text:
Why do some universities not allow dissertations to be publicly available?
After reading a comment (now deleted) saying

My university's policies does not allow me to share my thesis PDF file completely.

I was wondering why some universities do not allow dissertations to be publicly available over the web? (by any means - free or through subscription)
This seems a fundamental right to the students (to share their dissertations) and to the community in general.
Thus, I thought I may get some inputs/examples, from different academic cultures, for possible reasons to not to have dissertations over the web (i.e. top secret?).
Update: The user whose comment prompted this discussion mentioned in a comment on this thread:

I consulted one of the professors at my university and he told me there is no prohibition on sharing my thesis's PDF file. It was my own mis-understanding of the copyright statement on the copyright page.

I would certainly be very interested to see an example of a university that, as described in the linked comment, has a blanket policy that dissertations must not be publicly available online, and learn about their reasons.  My initial reaction is that this is indefensible.

My initial reaction is that this is self-defeating.  Every US university I've been part of has required students to put a copyright notice in their dissertations, asserting that the student owns the copyright.  Authors can do whatever they like with their own copyrighted documents, including posting them on the web.

Let me second Nate Eldredge's comment.  Can anyone give a link to a university policy that forbids public distribution of dissertations?  (There are certainly policies that allow students to limit public distribution under some circumstances, but I've never seen one that forbids students to put their dissertations on the web.)

I am appalled to learn that some Universities prohibit this. I can't think of one reputable University worth attending with such a horrendous policy.

Given that the user (@enthusiasticstudent) whose comment caused all this ruckus (a) has not posted a link to any such policy and (b) suggests in his answer below that universities DON'T actively prohibit public distribution of the thesis, I suspect that the question may be ill-posed.  That is to say, there may be no such universities.

@DavidKetcheson Agree. Hope to have some inputs though.

Actually I think what user (@enthusiasticstudent) meant. This is the copyright page in our thesis translated in English. All rights reserved to the respective initiatives and innovations resulting from research studies subject of this thesis is owned by X University.

As the one whose comment triggered this question, I figure I ought to answer: one of the foundational principles of science is that it should be freely and publicly available.
At the same time, there are a lot of human interests that push in the opposite direction.  Some examples:

A nation may want to restrict high-technology in order to promote its own interests.  For historical examples, consider the British empire's secrecy around timekeeping for navigation, or Bavarian secrecy on methods for making high quality optical glass.
Information may be considered dangerous to release to the general public, such as regarding atomic weapons or the DNA sequences of deadly pathogens.
Commercial companies invest in technology in order to gain advantage over their competitors.
A scientist may want to avoid publishing patentable research until after the patent is filed.

A lot of science that is done is thus never openly published, or openly published only long after it has been completed.  The question then is, how should universities relate to this, particularly regarding dissertations?
To the best of my knowledge, in all of the high-ranked U.S. universities, a Ph.D. dissertation is required to be entirely public, as a matter of scientific principle and integrity.  This wasn't always the case, particularly during the convergence of scientific research and military funding around World War II.  As the country became more uncomfortable with that association, however, the elite universities began to remove classified research from their campuses and require that theses be publishable.  In many cases, classified research still goes on in association, but through a separate entity, such as Lincoln Lab for MIT, SRI for Stanford, and LBNL for Berkeley.  Likewise, sensitivities have developed around commercial research.
The general principle that is followed then, at least for elite U.S. universities, is that the research leading to a dissertation may involve unpublished or restricted information.  The dissertation, however, must be public and substantial enough to stand on its own without depending on other non-public research that may have been done in association.

In Sweden the defences (Msc and PhD) are public by default, but the supervisor may make it private if it is deemed appropriate (most common, a company paid for the research and have an embargo).

I'ts done to protect sensitive materials. As a rule, dissertations were made openly available at the Harvard Archives. This changed a few years ago, when the deans, responding to doctoral students’ fears, allowed embargoes broadly. As a result, as a search in ProQuest reveals, an unprecedented number of dissertations (almost one in three) produced at Harvard in 2012 and 2013 are embargoed. These dissertations are now secret and the authors can decide how long to keep them so. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/9/10/Harvard-dissertation-secret/
Just wanted to add, that many universities partner with corporate firms where the research is funded, so probably either the university hopes to apply for the patent or the firm.
Colleges and universities own the ideas and technologies invented by the people who work for them, including professors and graduate students who are paid to do research

Who Owns Your Great Idea?
University patents limit access to medicine. These students want to change that.

Allowing students to disseminate dissertations online does not impact a university's ownership of its intellectual property, just like allowing students and faculty to publish papers on their work doesn't. I don't know of any university (including those that retain rights to intellectual property created by students and faculty) with a blanket policy forbidding publications.

That is a very disturbing a regressive development...

@seteropere, Sadly this does happen and could spread if more isn't done to keep information free flowing.

Based on most comments on the question, I know this answer may seems odd but at least it may elaborate more details on the comment. As much this may be surprising, I was surprised when I saw online dissertations for the first time.
Where I study, only the hard copy texts are available in the libraries and students can read them, but they can not make a copy of them. Students can write down some notes in a paper and only take that note out of the library. Also the time you can access the dissertations is limited.
As I have seen a lot, the copy right page where I live is something like this: All rights reserved to the respective initiatives and innovations resulting from research studies subject of this thesis is owned by X University. So the University thinks they are the ones who own the results not the student who generated them.
With this in mind some reasons may be:

You can easily copy the dissertation from another university and sell it in black market or foist it as your own work. The reason is dissertations is not available online is your adviser can't or won't bother to check every library in different universities or he/she has not enough information on your field. So, it would make it easy for the student to copy the results of others.
Some dissertations may have some flaws or weak results. If they publish it online, it would compromise the fake reputation of the university. So it is in best interests to not publish it online.
Sometimes, the student or adviser wants to publish the results in a journal but they have not decided when to do so. So they prefer to keep the results for themselves for the time being.
Only published papers in journals and conferences would help the scientific degree of a teacher, so why bother to publish it online when it is non-English and it won't be cited by elite universities in US or Europe.

Keep this in mind that these are irrational response of some universities in order to solve their problems.
ADDED:
Some universities have different opinion about ownership. For example:

... I pledge not to publish the results of this thesis without permission of my adviser and I am not allowed to disclose any information regarding of my thesis with anyone without permission of my adviser.

About the first point: I am saying it make it harder for students to plagiarize. It's like erasing the problem. If a student wants to plagiarize he/she will do it one way or another and of course as I can see, it hasn't helped both parties but it is an irrational response to this problem where I live.
About the third and fourth points: Again I reference to manuscript of another university not a person.

All the papers based on this thesis should have the name of X university.

So it is not just a decision of a person for his/her profits.

Allowing students to disseminate dissertations online does not impact a university's ownership of its intellectual property, just like allowing students and faculty to publish papers on their work doesn't. I don't know of any university (including those that retain rights to intellectual property created by students and faculty) with a blanket policy forbidding publications.

Your first point is not logical: you say having dissertations online would make it easier for other students to plagiarize them. But then you say that not publishing them online makes it difficult to detect plagiarism.

And your third and fourth points explain why an individual might choose not to put the dissertation online, not why a university would have a general policy forbidding it.

I deleted the reference for the added part in order to stay anonymous.

The notice you cite in the first paragraph does not claim copyright or ownership of the scientific results; it only claims the exclusive right to financially exploit said results. It is therefore an intellectual property, not copyright, issue, and irrelevant to the question of publication. (Such a blanket clause is very common with respect to any scientific results obtained while affiliated with a university, either as student or faculty.)

Diploma mills (fraudulent "universities") will refuse to disclose dissertations because the dissertations do not actually exist or are obviously inadequate.


text:
How to investigate why students do not do their homework?
I teach freshmen courses. The lessons are in the classroom, but I also use an LMS to receive homework, to communicate grades and comments, and to post additional readings and resources.
It is normal to encounter a few students not doing work, but this term, I found about 80% of one section doing no homework, even easy work. To investigate why so many students are not doing the work, I tried these strategies:

I sent private messages to each student informing them that they missed several assignments and that it is their responsibility to inform me of any problems. The students did not reply.
I posted a private survey to the LMS to all students, asking for students to describe any problem they were having with the LMS or homework. None of these students completed the survey.
Seeing no replies after 5 days, I set aside some of class time for a whole-class discussion on this topic, but this made students nervous. In retrospect, realize this was a poor choice.

I did learn through the discussion that some students did not know how to use the LMS and now that we've spend 20 minutes covering that (again).
After my discussion, more homework is coming in, but still about 50% of the class has a 0%.

I do not see this problem in my other sections, nor have I had this failure rate in past years.
A student signed me into their account, so I could confirm that there were no anomalies in the LMS for this section.

I want to identify why this section has so few students submitting work, so that I can make appropriate adjustments to the course, as necessary. How can I investigate this problem further, without making students nervous to explain?

I don't have experience with LMS, so I'll just provide a suggestion. I would use LMS to do all those homeworks before I assign them to the students to see what kind of problem the students might have. If I find problems using that LMS, I would seek help from the LMS support, i.e. it was not students' fault. If I find no problem with that LMS, I'll fail the students. Please note that I am saying that I'll work through all the homework problems using the LMS.

You don't describe reminding your students of the consequences of not submitting homework. Lazy students aren't suddenly going to start doing homework on an unfamiliar system because you ask them nicely.

I've checked the LMS from a demo student's perspective and found no problems. The course is identical in every way to what other sections have access to.

Yes, I explained the math behind the grading (fairly standard), let them know that if they start work now, they still have a chance to pass, and told them if they did not start submitting the work, they would fail. Most of these students are not even going to the LMS to check their failing grades.

Even if you have a proper Exam for a proper grade at the end of the year you can warn students that if they dont do the problems they may fail .You can get the repeat students to tell the others what happens if you dont do your homework .You tell them that if you can do the problems unaided then you will pass otherwise you may fail.

Why not set up an anonymous feedback jar?

Have you checked to see whether some group of students has been pushed into your section by a scheduling issue?  e.g. if students who are identified as "at risk" are required to take a student success course that meets at 10am and your course has sections at 10am and 11am, you can bet that the "at risk" students will be clustered in the 11am section.

Is it possible to perform some type of A/B Testing in this area, for example, assign a homework online AND assign it in person, and determine what percentage of students complete the online and/or in person, and compare the two? For Example, if results showed that 10% performed online homework and 95% performed in-person assigned homework, it would suggest that the online is inaccessible or in some other way more difficult to complete.

You have been around the block a few times, so I interpret this question to be "What is going on with THESE PARTICULAR students?" And of course I don't know.
I have run into some scenarios at my large public university which may be relevant:

Recent admission changes which bring in students from more low-income schools with less experience with self-regulated learning.
Changes in course requirements which allow less-experienced students to take the course.
Limited timing of a different required remedial class made one of my two sections also all remedial.
A shift to making a class more online also allowed students to fall behind more easily.

Whatever the reasons, I would also want to know why this results in homework avoidance and how to help overcome this.
Have you tried having undergraduate tutors ask the students what would help? Your students might feel safer admitting problems to peers.

(1) and (2) seem very likely the reason. I'll contact the administration to see if this co-hort was created differently.

@Village (2) is the reason I asked you to test the LMS yourself, see my previous comment underneath the question. Some students just don't know how to deal with some badly designed LMS.

That may be the case. I use Edmodo as my school's official LMS is not maintained properly. In Edmodo, all upcoming homework is arranged like blog posts on a single page, with instructions and due date printed right there, and a large "Turn In" button. Students do not even need to navigate anywhere to find the assignment or instructions which appear right on the front page when logging in. These incoming freshmen have never used this previously, but as they are IT majors, I'm surprised they'd possibly have difficulty using this interface.

@Village Aha. You did not say they are IT majors. In this case, I would say fail them if you have told them to turn in the homework at the beginning.

I have confirmed that (1) and (2) describes exactly the situation with these students.

Thanks for the report back! Hope you can figure out how to get them over the hump. College and its multiple demands can be overwhelming if a student comes from a family without experience with it.

There are many aspects to this question, which amount to "what are some good teaching techniques?"  In fact, I think getting students to do homework assignments is one of the most important parts of teaching.  I recommend you look for in person training programs at your intitution's (or a nearby institution's) teaching center.  Each institution in this network has such a program: http://www.cirtl.net/.
When I did this, I learned how to design better assignments, lead better class discussions, create more engaging classes, and find out what determines student success.  I think most senior faculty would benefit from similar training.
In this case, I suggest creating in-class activities the students cannot do unless they did the homework.
Also, in my experience, all LMS suck.  Don't use them except when you have to (typically to keep grades confidential).

I agree about LMSes, but the homework is best submitted digitally and the LMS is much better than simply using E-mail.

I agree that there is always room for improvement in my teaching, but I already have quite a lot of pedagogical training. Is there something more specific I can do to identify the causes of this group doing poorly, while other groups have been doing well with my teaching format?

Undergrad here,
+Is there any chance an above-average percentage of these students are registered for a pass/fail grading option? They might think "oh I just need a C" and be choosing to ignore the homework, thinking they can just ace the exams. Even good students do this. Perhaps your registration system puts them in one section.
+It could also be that your problem section was the only one left open for people who did not bother to register in a timely manner. Thus, slackers would be overrepresented :). There would also be a shortage of good students that the slackers could copy from. Was there confusion about the availability of your class this term?
+Perhaps there was a miscommunication about class drop procedures.  People just quit doing the work and think you will be the one to unregister them? Are these people coming to class? Perhaps the hypothetical hasty-registered "slacker section" have decided to mass quit...but slack off on the unregistering.
Or, like the others have said, something is wrong with your LMS and they might not know which homework is due. If there is a tech issue, it might not necessarily "look broken" and people think you just have not given any homework YET.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Using data in second study w/o consulting all authors
I just submitted an article using data from another study that was done together with a colleague. I am (technically) the first author of the first study, though we are equally credited first authors and we did refine the first study’s design together, though it was my idea and I wrote the software that eventually performed the data collection. I did say that the data came from our original study and cited it in the second.
He is upset as I did not ask him for permission to use the data from our joint project (I could probably still tell the journal to add him to the acknowledgements). But, he also wants to be credited as an author, even though he did not contribute to the current study. Does using data from a previous joint project warrant his authorship?

Is the data set itself part of the first publication or not? Or is the data merely used in both publications?

In the first study, we gathered data a lot of data that we didn't use or analyze. The second study uses parts of the data we didn't use. The first study was general experimental psychology while the second is personality psychology. The data set was not released.

I have deleted my previous answer because this information changes the answer quite a lot. Thanks for clarifying.

Just to clarify: parts of the data you used are unpublished data that were collected in collaboration with the colleague who was (co-)author of the first but not of the second paper? These data are part of a larger data set of which another part was published in the first paper?

As with most authorship discussions, the issue is somewhat nuanced:

On a purely technical level, everything appears to be in order. The two of you conducted a study, and you published it together. You did a second study alone based on material from the first study, and credited it correctly. No academic misconduct has happened in any part of this process.
However, on an emotional, personal level, it is easy to see that your co-author probably assumed that you would continue working on this project together, and he feels betrayed by you taking a significant chunk from your earlier joint work and exploiting it without is knowledge, and without giving him a chance to partake and continue to get credit. Note that the issue here is not so much that he is not a co-author of a study that he did not contribute to, but that you presumably never gave him a chance to contribute and continue to be part of the project.

Edit:
Based on the OP's comments, it's not actually clear to me anymore whether the co-author did not in fact also deserve authorship in the second study. Personally, I would at the very least be highly uncomfortable using unreleased, so-far unused data that somebody else helped collect.
As is often the case, I feel it would help if you put yourself into your co-author's shoes. Would you feel that everything is ok if the roles were reversed, and your co-author just conducted this follow-up without telling you, and based partly on your earlier work and data that you collected?
Unfortunately, it is difficult to move forward from where you currently are without any hard feelings. Adding your previous co-author to the new study, if even possible, is not ethical as (s)he did not contribute, and obviously you can't go back in time and give him a chance to continue working on the project with you. I feel an important part to clean up this situation is you apologising for not handling this situation in the best way, and acknowledging why the other side is upset (rather than focusing on whether or not you have "technically" done something wrong). If your personal situation seems salvageable, (honest) promises of joint future work usually do wonders in smoothing over rocky current authorship discussions. However, if your personal relations are sufficiently tainted, it may be best to just store this away as a learning experience and move on rather than continue working in a collaboration where the trust has been lost.

Including the information in your comments, I think there are two separate but related issues here:
A) Do you need your previous coauthor's permission to use the data for an additional study?
B) Do you have a responsibility to solicit contributions from someone who helped design and collect data to allow them to become an author?
In my opinion, the answer to (A) is no you do not need your coauthor's permission to use the data. However, for (B): given this person's contributions to the original data collection, you should have offered an opportunity for authorship. Note: I am not saying this means you should gift authorship to this person with no further contribution from them, but you should have given them a chance to have input in the analysis, and an opportunity to contribute to/review the manuscript.
If the previous coauthor was unwilling to contribute because they didn't have the time, or had misgivings, or any other reason, then I think you could still go forward and use the data (assuming you are within bounds of whatever IRB/IACUC/relevant regulations concerning the data) and perhaps given an acknowledgment for the earlier contributions.
(note: I am writing from the perspective of the biological sciences, where multiple authors on a paper is common and contributions are expected to be non-uniform across the author list; if you are in a field where single/dual authorship is the norm this may not apply)

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


text:
Including unrelated (but current) job on CV for PhD application?
I finished my master's degree in September, and I have applied to PhD programs that begin in September 2017. Most of the schools asked for a CV with the application. I've had to take a part-time job in retail to make ends meet while looking for a better job, and I included the retail job on my CV under the employment section. My CV, of course, highlights my more relevant positions (teaching/research assistantships), along with my conferences, awards, etc. But I'm concerned that I may have made a mistake in including the retail job at all - I only felt compelled to do so because I wanted to be honest about my current employment.
Will including the retail job on my CV possibly be seen negatively by PhD admissions committees? I am hoping that it is a non-issue, but I am not sure.
Edit: I realize similar questions have been asked but I don't think my question is a duplicate of the one that was suggested. I'm asking about whether it was a good idea to include current employment, not hobbies and interests.

Possible duplicate of Is listing non-academic interests on academic CVs important?

Not a duplicate; I seriously doubt working in retail is an interest.

You've included a piece of information on your CV that's essentially irrelevant for the position you're applying for, and that's how it will be viewed.  Most people on admissions committees won't care, assuming your application indicates a high level of motivation for a PhD.  So don't worry about it.
That said, some people will probably want to know why you'll have a 1-year gap between the end of your masters and the beginning of your PhD.  Presumably either you applied to some places last year and were unsuccessful or just didn't apply.  Neither of these things would be held against you much—but there are potential concerns here that I would want to see cleared away in other parts of your application.  For instance, not applying last year might lead one to wonder how serious you are about a PhD and/or how on top of things you are.  Hopefully your letter writers/personal statement would put any such concerns to rest.

I finished my master's degree in September
I wanted to be honest about my current employment (retail)

Being honest means answering interview questions truthfully.  If they ask you if you ever threw sand at someone when you were in preschool, tell them the truth -- but there's no need to volunteer such information.
Finishing a master's in September is inherently awkward. For significant gaps in a résumé, you can put some brief explanation in a cover letter, but for a short gap like this it isn't necessary.

Disclaimer: I never served on a hiring committee so I can't speak from experience. But I did my share of applying and know how I would look at such a situation.
Working in retail is not going to get you accepted to grad school. But having a one-year gap in your CV won't help you either; that would probably be even more damaging. Not explaining what you did (or are doing) after your master's would raise all sorts of red flags: What does he do? Why won't he tell? Can we rely on him doing good work?
The best strategy would probably be to explain your current situation in your cover letter: You finished your master's in September and didn't have time to apply for PhD while finishing (or whatever your reason is). You really want to go to grad school (explain why!), so you took whichever job you could get while applying. Formulated this way, you can even use your situation to show your motivation, dedication, and perseverance, which are key skills for any PhD student!

To add to this: I would reinforce in your letter your choice not to go to graduate school immediately, AND why you now want to go to graduate school. If you can, I think an effective way to discuss it is to talk about how this time has reinforced, clarified, and focused your choice to go to graduate school.

In general, my advice would be to not list irrelevant positions on your academic curriculum vitæ.
If you've held non-academic positions that are at least somewhat related (e.g. you've worked as a programer and you're applying to graduate school in computer science), it's not unusual to list them in a section toward end of your curriculum with a heading like "Professional Experience" or something similar. If they're not related at all, it doesn't need to go in.
Will doing so hurt? Probably not. I'd feel especially confidently stating this in regards to graduate school applications where there's simply not a strong expectation that you'll know the norms among academic CV writing or, for that matter, that you'll have a lot of relevant material to fill your CV with.
To the extent that your work in an unrelated field as left "holes" (i.e. unexplained periods of time) in your CV, the normal place to explain that is with a line or two in your personal statement.


text:
How to anonymize a business in a paper?
I am assisting with a research paper about a single business. The business owners agreed to participate in the study on condition that their name remain anonymous. What is the proper or common way to anonymity the business? Should a fake name be used? Should readers be told that a fake name was used?

In your introduction you can explain the context of your study, and the research questions you want to treat. Then, in the last sentence of the introduction you can write something like:

To answer the research question, we treat a case study dealing with a
particular company. For privacy reasons we cannot give the exact name
of the company, so we will simply refer to it as "the company" throughout this paper.

Then in the paper you can use sentences like:

Productivity in the company was boosted by increasing the light
intensity at the workstations
The company that is the focus of our study is a tech company of 500 employees which has grown very much in the last 5 years.

In this way everyone is aware of the fact that a fake name was used.
ps I haven't written any papers that involved this kind of dilemma, but this is what I would do.

Frequently people give a pseudo-name to the company. So instead of writing "the company", you might give the pseudo-name "TechX". But yes, your guess is what people frequently do.

I've seen this used on thedailywtf.com where they share face-palm-worthy stories about all things that have to do with IT. If there is a company involved they'll use a mock name like Global IT corp.


text:
Do any schools offer teaching or research assistantships via distance education?
I would like to complete an MRes or PhD, but do not live in an area with any schools. I would rather not relocate. I see that many schools offer paid MRes or PhD programs entirely via distance. Do schools sometimes also offer teaching or research assistantships via distance as well?

I am not aware of a single credible online/distance PhD program.

How would that work? You'd teach via video link? Seems unlikely...

The University of Birmingham has many PhDs and other research degrees via distance. Many schools, including Harvard, Yale, Columbia, etc. offer Web-based courses. Why is it so unlikely?

@Village online courses are not at all similar to online advising

Graduate study is learning to do research, by working with your advisor and a research group, mostly hand in hand. A small part of that you'll be able to do remotely, but a minority in any case.
Perhaps you can find a job as a TA for some of the online courses, but if I was to select somebody to assist me in this, I'd select somebody I know personally (and even have at hand for coordination or to pull their ears if something goes awry).


text:
What to do when students bring me questions related to other courses and subjects?
I teach all of the writing courses for one of my college's STEM department. Occasionally, students bring me questions related to their field, e.g. they are doing some project for another course and they want to know what tools I used for a similar real-world project I did before.

If I help the students (which would amount to suggesting some books, tools, Web sites), perhaps the department will feel I am interfering in matters where I should not, as this is not my teaching area.
If I turn away the students, perhaps the department or (students themselves) will feel I am not committed to serving the students.

What is the accepted procedure for such a situation?

I am not a teacher and have no credibility but in my opinion the right (morally) thing to do is to help when you can and be honest if you can't. If university protocol is such that students are prevented from learning by any means (and teachers feel threatened by possible repercussions when helping students), that sounds like grounds for a department meeting. It directly counters the purpose of education. In addition, perhaps if you have a chance to speak with the "correct" teacher you could mention that student's interest and ask them to proactively provide more info to that student.

Be flattered.  Be very flattered!  Help them as much as you reasonably can.  (If nothing else, you know how the library works and they may not.)

There's no shame in saying you're not an expert in their domain specific knowledge.  It's more important to know your limitations than to give advice you're not directly qualified to give.  Direct them to a professor in that specific field.
If you feel you have sufficient experience to give (at least) a starting point, by all means share it with them.  Just always make sure that you are clear about the limitations of your expertise.

As an undergrad, in my first year I had a great professor that was very good at explaining almost everything. For many students, he became another resource to solve doubts and get help, specially for those subjects where the lecturer was not so clear. If you asked him politely, he would gladly help if he knew the answer. I will always remember him as one of the best contributors to my education.
For some of his comments, I imagine he may have had problems with some other member of faculty. So he changed his policy: whenever he explained anything from another subject, he would close the door. Being realistic, anyone complaining because you are sharing knowledge of their domain, will probably have a bad attitude to many things. Whatever you do, something will upset them.
The only drawback of free help is that takes time from you. If this becomes a problem, you can just ask the students to come at another time because you are busy at the moment. You are doing them a favour, and they will not have any problem with it.

In my opinion, if you are not time constrained and have the expertise, by all means, help the student.
I am a math tutor in a local high school, and often a student will walk in with a science book to ask a question. If it's something I can answer, I'm happy to help. No science teacher would be offended, although they might be surprised as human nature is to pass the buck.
In general, it's great that a student looks up to you and values your advice. I'd just accept that and be glad to help.

Conversely, if you are time constrained or do not have the expertise, just say no.

@JeffE - well for sake of completing the set "If you lack the expertise to answer the question, just say so."

The whole purpose of having students at a university is for them to learn things. Your university cannot reasonably object to you teaching the students things solely on the grounds that it was somebody else's job to teach them those things.
They could object on other grounds, such as you giving bad advice or spending so much time on this that you're not doing your own job properly but, as long as you guard against that, what real problem could there be?

I think there should be no problem as long as the question can be framed so that it is in the scope of your subject (even if the project that "produced" the question is not directly related).
This should ideally be done by the student, while asking the question, but if there is an obvious part of the question related to your subject, it would be okay to gently push your answer in that direction.
You said you do a writing class, so for me, these would be good examples of viable questions (independent of the concrete project related to those questions):

Questions about writing tools (like LaTeX). If the student wants to know pros and cons of learning a new tool in context of a specific project, that is a valid question (as long as it was not explicitly covered in class). Even if it was covered during the lessons, a discussion based on a concrete example can be very useful.

Questions about best presentation of data: given a great amount of raw data, what would be the best way to present it? (graph, table, raw format, just description) If the student comes with the concrete data, he probably has either some ideas or some doubts about what representation to use.

Tools for analyzing or representing data. Again, no matter where the data came from, if there are some commonly used analysis tools (in the wide area), or representation tools, the question is related to the writing up the idea / project results, more than the project itself.

Questions about general structure of the piece of writing. Sometimes the content of the work makes the most common practice not applicable, or some other structure simply better.
For example, one of my articles has the Related work as a second-to-last section, because it simply didn't fit in naturally at it's "usual" second paragraph place. The discussion with my supervisors help clarify that and why it was okay.

Basically, any questions where you are the best suited to answer, independent of where the question comes from, is not misplaced. Those kinds of questions show that the students are applying and synthesizing their knowledge, and looking at it from a different (not-required) perspective, which is a good thing. (If I ever was in that kind of situation,) those questions would make me proud of my teaching since it meant the students are applying what I taught them "outside the box" I gave them.
Of course, if it is not that kind of question, there is nothing wrong in turning the student away, perhaps pointing him to the right person to talk to. Simply saying that there are people who are better suited to answer their questions, while making it clear that you would be more than happy to help within your area of expertise, should be enough.
Students that you are directly responsible for (i.e. your supervisees) might be a different story, but that might be out of the scope of this question :)

If Village knows the answer, but falls outside of writing, why not answer it? I am sure that to get a "scientific writing" position one has to do research, become an expert in some areas. That expertise may very well qualify to answer the student.

@Davidmh I partially agree... If OP knows some extra information from his other areas of interest that are useful to support/supplement the answer of a question related to writing, by all means he should offer it. But I think a student coming to a Prof with a question totally unrelated to the subject he is taking with that Prof, if he is not the students adviser, is a gray area. Even if the Prof knows the answer, due to time constraints or other reasons, he might want to decline answering and redirect the student to another Prof (maybe offering a very short answer) - which would be OK I think.

One of the best ways for a university professor to aid a student's learning is to point them where they themselves could discover such tools.
Additionally, you could point them in the direction of your SME colleagues, experts in topics outside of the scope of your expertise.
Lastly, to maximize your likely full schedule, helping students identify resources could be something you provide to them as a group during advisor hours.  Schedule a group resources time during your office hours so that you don't get overtaxed time wise.


text:
Are researchers permitted to mislead subjects about the purpose of a trial?
I think much research would not be very successful if the subjects knew the purpose of the research. When researchers gather human subjects for a trial, can they provide the subjects with misleading information about the purpose of the trial?

Related article. It's been a while, but I'm pretty sure most psychological studies now have to be approved by an ethics/IRB, so as to stop things of a questionable nature like the Milgram experiment from happening. The only thing that I can think of that is considered ethical is double-blind with a placebo, which could technically be misleading since you don't know if you're getting treated.

That's a great question.

Studies involving deception are certainly allowed under some circumstances (see, for example, http://ora.research.ucla.edu/OHRPP/Documents/Policy/8/Deception.pdf).  But I'll leave formal answers to those with more experience with these issues.

The answer will vary by location: do you have a specific country (/legal system) in mind?

What research have you done?  I expect you to do a significant amount of research before asking.  In your case, this topic is typically explained in human subjects ethics training -- or you could just call up your institutional review board, who exist to help you work through these kinds of questions.  The keyword is "deception".  If you haven't done any research on your own, then the question is not ready for this site at this point.

Standard 8: Research and Publication of the "Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct" of the American Psychological Association pertains. Specifically:

8.07 Deception in Research
(a) Psychologists do not conduct a study involving deception unless they have determined that the use of
  deceptive techniques is justified by the study's significant
  prospective scientific, educational or applied value and that
  effective nondeceptive alternative procedures are not feasible.
(b) Psychologists do not deceive prospective participants about
  research that is reasonably expected to cause physical pain or severe
  emotional distress.
(c) Psychologists explain any deception that is an integral feature of
  the design and conduct of an experiment to participants as early as is
  feasible, preferably at the conclusion of their participation, but no
  later than at the conclusion of the data collection, and permit
  participants to withdraw their data. (See also Standard 8.08,
  Debriefing.)

Whether or not a planned study satisfies these requirements is for the Institutional Review Board to decide, which must review every proposed study before it starts.

Of course, the IRB isn't bound by the APA's ethical principles- it's operating under the "common rule" of the US federal government which has similar guidelines.

I recently participated as a volunteer subject in a psychological experiment, where it turned out that the experimenter had deceived me about the main purpose.  At the end of the experiment, she told me about the deception, and offered to show me the paperwork from the ethical review board that had approved it.  This was in the UK, and I presume that it was all in accordance with the standard UK rules.  For me the experience was quite interesting, but it could have been upsetting for people with a particular (and uncommon) set of life experiences.  However, it seemed clear that that kind of issue had been carefully considered by the review board.


text:
Does EBSCO's "Peer Review" search filter filter out junk journals?
My school's library e-journal search tool uses EBSCO. In EBSCO, one can select "Peer Review" to only show articles from peer reviewed journals. Does this filter have a system for removing junk journals (i.e. journals that receive money to publish work) from the search results or will many junk journals calling themselves peer-reviewed journals still manage to get through the filter?

Not every journal that receives money to publish is junk. PLoS Biology is for example a well respected journal.

I'll also add that peer review filter simply restrict the search to peer reviewed articles. What is junk is subjective. Non peer reviewed doesn't mean junk, it simply means non peer reviewed. See the details of EBSCO peer review definitions in my answer.

Yes.
However, keep in mind the various (read: broad) definitions of what peer reviewed means. EBSCO uses following definitions:

Blind Peer Reviewed - (or Double Blind Peer Reviewed) - Articles appearing in a journal are sent outside of the journal's publishing or sponsoring organization for review by external reviewer(s), whereby the either author's identity or the reviewers' identity is unknown.
Editorial Board Peer Review - articles appearing in a journal are reviewed by an internal board of editors, not solely by one editor. The author's identity may be known or unknown.
Expert Peer Review - articles appearing in a journal are reviewed by experts (either internal or external to the journal) whose credentials are known and who are experts within the subject matter of the article under review. The author's identity may be known or unknown.

According to EBSCO, you can also restrict your search to peer reviewed articles by suffixing your query with AND RV Y.

authors: Κωνσταντίνος Κορναράκης


text:
Do editors choose reviewers based on the quality of manuscripts?
When the editor receives a manuscript, he/she has to find a couple of suitable reviewers. I was wondering if the they were choosing the reviewers in order to match the expected manuscript quality?
What I mean is the following: if the editor receives a manuscript that seems to describe a major breakthrough, will he/she choose preferentially well known scientists to review it? On the other hand, if the manuscript does not seems good, will he/she prefer younger, less experienced researchers?

This question cannot reliably be answered. It depends is the only thing one can say.

This is often, but not always, true.

If so, then this is a similar idea to supervisors/advisors strategically selecting thesis examiners on the basis of their seniority to match the quality of a thesis. However, sending a lesser quality thesis to a more junior ranked examiner might backfire; the examiner might be trying to prove something or be overly critical because they think that's what examiners have to do. A good supervisor will be aware of all this and will be able to steer away from examiners who want to prove something.

Editors try to maintain a good status of papers published in "their" journal. There is no obvious point in using different standards for different papers and I am sure that such differences are not concious decisions if they appear. If an editor receives a paper that is outside of their comfort zone, it is of course possible they are not aware of possible good reviewers and may make seemingly odd choices. How common this is will be difficult to assess but that it occurs is certain.
In the specific of receiving something of breakthrough character, the procedure should normally be the same. However, an editor always has the choice of adding as many reviewers as they see fit. If a controversial paper appears, it will likely receive quite varying reviews and adding additional reviewers may be useful to get a sense of the quality of the work. This does not necessarily mean an editor will go for specific names but I can see that it may be the case that one would go for prominent names for such a paper.
In my experience as editor and author (and reviewer) I often get the sense that good science receives far harsher reviews than poorer. I do not think this is because the good stuff are assigned to "better" scientists, I actually think it is because a good paper is easier to fault be cause it is more transparent than poor papers which are muddled.
So, in short, there are many aspects to how papers are run through a review process. Choice of reviewers is not generally done after quality of the paper although it can happen. In the end a journal, through its editors, want to retain its status and letting poor papers through, does not serve such a purpose.

There is an element of logical necessity in the question you ask.
Let us start with the case of a really major breakthrough, think epoch-making result. In that case, editors will of course try to select someone who is able to understand and verify the work, so someone who presumably has notoriously an outstanding command of the topic, who is known for extreme precision and for the ability to easily incorporate new insights. Such a person has highly desirable qualities in order to produce outstanding research and is known for having them. The odds are that that person has produced top-quality research.
Now consider the fact that such persons are by definition rare, so as they are busy reviewing outstanding submissions, other people have to review less outstanding submissions. So in general, yes, submission credibly claiming a breakthrough are much more likely to be reviewed by well-known scientists or (logically equivalently) submissions claiming much more modest progress or claiming breakthroughs but rather dubiously are more likely to be reviewed by less well-known scientists.
But, as always, there are exceptions. I know at least one relatively junior, relatively unknown scientist who has displayed such excellence and thoroughness in reviewing top manuscripts in his field that he is regularly asked to evaluate submissions whose quality and importance are way beyond his own published work; a statement which should not be considered a slight on the quality of his research: one of the submission earned its author a Fields medal.

My impression from working with one is that good editors seek reviews and reviewers necessary and sufficient to justify their decisions. If the paper is obviously good and obviously right, the reviews may only need to be light. If it's a major breakthrough that requires careful checking, then reviewers of the highest quality will be sought. On the other hand, if the paper has major flaws but comes from a well-known, well-regarded author, the editor will seek out someone known to produce the high-quality review but negative review they need.
More speculatively, borderline papers probably require a lot of work from the editor. If they are unsure whether they want to accept a paper or not, they need high quality reviews to make the decisions on whether to offer revisions or not. They also need reviewers willing to do the work of multiple review rounds in a timely fashion. This latter thought is entirely speculative, but it is commensurate with my experience from conference program committees and the borderline papers we reviewed there.

So, what you are saying is that the editor is deciding wether to accept the paper or not before sending it for review and choose the reviewers that will match its decision?

@Wiliam That's not at all what he said. Bill said that the editor decides how thorough a review the paper needs (not the same thing as paper quality) and brings out the "big guns" (extra-high-quality reviewers) in cases where a paper needs to undergo extra-careful scrutiny.

@Wiliam, I think that the editor has to have at least an idea of which way they're leaning before they send a paper out for review. That being said, I don't think decisions are made until the reviews are in. Usually the reviews will confirm their original impression, and sometimes they will change the editor's leanings. That's human nature.


text:
Why do some universities not have a comprehensive exam?
I spotted that some universities do not have a comprehensive exam for their PhD students while it is standard at most universities (specifically for computer science). For what reasons do some universities drop the requirement of comprehensive exam? What is the impression towards someone who has graduated from no-comprehensive department?

Could you specify the time frame after which this exam is typically held, for a new PhD student - It seems its held after the first year?

@TCSGrad different universities have different regulations. usually within 24 months of enrollment

Is it really common in computer science? Most CS departments I am familiar with don't have them.

"it is standard at most universities" - Maybe in North America, but as the anecdotes in this question highlight, it is not at all the norm globally.

The primary reasons for having a comprehensive or qualifying examination are as a measure of quality control, and as a means of "population control."
The first ensures that students meet minimal criteria for promotion to PhD candidacy. This allows, in part, PhD programs to take a few candidates who they feel could be successful, but are not 100% confident thereof.
The second is used if departments admit more incoming students than they have funding to support as PhD candidates. Then the exam is used to "cull the herd," and keep the candidates the faculty wants to continue to fund.
My field used to be the kind of program where everybody had to do a qualifying examination. But, in recent years, this trend has started to swing away from comprehensive exams to research prospectuses. There is no stigma associated with either approach, though; both are considered acceptable.
Practically, departments choose not to have a comprehensive exam for a variety of reasons:

They may feel that they need neither quality nor population control.
They may not want to spend the time required to prepare, administer, and grade such exams (particularly if there are large numbers of students as well as time-intensive components, such as oral sessions).
They may feel other means of assessing performance are superior (for instance, a research dossier and oral proposal).

-1:  This is a great answer to the question "For what reasons do some universities require one pass a comprehensive exam?" but does not really answer the question "For what reasons do some universities drop the requirement of comprehensive exam?"

My department does not have a comprehensive exam. The most frequent reason I have heard is that we don't need it. On the other hand, some other departments in our university have comprehensive exams and I have heard that they are primarily used to weed out students after the first year.
I will venture to say that there is absolutely no impression towards graduating from a no-comprehensive program. Research job committees look at publications, letters of recommendation and research experience. Graduates from my program have found jobs wherever graduates from similar programs find jobs.

My impression is that comps are rather rare in computer science departments. Neither my current department nor the department that gave me my PhD have them. But the  math departments at both universities do.

@JeffE Excellent point. I asked a senior professor this question once in our school and he literally told me that it is a waste of time because having a comprehensive exam can also mean that the PhD admissions committee did not do a credible job that year.

Of course there are many advantages to having a comprehensive exam as are outlined in many of the other answers here, but there are also many reasons why departments don't have them.
A comprehensive exam creates more work for professors (they have to grade it, write it, and often even hold study courses for it) and potentially, if the program only admits good students, or if weaker students drop out due to poor performance in coursework, or unsatisfactory progress towards research, some professors consider the exam to not be worth the extra work (i.e. an unnecessary piece of bureaucracy).
In addition for some fields, research topics are very diverse, and course requirements are effectively all electives. In such cases, it would be unclear what course work a comprehensive exam would pull from.
Even if this is not the case, not all professors will agree with the definition of what a "core subject" in the field is. This is a bigger problem than you might think. Say as a professor I am really excited that I finally got a great student in my subfield and we are doing great research. Now say he fails the qualifying exam in some other topic that is viewed as a "core" topic, when my subfield is not considered as important. You can bet I will be bitter about that. If the professors can't settle on what topics are core (a political not just academic process), then sometimes the only solution that can gain enough approval from most of the professors is to not have a qualifying exam at all.
At some programs that do not have comprehensive exams, the advancement to candidacy exam can act as one, by including questions about topics from coursework that are only loosely related to the proposed research (in addition to questions more directly related to your thesis proposal or research presentation). These advancement to candidacy exams can require just as much studying as one would typically do for a qualifying/comprehensive exam. There are advantages and disadvantages to this approach. One advantage is that having the comprehensive exam material in the advancement to candidacy exam makes you go back through your course work and think critically about how each topic relates to your area of research. Your research allows you to review the material from a new, perspective that allows you to draw new interesting pieces of understanding.
In other fields, a comprehensive exam is viewed as a waste of time because the final exam in a set of core courses effectively act as a comprehensive exam. Usually, some students do not make the required grade and drop or retake the class (similar to a comprehensive exam). The big advantage here is that the professor who taught the material writes the exam, this saves time on the professor's end and also prevents needlessly failing students who might get hung up on inconsistencies between two different exam writers.

I got my PhD many many years ago in CS, and in my case the department had a 4 part/4 day written + a 2-3 hour oral a year or so later. The written was the same for everyone, 1 part CS theory (computability, formal languages etc), 1 part math (formal logic, combinatorics etc.), 1 part software (compilers, OS), 1 part hardware (mostly the content of the Hennessy and Patterson book, 1st edition at that point).  All at the graduate level (they subsequently dumbed-down the exam because the pass rate was too low and some faculty were loosing favored students who could not pass)
I spent a good 6 months with my head in books and in study groups studying for that exam, and though I was happy to be done with it, I didn't see the great value at the time.
I do now. Even now, with my "background information" 20 years out of date (not really), I find that I'm often using some piece of what I learned in that half-year to explain something to my students or to conceive of how I might implement some research or project idea--not all of it, mind you, but I have used all 4 parts. Students ask my questions expecting to get answers that draw from various parts of the discipline, and I'm grateful that I have that knowledge.
In a recent committee meeting to vet faculty candidates, I was discussing courses we'd want then to teach and one member of a committee [a dean, not a CS faculty member] asked me about the common knowledge that all PhDs in CS would have, and I was lamenting the fact that many schools do not have rigorous comps, and so we can't make assumptions about what background knowledge they have. That said, I usually don't bother looking at the comps page on candidate's universities, rather we ask a bunch of technical questions in the phone interviews
As a side note about "admissions committees" and why they might do a good job and still need comps, many CS departments take a large number of people with degrees in related disciplines (Math, EE etc), and while I think they make great computer scientists, they lack something if they don't have the opportunity to study the foundations of CS

-1: This does not answer the question "For what reasons do some universities drop the requirement of comprehensive exam?" but is a great answer to the question "For what reasons do some universities require one pass a comprehensive exam?"

Well, I did in the question, as they watered down the exam after I was there: "they subsequently dumbed-down the exam because the pass rate was too low and some faculty were loosing favored students who could not pass". Obviously, the alternative (as described above) is that we only admit people with strong CS background.
Nevertheless, you are right in that my emphasis was not sufficiently focused on the narrow question

I do not think that is obviously the only other option. You make it sound like a comprehensive exam is the only way to evaluate a student and kick out ones who are unlikely to produce PhD level research

I simply would not have done a PhD if I had to take comps. To me it was extremely important to finish as quickly as possible. With starting salaries in Engineering at a pretty high level, every year I was in school I felt was like leaving money on the table. I suspect that many universities also find that students in high demand areas feel the same and there is a scarcity of grad students, particularly local students.


text:
Submitting a manuscript dependent on another one also submitted
I have a manuscript A, ready for submission, that describes a method for characterizing topographic features (computer sciences). I also have another manuscript B, ready for submission, that uses the method from the manuscript A where I extract the features I want  and do some statistical analyses to explain the topographic variations (geosciences). A and B cannot be merged, and I consider to publish them in different journals since they treat different topics.
Should I submit A and B at the same time, but mention in B that I use a method from A? If yes, what should put as in-text citation?

Is there a compelling reason to submit both simultaneously? In case (I hope this doesn't happen!) there is an oversight in A, and the reviewer asks for modifications to the method, the results in B may no longer be valid. So it would be better to wait for acceptance of A.
If you must submit both soon because of deadlines etc, you can cite A as "journal xyz- submitted" (i.e. 'submitted' in place of volume number etc). This does happen now and then, but in my field (materials science), most journals discourage it.

I'd consider sending at least A to arXiv, then you'd have something to cite in B. The local culture is very different about preprint in various fields, but computer science is IMO quite Ok with arXiv preprints.
Another idea would be to submit A as is, but in B submission also to supply A manuscript as additional material for review.

This is a very normal thing and no big deal.  Just cite the other one with whatever the citation format is.  Obviously you won't have a volume number or page numbers and add "In preparation." Or "Submitted." Or "In press." (Whatever applies.)
Note: that some reasonable portion of such prospective citations don't ever turn into articles or go into alternate journals or whatever.  But such is life.  No big deal. You are being as honest and accurate as you can at the time doing the citation.  It is still possibly useful to a future researcher for years in the future, who may want to look for related papers when looking at the one paper.  You are doing the best you can.

Note 2:  There may be very good reasons to have separate papers like this.  For example if you discovered and characterized a new important chemical with new apparatus, you may want to go into lots of detail on the chemical but not in detail on the apparatus for a chemicals journal...and then the converse for an apparatus journal.  In addition, sometimes work has natural break points (chemical A and chemical B discovered with some connection) where it is really better for the reader to get an LPU (least publishable unit) on A and one on B.  It's a judgment call and some people think it is done to pad count, but I actually prefer LPU papers because they are a bit more readable and focused.  You can do a review paper later that combines some of them.  Also LPUs are faster to get out.


text:
Reproducible research and corporate identity
My university is on a drive to unify its corporate identity (it makes me sick just typing that). This drive includes branding our lecture slides, research talks, and research posters. The branding templates are not released under an open license and utilize a copyrighted logo and proprietary fonts. I think this prevents me from releasing my talks and posters under a free and open license (e.g., CC BY) which is one of the tenets of Reproducible Research.
Apart from creating two versions of everything, is there any way to reconcile this apparent incompatibility?
Is my understanding of licenses like CC BY wrong? Can I release something (e.g., a research talk or poster) with a copyrighted logo that I don't hold the copyright on under a free and open license?

Have you contacted the division of your university responsible for copyright (Library, Division IP) regarding their licensing of their copyright material and their font licence for reproduction on CC BY?  Their own licences may be such to allow you to do so.

@SamuelRussell not yet, I am still trying to track them down. As far as I can tell no one wants to take responsibility.

Maybe you could specify "everything except the logo and fonts is released under a CC BY license"?  Strictly speaking, that would be fairly restrictive, since it would not give people permission to redistribute the file as is.  However, it would at least make it clear what is available for reuse if that's the aspect you are worried about.  I imagine your university would even agree to a more elaborate license (saying the whole file is distributable without modifications under CC BY-ND and everything but the logo and fonts can be reused under CC BY), which might be the closest to what you want.

Regarding the logo the university might agree to CC BY because it forbids reusing anything "in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work".  One could argue that a logo automatically implies endorsement and therefore cannot be reused even if taken from a CC BY licensed work, in which case including it in such a work shouldn't be a problem.  However, I'm sure the university would want to discuss this with their lawyers before deciding that clause made it safe.  In any case, you are right that because you don't hold the copyright, you need their explicit permission.

What does capitalised "Reproducible Research" mean? Please can you add an explanation to the question? It must mean something different to uncapitalised "reproducible research", because that wouldn't require talks and posters to be released under a free and open licence at all, so I guess you're talking about something more institutionalised and ideological?

@EnergyNumbers I added a link to http://www.rrplanet.com/. The idea of capital Reproducible Research is that in the absence of free and open licensing (among many other steps) research isn't easily reproducible.

This drive includes branding our lecture slides, research talks, and research posters. — Just say no.  Actually, don't even say no.  Just don't do it.

@JeffE talks are easy. Posters, and to an extent lecture handouts, need to be printed. The university approved printer won't print I branded material.

My university has had enforced its "corporate identity" since the 1990s. It is described in details on a web site and available in a series of templates. Although I get a sense of tiredness when I read the material surrounding the "identity" I can also see benefits, to recognize the university "products" (sorry) among other materials at a congress etc. But, the question was about reproducing material.
As I see it I would want to have the logo on material such as posters or presentations so that people can identify my affiliation. I am free to post presentations and posters or other materials on my university site with the logos on them. If I want to put some material out that is mine I simply would not use a unversity logo. An example: I have written several hopefully useful booklets on scientific writing to be used by students. This material is my initiative and is not the result of the university asking for it. These booklets are distributed for free using our web-page and I would gladly distribute them more widely if there was demand. So from this perspective I can see two different "products" where one benefits from the logo and one where I do not want it.
Now the rules of my university says the logo is copyrighted which means others cannot use it. this still means I can post material with the logo in public places. The problem arises if someone takes my, say, presentation and uses it as their own. Then they break the copyright and make themselves guilty of a kind of fraud by associating themselves with an organisation to which they do not belong. I still have done nothing wrong, posting material is fine and even encouraged. The copyright also prevents people from the taking the university logo and adding it to their own "product" fo rexample showing it on their web-page or using it for commercial uses.
So now, the content. You seem to indicate that you will be prevented from displaying your work without the branding. I do not think this is correct. The laws on copyright and particulary intellectual ownership in my country is very clear. If you have created something it is yours. In a commercial company you may end up sign off this right by becoming employed so that the things your develop within that company belongs to them, not you. That is how research in pharmaceutical companies work, for example. My university system has made attempts to gain rights to lectures etc. but this has so far failed miserably due to the strong laws. You need to check these laws that apply to you since I do not know how they may vary internationally; I would expect them to look fairly similar.
You mention "proprietary fonts". This means the university has selected fonts and bought them from a font foundry so that you can use and copy them for free within the university system. This does not mean other cannot use them, they must simply buy them first so providing copies to persons outside of your university would be illegal. Since fonts are not included in Office templates or in pedfs resulting from your templates there is nothing illegal about distributing such documents. If you were to take the fonts and produce a product that you were to sell for your won personal gain, you will, however, break the law.
The bottom line, then, is that you can put your  material in the creative commons as long as you avoid the logo (ater all who would want to use a figure with somebody elses logo in it?). I cannot see the university preventing you from doing this unless they explicitly ask you to waive your rights. Material with logo has its place when you want to make sure your afficilaition is clear. If you do not want that, then I believe you are free to post things in another style.
Finally awareness of the laws and regulations concerning intellectual rights are important and I strongly believe it is good to carefully look at whatever applies in each of our cases so that we can react if someone tries to infringe on such rights.

+1. very nice answer. I think that nothing prevents the OP from posting his materials online. If its about research communication as the OP indicates, it will do the job. Others can use the content without the fonts, logos etc.

My suggestion is to follow your school's guidance as much as you have to, but figure out a way to remove (by script, macro, by hand, or otherwise) the branding for distribution.  Have both versions available on your website.  If you have a presentation that you may want to distribute, put a note at the bottom of the title slide, or at the end:

A freely distributable version of this presentation is available here: [web address].

If your branding mechanism is a master/template slide, it is trivial to remove this for a non-branded version.  I have a hard time believing that printing issues (for posters or handouts) should be a big concern for redistribution -- if it isn't digital, very few people are going to scan/copy for redistribution anyway.

This is the two version approach that I was hoping to avoid. Having gaps where a logo once was will look a little odd. Changing the type face may cause the text to reflow/change size requiring a new layout.

@DanielE.Shub My fault -- I didn't properly read that you wanted to avoid the two versions.  When it comes down to it, though, how do you want people to share the work?  Do you want the ideas shared, or the actual document?  If it is the former, it doesn't really matter what the document looks like.  I would absolutely avoid branding individual graphs or charts. As for the font issue -- unless your school is using a really odd-ball font, you should be able to find a suitable free replacement without much trouble.

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


text:
How do we provide permission to use a figure that we hired a graphic designer to create in SciRep?
We hired a graphical designer who made us fancy visualisations for our paper.We signed the contract and paid him. He gave us the files and transferred copyrights to the university.
Now, at the production stage with Springer Nature, they asked for copyright from the owner (in English).
What shall we do now? The least bureaucratic option is preferred.

Is the issue that the signed copyright transfer from the designer to your university is in a different language?

Is SciRep Scientific Reports?

You need to work with the university to transfer copyright or an appropriate license to Springer and to assure them that you have the rights to use the figures. The university should have a legal office to handle this. The university is the owner so must be the one to handle the copyright transfer or license statement. The university should provide the new statement in English. If necessary you can provide a dual language version if you are in, say, France.
If Springer needs assurance that the university is the proper copyright holder and can transfer rights, have the university send a copy of the original transfer. If the original transfer is not in English then have a translation done and send Springer a copy of that translation and the original as well so that there is no misunderstanding. This last step might not even be necessary initially.
Note that you aren't the owner, nor can the creator help you since they have given copyright to the university. There is no way to avoid the university's participation since you are unlikely to be an "officer" of the university with authority in such things.
However, for open access, you may misunderstand what is being asked for. What Springer will need is a perpetual license to publish the work even in open access. It will be a license that is given, not the copyright itself. And the license extends rights to readers/users of the article, not just to Springer.

Scientific Reports is an open access only journal so it should not be necessary to sign over any copyright to the publisher.

@Anyon, then why are they asking for it? I'll add a bit.

Well, that is what I was hoping OP could clarify. I wonder if the usual form requires the authors to attest that they created all elements in the papers, and if not provide evidence (in English) that they have the right to publish elements created by others.

@Anyon: also for OpenAccess, the material needs to be properly licensed. IMHO it is a rather moot point whether we call this transfer (or new license), and whether it is done via Springer or by giving them the appropriate OA license. All this doesn't change the fact that without license, Springer cannot publish it, OA or not. (What is indeed not necessary is an excliusive license, a non-exclusive one is sufficient here)

Oh, and Springer has a legitimate interest in OP declaring to them that they do indeed have the right to grant such a license to them. Side note: depending on your legislation and employment status, university being owner of the (transferable) copyright is no different from OP drawing a figure: the transferable IP rights often are by default owned by the employer = university.

The least bureaucratic option is preferred.

There may be options:
In many jurisdictions, the transferable copyrights of a work produced by an employee are automatically owned by the employer, here the university.
If that is the case where you are, you may argue that this particular figure is really no different from any figures or text you produced: the copyright owner is in any case the university.
You may thus take the point of view that it is appropriate to involve university burocracy here to the same extent that you involve it for all other copyrighted parts of the paper: text, figures, tables...
This also means that you can license it just the same way you license all the other parts of the paper (assuming that you got the appropriate rights licensed from the creator - if not, legally speaking you need to contact them and ask for a correction/update of your license).
One level up the ladder of burocracy would be to let your PI (or whoever had the power to sign the contract with the designer) do the transfer. And then it is up to them to know whether they have the power to do so on their own, or whether they need to involve more administration.

If they tell you to do it, you're fine: burocratically speaking that is a task you're assigned to do. Burocratically speaking, it is up to your supervisor to know which tasks they are allowed to perform and delegate - none of your business.

If the procedure has been to fill in some form about the publication (this is required for publications in some institute where I have been), and you got it back signed and with the task to do the legwork of uploading stuff: I'd also take this as the assignment of the task to do as needed. Which includes the appropriate licensing for all materials including the fancy figure. (Advanced university burocracy asks for license matters in the "I want to publish"-form.)

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