sort of extra mental load if you don't want to?
Rituals and rules help to structure that social-relationship-negotiation and make it cognitively easier. Yes, it is added administrative cost up front, but it can also pay off in giving you more freedom with your limited resources later. This learning style is refreshing precisely because it challenges you to essentially always "do the dishes right after you eat" -- it sucks because you have to interrupt your TV show or whatever to clean up, but it turns out that it is more efficient (the dishes are much easier to clean before the food dries onto them) and has a certain aesthetic benefit (your apartment is cleaner on average). So take this as a time to try and learn from them, and to pick up skills that will better help you teach people in general in the future.

+1, people with highly critical minds chalange and evaluate everything put before them no matter the source. i call that healthy mental attitude but i am biased as i was like his student before learning to shut up, though still never unquestioningly accepting knowledge or learnings that someone else "seems" to possess.

Above all, be patient. Being an introductory computer science course/lab, realize many others will be interested in what is going on in your head and will further learn from you how you approach things in a professional manner. Try to be a role model for him and others. Yes there will be many who will be unstimulated. Realize given your knowledge things may appear rudementary to you, however are far from it for them. Try to adapt to your audience, they are different each and every time; a one-size-fits-all approach is not optimal.
I would strongly advise on keeping any classification of a mental condition to yourself. If speaking to him, a professor, or others be very careful not summarize the behaviour as some sort of disability. Consider speaking informally to your university's title IX coordinator about how to behave before doing something you may regret! Both from a liability standpoint and the well-being of the student. Just drop by their office and chat.
I am not sure how to delicately handle him interrupting your dialog with other students, beyond being firm with him each and every time so that he learns. I encourage you to seek counsel from your department there.
As a personal aside in a similar situation, a consistently conceited/rude student had asked for help one and one, their phone rang, they held up their hand in a "talk to the hand" manner and proceded to talk to whomever on their cell phone. That student was permanently moved to the end of the queue for the remainder of the semester (and future grading in later courses).
As another aside from the vantage of a student, in Calc 2 there was a female as you describe, with at least a dozen questions every lecture. Eventually the instructor embraced her willingness and would call on her, and intermittently check to ensure she understood things. Some of her questions were rudementary, however I didn't understand much of the new material either; eight years later I am still thankful for her inquisitive nature and remember her with fondness. In a later course, I remember the instructor consistently reacting in an inhibitory manner and so she didn't speak up nearly so much; I worry that she didn't do so well there.

I have had experience in similar situations (University Classroom). I would advice implementing a strict "Hold questions until after lecture" policy. If possible, ask the student who is disruptive to wait until you have spoken with the other students because you want to pay particular attention to his points and questions. In essence, invoke the principles of good Ole Dale Carnegie. Good luck.

That is too drakonian. Some people genuinely don't understand, or would like to see another example. I have to humbly confess that I occasionally blunder, and my mistakes get caught (usually!) by a student or two, limiting any damage done


text:
How long does it typically take for Chinese universities to accept or reject applicants?
How many days does it normally take to receive an admission letter after applying to a university in China?
I am a student from Bangladesh.

Days? Admissions processes normally last months. How long it takes for a given university varies from school to school.

@aeismail I think it is possible, that the OP didn't get an answer and he is "curious", what is happening.

Your question isn't clear enough. Are you applying for a graduate program? Which steps are involved and where are you at in the process? Depending on the program and application step it can take a week or over a month.

It depends on the programme of studies, the director that will see your application, plus whether there are additional requirements for your discipline, for example a portfolio. You might get lucky if you can email admissions again to ask which state your application is in, and how many stages you have before they conclude the process. Normally in a Chinese uni though they will ignore you until it is time to inform you.

At Nankai, international students apply for a PhD or Master's program through the International Student Service System.  Applications are due around March, and the student starts in September (if accepted), so the answer to the question...

How many days does it normally take to receive an admission letter after applying to a university in China?

...is "it depends on what time of the year you apply".  There's also three possible sub-questions:

How long does it take to get a letter of acceptance from your supervisor?  As long as it takes them to decide they want that student, and for them to actually write it.
How long does it take for the university to accept/reject the student after they officially apply?  Maybe a few months (assuming all the documents are in order).  Admin needs to decide who to recommend for government scholarships.
How long does it take the government (and hence the university) to respond to a student's scholarship application?  Maybe 4 or 5 months.  It's a fairly long process.

The last two items don't apply (to the same extent) if the student is self funded.  I'm not sure about the circumstances for undergraduate applications, but I expect self-funded students are likely to be quickly accepted, and for those applications seeking scholarships to take months.
I'm not sure how typical this process is in China, but I guess it's standard practice.


text:
Department forcing me to teach a course even though my advisor has funds available to fund me from a grant
My advisor has funds for me to use for research from his grant so that I don't have to teach in my final semester. Unfortunately my department is denying the request and forcing me to teach a course to be funded since they are low on teachers. 75% of other students are being allowed to use research funding in my department, and I am one of the 5 who is not being allowed. The reasoning is because of timing and a change of policy that once the department determined they were running low on instructors they started denying requests for research funding.
I have exhausted avenues within my department and have still been denied. I do have a lot of savings and could afford not to be funded at all. Honestly, I am tempted to deny teaching altogether. Of course I would not earn my 10-15K + health insurance + tuition benefit that I would get for research funding or teaching or being on the grant for research, but it is doable and honestly tempting to me right now. I am really upset about this.
I am going into my last semester and need time to finish my thesis, find a job, and everything else that comes with graduating. I simply do not have time to teach and have been counting on this funding from my advisor. I think it is completely ludicrous that the department is telling my advisor he cannot fund me using the grant money which was set aside for me.
Can you think of anything I can do to fight this? It seems both immoral and illegal to me. Should I contact the graduate school or the dean of students? Do I have any legal recourse for this? It just feels they are stealing the grant money from me because they won't allow my advisor to give me the grant money meaning I am forced to teach if I want to get paid.

You claim it is because they are "low on teachers". I'm thinking that there might be other reasons, including a requirement that every doctoral student teach at least one course since it is good for their career prospects. There are places with such a requirement.

I am in the US. I am required to teach two courses in my program but I have taught 6-7 so far.

Thanks for everyone's input. I am just really tired and stressed. I just need to graduate and get out of here. It's been a tough semester with two close losses due to covid so there are definitely other factors at play.

Do you need a thesis credit to graduate? Rather than paying tuition, can you take a semester leave and work independently on your research?

Also, are there any student's who haven't fulfilled their teaching requirement who might be convinced to swap with you out of the goodness of their hearts?

@overfullhbox That is a really good question. I will look into if I have to be enrolled or not at the time I graduate. Regardless, that may be a good option, I could take a leave of absence and graduate in the summer semester if needed and it wouldn't significantly impact anything.

I am not sure about the other students. I will ask around. I think typically students don't have a problem meeting the requirement because it is only for 2 semesters. But it is worth asking. Thank you.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134440/is-ta-ing-worth-the-opportunity-cost-of-having-more-time-for-research You might be interested, especially since you are graduating soon.

It seems both immoral and illegal to me...It just feels they are stealing the grant money from me

It is understandable that you are very upset at having been arbitrarily assigned additional work for no additional benefit. However, "immoral and illegal" is likely too far. It is highly unlikely that you were personally named in your advisor's grant. It is similarly unlikely that your contract stipulates that you are entitled to this grant money. Rather, it sounds like you and your advisor had a good-faith agreement that he would try to fund you from this grant, and it sounds like both of you tried to honor this. It is annoying that department rules are frustrating your agreement, but I would be very surprised if this was legally actionable. Even the morality may be less clear-cut than you imagine.

Honestly, I am tempted to deny teaching altogether. Of course I would not earn my 10-15K + health insurance + tuition benefit...but it is doable and honestly tempting to me right now.

Tuition is pretty expensive -- five figures at least. So, this could easily cost you $30K. I would suggest that is not worth it. Even for me, being busy, long past grad school, and financially comfortable, I would probably agree to teach a course in exchange for $30K.

Can you think of anything I can do to fight this?

I would start by recalibrating expectations. First, this is a fight you may lose. Second, this is an inconvenience, not a crime against humanity, and it is not worth "going nuclear" over this (i.e., avoid burning bridges or making threats). Third, you have very little leverage as a grad student.
Instead, I would discuss this with your advisor (or another trusted professor). If possible, estimate specific tasks that may have to be postponed or skipped due to your reduced availability. Do not lecture about legality or morality; instead, gently point out that a last-semester student is not really a good choice for a complicated teaching assignment.

If your advisor is on your side, they are probably much better positioned than you to find a work-around. If your advisor tries to help and fails, it is very unlikely that you will have more luck.
If your advisor does not want to get involved, they may at least be willing to give you feedback on your ideas about complaining to the dean's office or the graduate school.

Thank you for your input. I did look up and it looks like for me to pay the thesis credits in my final semester might only be 2K. I would definitely want to verify this though before going that route. My advisor has helped me bounce off ideas of how to get around this and talk with the department myself, but he doesn't seem willing to fight the department himself. I might just have to really minimize what I do for teaching and try to make it work. It just seems unlikely I can teach and graduate right now.

What's not clear cut about the morality?

Making reluctant grad students fill in during a shortage of teachers is not inherently immoral -- though there may be a larger pattern of wanton indifference toward the grad students' needs, in which case calling the department's actions "immoral" might be justified. But justified or not, approaching this as a question of "morality" or "immorality" is unlikely to be productive.

This happened to me once.  To make it worse, I was told I must teach the semester I did not want to, and I could not teach the semester I did want to.
You probably should not fight it.  You do not have any leverage.  Really the only action you can take is to complete your PhD a semester earlier than planned.
It's probably not illegal.  It probably is unethical to prioritize the need for cheap labor over PhD student success.

Thank you for your insights. I wish I could graduate early, but I am currently teaching the same course they want me to teach in the spring and I just haven't had time to write my thesis. I need to start prioritizing that over my teaching now for sure.

Why don't they have leverage? The OP can refuse to teach in which case the department will have to find someone else. Logistically, it might be easier for them to try to accommodate the OP now rather than scrambling to find a replacement if the OP decides not to work.

It is true. Although I don't want it to come to this, I can decline the TA funding when offered it officially closer to the spring semester. I may end up having to do that depending on how things go with my thesis in the next month and a half or so.