text:
Effective ways of encouraging "weak" students to make use of office hours
I find that a not-so-insignificant number of my students could benefit from coming to talk with me during office hours about homework assignments, their exam preparations, etc., and I'm looking for ways to encourage them to do so. I am a big proponent of students being proactive, and figuring out on their own that they need to seek out help, but I am not seeing enough progress on this front and am, thus, looking for alternatives.
One of the main problems I am observing is that, on homework solutions, some students clearly don't know what they are doing, and coming to talk to me about how to proceed could potentially be very beneficial for them.

Since good students already utilize office hours, when needed, what are some effective ways of getting the relatively weaker students to attend office hours?

One idea I am toying with at the moment is to make office hour interactions with me grade-able, and worth a certain percentage of the grade. As an example, consider the following:
Say a homework is assigned, student W is the "weaker" student, student S is the "stronger" student, the homework is worth 10 points, and the "interaction-with-me" component is worth some amount of points, say, 10.
Student S turns in a solution, which is correct/mostly correct [say, 85% or more correct]. In this case, student S would receive anywhere from 8.5 to 10 points on the homework grade and, since their score on the homework is greater than or equal to some threshold, say, 85%, they also score 10 points on the interaction component, whether or not they utilized office hours.
Now, consider student W: If student W utilizes office hours, and it seems like they are really trying to understand how to tackle the homework assignment, then this student would receive 10 points for the interaction component [student W's homework score, though, would reflect their performance on the homework]; else if student W does not utilize office hours, and they scored below some threshold on the homework [again, say, 85%], student W would then receive whatever they earned on the homework and zero points for the interaction component.
The above is just one idea I have at the moment. One thing I don't like about it is that it increases the documentation burden on my end. One possible solution to that would be to require students to document their office hour interactions with me on their solutions such that it would be a relatively quick check for me at grading time.

I was a good student, but only saw one of my tutors outside class on one occasion, and was ashamed that I'd had to do so. I saw it as cheating and a de-facto failure on the assignment I was asking about, even though I ended up with a great grade. Is it possible that your students don't realise that seeking your help is not cheating and that their peers who perform well are already doing so? Perhaps you could give examples in class of the type of thing you have helped other students with?

@Significance Good idea, I'll try that.

As a student, who normally performs well, I don't see it as cheating per-say, but rather an embarrassment. It is admitting failure on my part to do something (whatever that may be) to bring myself up to the level the course expects. I think many students don't feel any given course is literally too challenging for them, but rather they simply haven't put their best effort into the course. Going to office hours not only subjects one to the same lecture again, but also admits they may not being paying attention in class. It also opens the door for more undesired professor "attention" in class.

In addition, going to office hours may expose more shortcomings in the student's understanding of the course, which may make them feel worse off than before. The student may have barely coasted by on their own, but now they feel the added pressure of feeling like a fake, in the eyes of the professor. Or, the student may deliberately be blowing off assignments, and on paper appear to the Professor as-if they have little understanding of the course. Most students, in my experience, don't want to stand out in any way, but would rather just remain a last name and student id number on a grade sheet

In my uni lectures are optional, and are attended very little (I attend all the time except when ill, or if lecture is early in the morning 8:00am). For me lecture is the most important part of study because I try to communicate  with lecturer "on the fly", or If my question is complicated I write it down and ask immediately after lecture, and that's when I also ask questions about assignments (written down before lecture). I've never had need to see lecturer in his/her office.

The idea of grading office-hour-time sounds horrible. First, it can only lead to an unhelpful guessing game on the part of the students. How can a student know whether or not they understand the material before their work is marked? Surely the point of the assignment is to test their understanding. If they do badly, then they should come to see you, but this can only happen after they know their score. Second, and in conjunction with the above, the idea fails to account for the needs of students who suffer from, e.g., anxiety or autism, and struggle with social interaction.

How can a student know whether or not they understand the material before their work is marked? — What I want is for students to figure out the right way to solve the problems before they hand it in. One of the ways I can potentially help students in this regard is if they come see me and discuss their approach and get feedback. @WillR

@MadJack: Of course, there will be some students who don't know the correct method, and it would probably be beneficial for them to see you. I'm referring to those students who think they understand when they actually don't, or those who make errors in their reasoning, or those who aren't putting enough detail in their answers, or even those who are simply misunderstanding/misreading the questions. Implicitly, I assume that these four subsets of the student body outnumber your one subset. (continued)

Say you're a student: you might do all the work, and feel confident that your answers are correct, so you hand it in without going to the office hours. What happens if you're one of the students to whom I was referring? Now you've lost marks on the assignment for getting the wrong answers, and then you've been punished for it. Conclusion: this system promotes a lack of confidence in your own abilities, and even students who understand the material well must end-up second guessing themselves and their work, to no benefit discernible to me.

@WillR Yes, good point.

My professors used to strongly encourage visiting them to "correct" (review together) the errors in written examinations. Depending on the rules of your university, you may "force" students to visit you by tactics like a) disclosing their grade only in person under a certain score, b) requiring that a student comes review their last assignment before delivering the next.

One of my professors made it mandatory for each of us to use office hours at least once during a certain paper. Before that, I was not fully aware of office hours being an option. Maybe that could help?

I have found personal (email) invitations to be very effective at getting certain students to come to office hours. (After attending once by personal invitation, they seem to be much more likely to come again without an invitation.)
The emails typically look something like this:

Hi Jane,
I noticed that some students, including you, had trouble with the theoretical basket weaving questions on Homework 3. I would be happy to review this topic with you during my office hours this Monday, 3-6PM in room 901. If you have class or other obligations during that time, you can email me to set up an appointment at another time.

Good idea, thanks. I admit that something like what you suggest seems preferable to the idea I am toying with since your's doesn't involve the willy-nilly giving away of points.

It rely needs to be personal though. I had a lecturer that I hated, and couldn't be asked to even attend his lectures let alone go to his office hours. He sent out an email asking me to visit him to discuss my poor attendance. There were ever so slight hints that it was a mass email so I didn't go as it wasn't targeted to me specifically, thus I remained unnoticed.

I'd be careful about this. Students - especially students who have jobs - may already have a full schedule. Yes, you'd offer to reschedule. But given the power imbalance between a professor and a student, such an invitation can easily suggest that attendence is somewhere between strongly encouraged and mandatory, and this would put additional pressure on students. Not good.

@StephanKolassa students with jobs should either drop out (and work) or go to more advanced school. My claim really depends on country and financial situation. I take my uni as full time job. This is a big topic in my uni now, we had really big load of assignments and people with jobs had trouble to keep up. (uni is free, until 26 years old or you repeat a year, but living costs are high and goverment does not provide no-interest loans for students).

@Kyslik A lot of students have to work to support themselves through uni.  If they're working in order to afford essentials like food and board, it's hardly fair to tell them to drop out...

@Kyslik "uni is free" ...Wow, I think I might have figured out why a lot of us have differing opinions than yours on working during college.

@rw-nandemo well free... its payed by tax payers of course.

@sapi I agree, this matter strongly depends on country / region + financial situation either of individual or group of people. Problem I try to point to is simply uni should be as "hard" as full time job. Or at least employer should respect / understand that student can not be exploited 24/7 (most of the jobs are way underpaid - contracts are crappy because it is not "FULL TIME"). I admit I am lucky one and don't have to deal with living costs, neither do students that live in city that uni is located at, because they can live at theirs parents residence.

@StephanKolassa If a student is doing poorly on homework and exams, and can't give any more time and energy to their coursework then they already are because of their job, then they have a problem, and the problem is not the office hours; the problem is that they're attempting to do more than they're practically capable of doing (well). (If a student can give more time, but scheduling is difficult...  I make it known that I'm perfectly willing to hold Skype office hours on weekends or other unconventional times if necessary.)

@Kyslik: re ‘uni should be as “hard” as full time job’: I don’t know about your country, but in the US and Europe, many universities allow students to study part time — so they will take more years to complete a degree, but it allows them to work at the same time without compromising the overall amount of learning.

In Comp. 2, our first graded assignment was rough. (Spelling errors counted as significant grammatical errors so I flunked it.) Prof. told everyone who got an F to schedule time to see him.
I did and it was quite helpful. He explained his grading rules, his view on what he wanted, and so on. He pointed out that people like me really need to spell check and use any tools that help. The biggest benefit of that meeting was that we got to a comfortable place to discuss the course material which made in-class discussons actually work.
I suggest something along those lines, then: just tell those below a threshold to come see you.
You might even consider asking the strong students to come by and explain where they are struggling and what kind of backgrounds they have on the topic. In that case, you should just ask every student to come and note their responses. You might discover useful patterns.
Another thing to consider is how to get the strong to help the weak.
In-class discussions or group study can help. That depends on material a bit. In the comp class, prof. had us edit select errors from our submissions as a group and discuss alternatives. An engineering prof. once told us he expected us to work our homework in groups so we should form teams. I normally flew solo, even in classes where hardly anyone did so, but I found a partner immediately after that class session.
Don't underestimate the power of declaring your preferences/expectations.

Sometimes students are intimidated at the idea of going to a teacher during office hours. I think we have all been "cross-examined" during such an experience even though we know it was beneficial.
Instead of inviting them one-on-one perhaps requiring them to come in pairs or small groups would be helpful. This saves a lot of your own time as you work with several students at once. In addition, it removes some of the discomfort of having to go alone to the instructor's office for the students.

One thing you failed to mention is also the practical benefit for students coming in smaller groups: I would often come to office hours with other students and it would quite often happen that there's a thing which is unclear for all members of the group, but only one member actually figured out that it is unclear and asked about that. Afterwards all members would benefit from the explanation and quite often engage in discussion about the unclear thing.

It might not apply to you, but here's my 2 cents.
One reason I rarely come to a teacher's office is that I take too long to figure out that I'm sinking - and coming in the day before it's all due resulted in a "You should've started earlier" lecture, which was not the least bit helpful. Like I don't know what I should have done, I'm asking what's now that's in my control...
The embarrassment tends to outweigh any help I might receive. I never mind the cross-examination regarding my knowledge, but cringe at the mere mention of "Why didn't you [do it earlier, come to me before, ask in class, etc...]?" and "Didn't you listen to the lecture?" (I might've missed one sentence out of the thousand you've spoke, which, alas, turned out to be the key one - or I might've missed the sentence in question because I was late. I can't tell what I've missed if I've missed it!)
So, if you find yourself asking one of the above "Why?!" questions in sheer exasperation ("Why do you do something so silly?" is the general gist of things), please don't. Unless it looks like the answer is along the lines "my life is hell and I think of running away from home", of course. However, if you're certain you'd just get a shrug of similar exasperation ("As if I know!"), I'd recommend ditching moralisations and "should have"s and focussing on the assignments themselves. That won't help with people coming the first time, but it is likely to improve repeat visits. Students are timid creatures and might take failure over "making a fool of themselves".

Thanks, and I do appreciate the answers/comments from everyone here, including from the student point-of-view.

I agree with the two top answers: invitations, of one sort or another, are the most effective way.  However I've noticed a large variation in how many students come to office hours by course, by instructor and by school, and I suspect what techniques are effective will depend on your situation, so it's probably good to experiment with different things.
Here are a couple of other ideas, not exactly covered in other answers:

Most obvious: try to make your office hours convenient for as many students as possible, based on their schedules and when assignments are due.  This may involve scheduling more office hours, having office hours Sunday nights, or having office hours in a different building from your office.
One thing I have done for some classes, has been somewhat effective, is to try to make office hours like a study room (which may be a different room from your office, or organize a study room close to your office).  Let them know they can come and work on problems there, solo or with each other.  Then, since you'll right there or nearby when they're working, they'll be able to ask questions right then (similar to group work in class).  A lot of students don't realize they'll need help, don't start the homework early enough, and don't want to come without a question in hand.  This also alleviates some intimidation they may feel about coming to OH.
Something a colleague has done, and found somewhat helpful (I have not tried it myself): make all students visit you in your office within say the first two weeks (scheduled appointments, just for a few minutes, which can be in small groups), to help encourage the habit of getting students to see you in your office.  I do think building a habit and a culture is important.  Many students don't even know where their professors' offices are, so at the least, they learn where your office is, and increases the chances they will drop by if they have a last minute question, say.
Make reminders about OH in class, with sincere encouragements to come try it out.

I will try to put forward a heretical suggestion. Why would you want to?
Having TA'd a number of math courses in the US and obviously had many office hours I've learned one thing. If a person doesn't want to spend time and effort on learning the material no amount of forcing them to do so will help.
In general you have two types of weak students. The ones that have really bad foundations and the ones who aren't willing to put in the effort. These might overlap but essentially if the student can't be bothered to show up to your office hours without being penalized/rewarded in some way then chances are they will just end up wasting both their and your time.
Worse yet they will end up wasting the time of the students that showed up for the office hours and are actually trying to learn something!
In summary hold office hours. Announce it in class at the beginning of the semester and make sure to point out these are both for catching up on what the students want to learn and for learning things beyond the curriculum (this has the effect of both getting the good students in so they can learn more and mitigating any possible feelings of "If I go to office hours it will look like I'm a loser who can't learn it on their own") and leave it at that. Don't waste anyone's time by forcing them to do something they don't want to.

Don't waste anyone's time by forcing them to do something they don't want to. — Good point, thanks.

The purpose of office hours are to help struggling students and to see everyone get the most out of the class. In my experience, when a student is struggling they do one of two things. They either give up entirely, or they fight for any point they can to pass the class. To help them aim for the latter, I would offer just a few points of extra credit. I know not everyone feels the same way I do about extra credit, but it can be a great incentive to help those who struggle. On top of that,  you will get the students that aim for %100 to come and visit with you because they want every point possible.

I've experimented some with extra credit, and I think it has made some difference for going to a help center, but not too much difference for coming to my office.  Do you have any evidence of how effective this was for you?

how about you announce a policy where, if a student receives below a 70% on an assignment, they are required to attend your office hours. When they attend the office hours, they receive 50% of the missed points (for example, raising a 70 to an 85). To me this is an effective solution because students are able to understand what they missed about the assignment as well as raising their grade on the assignment which will help them to stay motivated and increase engagement in the class.

Office hours should rarely (if ever) be "required."

Maybe then, remove the 'stick' (of requirements) and only offering the carrot of allowing 50% of missed points if a student attends office hours?

A colleague at another institution attempted something similar, by requiring students to come to office hours, regardless of whether they needed to or not. I don't think it worked out too well.


text:
Given a downloaded PDF of a publication, is there any way to detect if it's a journal or conference paper?
I have some downloaded papers and I am going to store journals and conferences in separate folders. My problem is that by having a simple look at the PDF file, I cannot detect if that paper is journal or conference. Some papers mention it. However, how to detect the others?

If you cannot tell now, how will you find a paper again once you've filed it? An easy solution to your problem would be to not store the two types separately.

Just search for the title of the paper as a phrase, online. That will almost always lead you either to the journal, or to the conference.
If that doesn't work, go through the list of authors one at a time, and find their university home pages, if they exist; from there, look for their list of publications: that will often have the full citation, and that will let you know whether they are journal or conference papers.
You could also try searching on one or more of the online reference compilers, such as CiteULike, Sparrho, Zotero, Mendeley, or even serial spammers ResearchGate
There are also existing tools such as Mendeley Desktop that will try to find a pdf's metadata for you, with varying degrees of success.

From what I have understood, I should read the citation and format of writing does not say anything. Now my question is that if for example the publisher in citation is Computer Graphics Forum or Blackwell Publishing Ltd, should I have trouble of online search for the publisher to realize if the paper is conference or journal? Sometimes the publisher has both journals and conferences too.

@barej: The citation usually tells you more than just the name of the publisher, namely the name of the conference proceedings or journal.

@O.R.Mapper: Lets make an example. I have the citation: Da Silva, Marco, Yeuhi Abe, and J. Popović. "Simulation of Human Motion Data using Short‐Horizon Model‐Predictive Control." Computer Graphics Forum. Vol. 27. No. 2. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2008.. How to know if it is conference or journal?

@barej: "Blackwell Publishing Ltd" is the publisher, as that is what is normally followed by the year and indicated towards the end of the citation (in that citation style, anyway), and also, because (as implied by the Ltd) it looks like a company name. That doesn't tell you anything about the type of the publication. What can give you some information is Computer Graphics Forum. That is the name of a specific work or series, and you can find out what it is. However, the fact that it's followed by a volume and a number strongly implies that it is a journal.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How to phrase omissions correctly in a thesis?
This might be a strange question, but I am currently thinking about a good phrase to use if I want to emphasize that the theoretical omissions I am making are not caused by neglect, laziness, or because they don't fit my results or something. Instead, I want to quickly get across that the main reason I am not discussing them is that it would increase the section without adding anything of value.
Is there some good phrase that gets this across?
To give a specific example: Let's say I am describing an instrument that heats up a sample until it goes into a phase transition. The instrument works the same way no matter what phase the sample is currently in, but it's a different type of transition in each case. For solids, it would be melting. For liquids, it would be vaporization. For gases, it would be the formation of a plasma. The underlying principles are always the same, but depending on the transition different energies are necessary, the changes take different amounts of time etc., and of course the terminology is completely different. So even though it's the same, and I could talk about it in a very general way, I can't because language fails me. I simply cannot phrase it elegantly, so I have to omit stuff that is not absolutely necessary.
I can't say "I'm leaving this out because modern languages are not advanced enough to discuss this phenomenon in a general way, even though it's actually a very simple phenomenon. And my professor wants this to be 150 pages or less and I'm running out of space." But this is kind of what my problem is.
Any suggestions?

Note: You make omissions, not do them.

You could explain one case in detail, then cover the other cases by listing what terms to substitute for the other cases. Especially if you're dealing with applying the same equation with different terminology, you could provide a table of which variable is named what in each case.
E.g.

Because the principles only differ in terminology, only the solid to liquid transition is covered in detail. The equivalent terminology for each transition is in table 3.

Thank you, but what I mean is not a simple case of exchanging one word. Still, I like the idea of describing only one case, while explaining key differences to the other cases in passing.

Yeah, I like this concept also.

Find a good source of the appropriate discussion and include a reference.  "This is discussed in detail in Smith, Jones and Brown, 2005."

That's a good idea, but there are actually no good sources to cite. Still, thank you for the suggestion. (The topic is actually quite a bit more complex than I make it sound in the question, and for each individual part there are many in-depth quantum mechanical derivations, but all the review papers then completely ignore any complexity that exists and boil it down to "things heat up".)

The mathematicians have a good way of doing it: declare it trivial.
In your heater example, let's say that you demonstrated some results in a liquid. Then you start your section with:

In this section, we present results obtained from heating a liquid sample with a Widget2000. These results can be trivially extended to samples in a gas or solid phase. Since the liquid case is of particular interest for this thesis, other types of sample are not described in detail.

As long as your readers know very well that your statement is correct and intuitively agree that the other cases are trivial, without having to think about why they are equivalent, this is a good way to do it. If you have some doubt - e.g. because somebody has to have a certain level of background in your field to know that it is indeed trivial to demonstrate the equivalency - it is also advisable to add a citation of a source which discusses the equivalency.
Alternatively, if you think that your readers will disagree with the assessment of "trivial", but also don't have sources which show proof, you can write instead:

In this section, we present results obtained from heating a liquid sample with a Widget2000. Solid and gaseous samples show analogous behavior, but demonstrating a proof for that is outside of the scope of this thesis.

Or, if you want to play it safe

In this section, we present results obtained from heating a liquid sample with a Widget2000. We also assume that solid and gaseous samples show analogous behavior, which is a standard assumption in the field of heating samples by widgets [here you cite 2-3 popular papers which do the same handwaving as you do].

I know that this might sound strange, since there "trivial" also has a different, negative meaning in everyday language. In a scientific text, it means "it can be proven with somewhat tedious, but entirely straightforward work, without any gotchas". There is no negative valence attached to it in this sense, and it is used for exactly the purpose you want: to signify that you are streamlining your text and omitting the true but boring parts.

Just ignore the gap.  Honestly, if you are just using a calorimeter in the context of several other aspects (synthesis, conductivity measurements, etc.) than nobody needs you to go through every detail of instrument design. Consider someone using X-ray diffraction, even as a primary measurement doesn't need to go through the Laue equations and how to build a diffractometer.  They just give specific info pertinent to the particular research (used a Rigaku machine with blabla settings).
Of course if your project is ON the DSC, you need to discuss it.
Maybe it is sort of halfway between the examples I listed.  But still.  I think this "omission" is bugging you more than it will others.  Just write up your work and don't bother discussing the instrument so much.  I bet nobody notices.
Publish a paper on the calorimeter.  (Even in a teaching or instrument journal.)  Than cite that.
Practical advice A:  don't let something like this slow you down!  Write the whole thesis and leave a little "hole" where the calorimeter theory goes.  This is psychological.  Once the entire paper is almost done, you will have a lot of momentum built up.  Plus you will have been thinking about it on the back burner.  At that point, you can just plop something in there.
After all we have word processors now.  You can work on different sections out of order.  I used this strategy on my own science writing and it really pushed things forward.  Felt good because I saw all this progress happening.  And then the holes looked small at the end and got filled in easily.  Heck.  I even did it with experimental results!  Wrote the paper without having all the experiments done (cause I was sick of them).  And then having something all done except that one missing piece motivated me to finish off the gap.
Practical advice (B):  Write it all "long".  And then edit it down later.  Sure it's a little more work.  But this is actually common in the work world that you will have documents with length constraints.  Write it up in detail and then go through an editing process to shrink it.

One solution is to describe one of the cases in detail and say that the others are "similar" or "analogous".
However, from the example you give, I'm really not seeing the problem. Why can't you just say something along the lines of the following?

The device heats the sample to the supply the appropriate amount of energy to cause a phase transition (melting for solids, vaporization for liquids, plasma formation for gases).  The time taken will depend on the amount of energy required.

That's about a third of the length of what you wrote. Obviously, you'll need to add more details than you included in the example in your question but I don't see why you can't cover those in a similar way.  It doesn't matter that the different phase transitions have different names, because you can just talk about "the phase transition"; it doesn't matter that the phases have different smells because you can just talk about "the smell of the phase".

The example seems to be misunderstood by many people, which is my fault. Describing a phase transition is indeed easy and can be done in a general way, but I want to describe the actual physical processes that happen when a solid melts. Melting is caused by energy transfer by phonons, which leads to breaking of bonds. (But imagine a slightly more detailed paragraph about this.) In gases, there are no phonons, so the description is fundamentally different, but it's still the same idea. And the device works in both cases, so I should mention that, even though I am only looking at melting solids.

OK -- it's always hard to judge how literally to take an example, so it's not really anyone's fault, really. However, if you're only interested in melting solids, you only need to talk about melting solids. Feel free to mention that the device also works for other phases but there's no need to give any detail indeed, is the exact mechanism of melting even relevant? If all you care about is that the device melts stuff, then it doesn't matter how, physically, melting happens. It sounds like you need to talk to your advisor about what level of detail is appropriate.

I'll edit some of that into my answer in due course.

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


text:
Are the opportunity costs of pursuing a STEM PhD in the US higher than decades ago?
Here are some things that are well-established:

Being a PhD student is a (albeit, temporary) career-path with the poorest education-level/income ratio in the United States. It has been estimated that Post-Doc salary is comparable to junior librarian., and PhD salary is comparable to a waiter.

Note: Average salary of a waiter entry level positions start at $21,158 per year while most experienced workers make up to $39,585 per year. A junior librarian makes less than $50,000/yr.

The opportunity cost is also stark compared to people who are similarly educated in STEM but left for industry early, with a popular estimate of around 1 million USD by the end of the PhD (5-6 years) (which might not include time-value of money, investments, and retirement savings).

Despite academia as a whole being a multi-billion/trillion dollar industry, the administration refuses to raise the stipend for PhD student, leading it to stagnate on average 25,000-30,000 USD/yr for the last three decades if not more.

It is pretty clear to me that most (but not all) PhD programs are path to an enlightened poverty, with STEM PhD faring better than Humanities PhD, and industry-demanded STEM PhD faring better than say biology or pure math.
However, I wonder if this opportunity cost has gotten even even worse over the past few decades due to some factors such as,

rising competitive (on the global scale),
job/housing insecurity,
a sizable aging but not retiring faculty,
skill-based labor market heavily favored over degree-based,
rising cost of living in almost every part of the globe.

Take a current example, due to Covid19 many industry stocks (say airline) are at their lowest point, however, most PhD students do not have the money to invest hence will not likely to reap the benefit. Another example is in software engineering: it is pretty well established salary was good about a decade ago but now the supply is high enough for the wage to fall, most PhD students also miss this "golden" period. Almost all major tech companies (such as Stackexchange, minus IBM, Microsoft, Apple) are founded/launched by people around 2000s, we can firmly say that period is over. Yet another is encroachment of industrial research on academic topics. Google, Twitter, Facebook and various other large tech conglomerates dominates all major AI references in 2020, which makes research on a PhD stipend look pointless
I sometimes take a look at these so-called industry-academia collaboration and wonder out-loud if this isn't just some scheme that seeks to exploit underpaid and highly motivated graduate students.
Objectively speaking, has the opportunity cost gotten higher over the years? If (or not) so why?

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/135865/how-do-academia-and-graduate-advisors-deal-with-the-fact-that-the-cost-of-living/135888

Since the question has been now tagged US, I've moved the comments about US vs EU to chat.

You are too focused on money. Most academics don't. If you want money, become a lawyer.

I think the answer is a relatively clear yes, at least if you compare to 30+ years ago.
First of all, the rise of software development, mathematical finance, and more recently data science, means that at least some STEM majors have much higher salaries in industry than was possible 30 years ago.  I think this change is at least as important a part of the story as an changes within academia.
Second, academia has been in strong decline in terms of availability of good jobs for at least half of those 30 years.  Universities were growing due to the baby boom and increases in the portion of students going to college, and has been in crisis since those trends stopped.  Sometimes this crisis is more acute (the financial crisis, the end of the Soviet Union, covid) but it’s ongoing even during the less acute phases.  As a result there’s fewer jobs in academia with tenure track lines replaced by insecure and poorly paying positions.
All that said, I think “enlightened poverty” is wildly overstating the situation, and could only be said by someone who has no idea what actual poverty is.  If being extremely wealthy is important to you, then yes doing a PhD is a terrible idea.  But even PhD wages are not poverty, and for many people the goal is to make enough money while having a job they enjoy.  With that viewpoint the opportunity cost isn’t so important.  If you have enough and are happy why waste time being jealous of people who have more?  Even if you go into industry there’s always going to be some people who make even more, so constantly comparing yourself to the perfect sequence of financial decisions is not a productive way to look at life.  Of course, if you do think you’d like both jobs it’s very justifiable not to do a PhD because you’d prefer more money, and I do think the changes over the last generation means that choice is right for more people than it was previously.

Hmmm. Thirty years ago the boomers were in their 40's. STEM was very big before we landed men on the moon. Then  a crash. Big resurgence when the PC was invented. Then a crash. Rinse, Repeat.

It seems to me that you need to address the increased probability in getting a  job in software development, mathematical finance etc with a Ph.D. versus with a BA. I did some research on this for a student about 10 years ago who was sure he wanted to work in finance and could plausibly graduate in 2 additional years. We came to the conclusion that the improved job options were worth more than the forgone income during those 2 years, but probably wouldn't have been worth more than the forgone income from never enrolling in the first place. Would love to have some better data on this.

The opportunity cost could be calculated only ex-post. So if you take a 1000 PhD students and determine their total earnings 5 years after their education vis-a-vis the alternatives, says a software engineer. And do a statistical analysis, only then, could you come to a conclusion. Perhaps you can look for such data and do the analysis if you want to be rigorous.
But that might not really be highly useful because there will be outliers and most of the choices we make in life, assuming we are motivated to be successful, is to become an outlier. We make decisions to pursue higher degrees like PhD with varying goals.
Most of the PhD aspirants wish to find a career in education -universities and colleges - requiring to fulfil the eligibility criteria. In their case, there is no value in calculating the opportunity cost as that is the career path which suits them.
Another group of aspirants pursue a PhD with the hope of building something which can bootstrap their career in innovation and entrepreneurship. You build a very good idea in academia and launch it as a product. Google is one such example. Silicon Valley is filled with such instances. If successful, the opportunity cost is not high. If you fail in this goal and then get back to the industry there is a high opportunity cost-- with a good chance that your boss was your junior in high school.
There is another notable group of PhD aspirants who pursue a degree in the hope of migrating to a newly developed country with better living standards. The host country either runs the universities, more as a business, raking in billions of dollars in tuition fees and then letting these PhD students work in the industry -- where they do not really mind doing even jobs which have got little to do with what they did in their PhD. Again, in this case the opportunity cost is very low -- considering their objective.
Going deeper into your question, or rather now addressing your actual question, has the opportunity cost changed over time. The opportunity cost has, with time, reduced, imo. I have known students who extend their Master's thesis into PhD and finish the whole work in less than 4 years after their Bachelors. In Europe, the average PhD duration is increasingly tending to three years though it is still 7-8 years in the US. Naturally, the opportunity cost in the US is high but so are the opportunities.
You can see that the opportunity cost is not just a function of time but also the region of the world and the ability/goal of the PhD aspirant.

Why five years? The lifetime earnings would be a better standard. Of course, for freshly minted PhDs it would have to be an estimate.

That's much difficult to estimate. And money when young is more important than when old.

you'd have to discount the earnings, but yes, the estimation is tricky, yet extrapolating from the first five years probably understimates the effect a PhD has on earnings quite a bit.

In general one should not try to get PhD if they are not interested in an academic career. There are national differences but with globalizing practises, increasingly being a doctor is no longer what it used to be. A hundred years ago in Europe is relevant because the transition has been long. Not long time ago there were no Post Docs. And there used to be even Licentiate degrees between the Master and Doctor.
PhD used to be more about creating a master piece to showcase ones vast knowledge accumulated in tens of years of experience as a researcher. Nowadays it is just an extension to education. Now there has been about a generation of people for whom the latter is true. Comparing free education with salary against someone actually working makes no sense. Before getting into a tenure track you cannot compare the industry and academia one to one. Once one is in a tenure track is there a similar job agreement with administrative responsibilities.
But overall no one should compare relatively free academic pursuit of knowledge with resource constrained for-profit pursuit of corporate side. In academia you are meant to only explore and in the business world exploit and minimize the exploration. A novel idea is not valued if you cannot turn it into a product. Industry-academia collaboration is about common goals. The work they do is different so you cannot compare the opportunities. In business world you learn production skills. They are better for production. In academia you learn about the theory. Which allows you to build more theory. In academia you are more free to pursue what you are interested. In the industry you are given the task you need to do. Some people give value to that freedom. It is not all about salary.

Licentiate as a degree still exists in Finland, though mostly for medical doctors or as a failed PhD in other fields.

@Tommi Indeed, in Denmark the PhD replaced licentiate and there are these real doctors that are more like what they used to be. The globalized PhD system has been adopted differently between nations.

Jeg vidste ikke at det var i brug i Danmark også.

On Academia SE I often read Statements as " a phd teaches you skills that are seeked after in industry"..

Either and academic or academic-like (national lab, corporate R&D) - the national lab I work at has lots and lots of PhDs (~2000).

Without a PhD you'd be limiting yourself career-wise in the corporate R&D organizations I'm familiar with.

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


text:
Is copyright transferred to IEEE upon submission?
In the IEEE policy on Electronic Information Dissemination (Section 8.1.9 of the PSPB Operations Manual), it says:

A.2.a. An author-submitted article is the version originally submitted by the author to an IEEE publication. An author includes a completed IEEE Copyright Form during submission of the article to an IEEE publication and thereby transfers the copyright of the article to IEEE.

and then later,

D. E-PRINTS
Before submitting an article to an IEEE publication, authors frequently post preprints of their articles to their own Web site, their employer’s site, or to another server that invites constructive comment from colleagues and provides a publication time stamp. Upon submission of an article to IEEE, an author is required to transfer copyright in the article to IEEE, and the author must update any previously posted version of the article with a prominently displayed IEEE copyright notice (as shown in 8.1.9.B). [...]

This seems to have changed with respect to previous policy. In the past, copyright was only transferred upon acceptance, not upon submission. Transferring copyright upon submission seems to have implications that are negative for the author and for the scientific community: it means that IEEE owns the article even if it is rejected, and that the author cannot submit it to another journal if it is rejected.
However, in my last submission to IEEE, the submission process did not include any IEEE Copyright Form. I was not required to explicitly transfer copyright, nor did I receive any document that states that this has been done.
My questions are then:

if the submission process did not include any copyright transfer, does the copyright anyway belong to IEEE now?

if the copyright belongs to IEEE, am I right that this disallows me from submitting to another non-IEEE journal if the article is rejected in this journal?

Copyright is only transferred during submission if:

An author includes a completed IEEE Copyright Form during submission

Without the copyright form, there is no transfer of copyright. Even if the form is complete, transfer only occurs under terms defined by the form. For instance, the form might define transfer upon acceptance.


text:
How early to apply for PhD's? (Europe)
In Europe it is somewhat common to apply directly to professors for a PhD project at any time of the year. Specially in chemical engineering, bioprocessing, process engineering, material science and similar areas.
Assuming you are currently writing your master thesis (usually takes 1 semester), how early should you start applying for PhD's?
I found this related question Apply for PhD before finishing my Master's degree , however it deals with applying to US PhDs while doing a EU Master.
My doubt is about applying to EU PhDs while finishing a EU master.

Your generalization is too broad. It is certainly not common to apply directly to a professor if you are in mathematics, so you need to specify your field to get a meaningful answer.

In Europe it is somewhat common to apply directly to professors for a PhD project

I cannot speak for the whole of Europe (and I think you'd get better answers if you'd narrow down your question) but at least in Austria it is usually required that you apply directly to professors; you can only enroll at the university for the PhD program if a professor is willing to advise you (there are other ways, e.g., if you enroll in a graduate school type program; but they aren't all that common).
I know that in several (central) European countries, at least in Computer Science, it is very common to approach the potential future advisor before applying formally. A formal application is nonetheless necessary, since you will usually be employed by the university. In some cases, open positions are only announced once the professor has found a suitable candidate - so there might be (and there usually are) opportunities even if there are no listed open positions. If the professor already knows you (from courses or a thesis project) it shouldn't be a problem to talk about PhD opportunities. If the professor doesn't know you, it shouldn't be a problem either; but you should be able to show real interest in the subject.

Very true: "...it is very common to approach the potential future advisor before applying formally."

"approach the potential future advisor before applying formally". I am assuming that with "approach", you mean sending some kind of short letter/e-mail indicating your willingness to apply for a position?

@Keine: exactly. You could also call or visit the professor during his offices hours; though an email is probably the best and most convenient for both sides.

@mort: Whether an e-mail is indeed the "best" way depends immensely on whether that particular professor has a tendency of ignoring or forgetting a percentage of the hundreds of e-mails they get every day, and whether that particular professor values and/or remembers face-to-face communication considerably over receiving e-mails from strangers.

@O.R.Mapper I understand your point. But I fear I have no other option since the Professor lives in a different country than mine. Incidently, is there a best time of the day to send an e-mail to a professor?. I can imagine sending one at 4.30pm is a sure way to get ignored.

@Keine: "I can imagine sending one at 4.30pm is a sure way to get ignored." - e-mails are asynchronous. Even if you happen to catch the exact moment when the professor is at their computer and is actually reading e-mails, the professor would most likely first work through a large number of other e-mails from before before he or she arrives at the ones that have just now been received. (In particular, the fact that the e-mail arrived "just now" could even be an extra incentive to not react immediately.)

There's nothing wrong with planning ahead, noone would blame you for not finishing your degree before applying.
However if you want them to take you seriously, and consider you for a position they might have, you kinda need to be not too far away from a speculative starting day. For that reason I'd say more than 6 months before graduation might be not optimal.
Also consider that in some countries, Sweden being one, PhD positions are full-time employment positions and they are announced publicly (even if a candidate is already present). From an employer's (or PI's) point-of-view, they need to show that they have the resources for the full-time employment, and that it's much difficult to "get rid of" someone, if the working dynamics aren't optimal, once a candidate is recruited.
What that means is that there are usually short-term, project assistant/worker positions that are meant to be "testing the water" for both parties (mine was about 8-9 months). It could also be so that the PI is waiting to hear from a funding agency for funds, and doesn't have the liberty to recruit immediately.
Such a "test period" is useful for the PI to check whether or not a candidate has what the job/project demands (academically and personally), and for the candidate it's a great chance to see the group dynamics, have a feel for how it is to work with that PI and his/her group, to work on that particular project.
So if the PI you contact does not immediately "accept" you for a position but instead offers a short-term position with the possibility of a full-term commitment, don't get dismayed :)

I don't really know the procedure for all countries but in France, the universities give priority to their own graduate students, especially concerning the scholarship. So, it is always better to do a MSc degree to be safe.
Also, as mort said, it is mainly the professor who decide to enroll you in PhD. If a professor accepts your PhD project, it would be fine I think.

"...the universities give priority to their own graduate students, especially concerning the scholarship". I am not sure if this really is the case, and I am more tempted to say that it's actually not. And in France, you MUST have a master to enroll (and not apply) in a PhD.

I know that it is not possible to continue on PhD without MSc :) it is preferred that you have it in France, in the university to which you apply. I don't want to give the name of the university but as a PhD student, in 'one' of the university in Paris, this is absolutely the case. They give the priority to their own graduate students for giving the MESR allocation (ministère de l'éducation et de l'enseignement supérieur)

"They give the priority to their own graduate students", is it because they are the best candidates for the job? If yes, fine with me. If no, then all I can say is that I find the selection process of this uni/lab/team fishy...

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


text:
My bosses force me to add an author to my paper who didn't contribute to it
A, B — my current bosses. X — my ex-boss.
A — I've spent a semester on sabbatical at the institution of X. Here is some data I produce. You have to write 2 papers.
Me (after 3 month, working completely independent; I am on the stage of the scientific career that does not need any supervision) — Here is your paper (it will be probably submitted to a top journal).
B — Very good, only 2 corrections. Add this to the acknowledgements and X to the authors list.
Me — X contributed nothing to the work. Besides, (s)he has already taken advantage of my dfg project and made everything possible that (s)he becomes the formal supervisor of the phd student funded by my project (see this post). Why should I add (her)him?
B — I need a paper with (her)him so that (s)he writes me a reference letter, don't you know I am looking for a prof. position.
A — You have to add X to the list of authors, haven't I told you that I spent a semester there. Besides, it is good for B's career.
With uneasy mind I have done what I am told to do. My health is more precious to me... However, I am recurrently coming back to this issue. Have I done everything right?

Comments in response to questions (edited)
Thank you all for very active participation and numerous questions.
Unfortunately, I cannot provide more information as requested. The question can be closed as unclear, however, I do not want to reveal my identity.

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

Neither of the arguments brought forth to justify X’s authorship is valid. Hosting another researcher’s sabbatical, being the possible author of a reference letter, or being good for somebody’s career are far from valid reasons for authorship.
As others noted, it may be that X actually did something worthy of authorship with respect to acquiring the data. But this poses the question why A and B did not bother to bring this good argument for X’s authorship. Thus we have to assume that this was not the case (or A and B do care so little about authorship ethics that they do not even know how to base arguments on it).

Have I done everything right?

It was A, B, and X who abused their power over you to make you do this and they are the main culprits. Sure, you could have not complied, but at what cost? How much guilt this imposes on you is a question of fundamental ethics and beyond the scope of this platform.

I like your analysis, it resonates with my feelings. Firstly it correctly recognizes insufficiency of their arguments. I am surprised how wide spread is the opinion that either 1,2 or 3 would warranty the authorship. The guess VonBeche was perhaps the first logical conclusion, but as I have said, not to the point.  Otherwise they would have already brought these facts to my attention. Or I would have not even question the authorship on the first place.

There are a couple of clauses in your question which you may want to reconsider.

I worked completely independent — did you? You wrote a paper working on your own, which is indeed a big achievement. However, you've been working with data, and the data have been obtained by A in the lab run by X. This definitely does not sound like a completely independent work to me.
X contributed nothing to the work — did s/he not? They set up  and run a lab, where the data have been obtained. Could you write the same paper without the data A collected? Could A collect the data without X's lab?

The arguments above do not necessarily mean that X should co-author the paper, but this is a matter of agreement between all collaborators. In ideal world, this should be discussed before the project is started; in reality, discussions like you've had are often held too late into the process, and the frustration you're feeling is understandable. Be strong — you will be a completely independent researcher one day very soon, and hopefully you will manage your projects and relations in much more thoughtful and transparent way. Until then it is best not to waste your life in such battles.

Agree. Especially the part about discussing matter of authorship in advance. Ran into problems myself, a person got disappointed. All because it was not communicated properly in advance. Of course sometimes a study turns into something different. But your story sounds not like that. However, I can imagine it's difficult if it's the senior scientists that refuse to do the talking

@GerdHeilemann + for "it was not communicated properly in advance"

You'd add X for the same reasons you're adding A and B.
A and B are your bosses, and supervise / advise / host you. Probably they also provide a lot of infrastructure and what I would call "institutional knowledge". Are you sure X wasn't doing anything like that for B?
Also, you sound a little bit hostile (because you think X took your ideas). Hostility doesn't get you anywhere, and this isn't a fight where you were going to win anything. Even if this is an ethical dilemma, you made your case and the decision has to be made by A and B.

No infrastructure or "institutional knowledge" involved. No, i do not think X took my ideas, you cannot take something without doing something.

So A was at the other institution and had nothing to do with X? Even though you worked for him in the past and is working on similar projects? I find that hard to believe. Are you sure that this is a pure case of politics, and not just a poor explanation by A and B?

@Rama Since you have used A's data to write the paper, and A produced the data at X's lab, it sounds like X's infrastructure is actually involved.

@lighthousekeeper: Providing infrastructure does not make one eligible for authorship anyway.

@Wrzlprmft Agreed, it's scientific misconduct either way. But, if X actually provided the infrastructure rather than just a recommendation letter for B, it feels like a less severe case of misconduct.

@lighthousekeeper When two parties have a dispute, they typically bring their strongest arguments. The fact of "institutional knowledge" was not even mentioned to me, for a good reason, I think.

@Rama Can you clarify if the word "there" in A's "I spent a semester there" refers to X's lab or just the university where X's lab is hosted? If he was actually visiting X's lab, that automatically implies that he used X's infrastructure to produce the data.

If he was actually visiting X's lab, that automatically implies that he used X's infrastructure to produce the data -- No, it doesn't.


text:
Affiliation and connected responsibilities
My question is about German academic system, but I would also like to know the situation world-wide.
Any research/educational institution strives (at least in theory) to produce scientific output of high standards. This is the motivation to introduce some kind of internal review for all the papers produced there prior to the submission.
One example would be papers produced during the PhD study. Typically they would involve at least one senior author, typically a professor who has a function of a PhD adviser and who also shares an affiliation with the PhD student. This assures that the manuscript adheres to some minimal quality standards.
In some cases more stringent procedures are implemented, e.g., internal reviews in Max Planck Institutes.
It is quite clear that Professors at the Universities are independent researches and therefore do not need to undergo any internal reviews prior to submission (this post makes me wonder if it is really so). It is, of course, beneficial if they seek for the opinion of colleagues, but not required.
But what is the situation with scientific personal on the intermediate stages of their carrier? Can a Postdoc/Privat Dozent/Junior Prof. affiliate themselves with the university without being refereed internally by some Prof.? My guess would be that this is an individual policy of each university. However, it needs to follow some general rules which I would like to know. I anticipate following scenarios, partly discussed (in more general terms and not specific to a country) in other posts here:
1) One is free to publish without an affiliation. For many reasons it might be not a wise decision. Typically it would signal the editors that the author has some problem with his institution or has no job. This reduces chances of being accepted.
2) The author seeks for an informal internal review, gets the blessing from a professor and does not forget to acknowledge him/her. This seems to be an idealistic and not realistic situation: the prof. will most likely be pissed off having to do some job and not being on the authors list.
3) The author offers the “courtesy authorship" to the prof. However, this might be problematic if the work in not even remotely within research interests of the boss.
4) Being a coworker of the university is sufficient to use this affiliation on the papers. No internal review is required. This answer suggests that this might be the case even for undergraduate students, however, I greatly doubt it in the case of german universities.
The answer seems to be clear if some university equipment was used in order to produce the work. It is natural in this case that the head of the department is listed as an author. My question is mostly about the theoretical work that requires maximum a laptop.
In your answers, please, try to address

each of the aforementioned nonpermanent positions (Master/PhD students, Postdocs, Privat Dozents, Junior Prof., retired),
discuss cases of inter-institutional work (PhD student is not working in the same university as PhD advisor),  and
consider other kinds of intellectual output (such a writing books).
If you think that (3) is the right answer, please, elaborate if it implies restrictions to write papers, books, etc. as a sole author for anyone who is not holding a permanent position.
If you are inclined towards (4), please, provide some substantiation.

Here is a little cartoon and a historical remark in order to encourage your response.

To put my question in a historical perspective: famous Prussian philosopher Immanuel Kant wrote all his works while being associated with the University of Königsberg (MA, 1755; PhD, 1755; Dr. habil., 1770). For instance, in 1749, he published his first philosophical work, "Thoughts on the True Estimation of Living Forces" (written in 1745–47) not even holding a PhD title and possibly unpaid. Does it mean that this and all subsequent works were internally refereed by some professors. What has changed since that time?

Head of department listed as an author because you merely used equipment belonging to the department? That's not normal even if the kit was bought from the departments own funding. To quote the Vancouver protocol: "Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or the collection of data does not justify authorship" (this protocol isn't universal but even where not enforced it's often taken as a guide to good practice.

@ChrisH In some fields, it happens. And beware that very few know about the Vancouver protocol.

4) Being a coworker of the university is sufficient to use this affiliation on the papers. No internal review is required. This answer suggests that this might be the case even for undergraduate students, however, I greatly doubt it in the case of german universities.

Assuming sufficient experience to get something published in a quality venue, from what I have seen, this is the case at German universities.

Could you please elaborate. Throughout my scientific career I have always a great fear of publishing anything on my own in order not to face administrative consequences from my boss. I think I was explicitly told that according to the rules of good scientific practice only (3) is possible.

This is very discipline specific, so it would be impossible to have such a rule at the university level. For example, in some disciplines you are required to publish a given number of articles allone, to show that you can be independent researcher. In those fields rule (3) would make it impossible to gain a PhD. It may be that there are some departments/labs that have such rule. But it is certainly not general, and I would expect that to be the exception rather than the rule.

@Rama: (3) suggests "courtesy authorship", which in itself is often seen as unethical and bad scientific practice. There are various questions on this site on that topic. Authorship should be awarded for contribution to the paper contents, not "automatically" for formal reasons.

@MaartenBuis  (2) is yet another interpretation of your scenario. There might be some university regulations and prospective PhD students do ask PhD adviser for an informal review and acknowledge that. It could certainly be that mathematics community is more altruistic.

Rama: Could you specify in your question what exactly you mean by "informal review"? If you consider an exchange like "Hey, <professor's name>, is it ok if I send my paper on  to  while indicating the institute name as my affiliation?" - "Yep, go ahead!" an "internal review", then, yes, internal reviews are indeed conducted sometimes. Even though, realistically, they often get weakened to "Hey, <professor's name>, while you were busy doing  last week, I submitted my paper on  and listed the institute as my affiliation. Hope you're ok with that."

@O.R.Mapper Yes, I was thinking about your scenario as well. However, the very fact that you admit such a notice is necessary may imply a completely different development: what would you do if professor answers: "oh, this topic is outdated, we do not study this in our department"? If some regulation can be weakened, it does not mean it is always weakened.

A PhD student talks to her or his advisor about what (s)he is doing professionally. No surprises there.The advisor in return advises. Again, no surprises there. This does not imply some rule about the use of affilitiation. It is just a healthy relationship between an advisor and a student.

The general answer to your quesiton is rule 4 applies to everybody, with the possiblity of rare exceptions in specific departments or labs. You seem to be unhappy with that answer. Maybe you can make this question more productive by asking what you really want to know. Your question seems much too general. You seem to be reading way too much into our answers/comments. Do you have a particular article you want to write alone and are unsure whether you will be allowed to do so? Or are you trying to plan your career and wondering when (if ever) you will be allowed to do so?

@Rama: Such a notice is necessary for reasons of politeness, not because there is any realistic expectation that the request could be denied. If "we do not study [a topic] in our department", the only real consequence would be to not spend many additional resources on it (and I'm not saying any; at least all professors I had the pleasure to work with would grant their subordinates at least some leeway on picking their own topics autonomously, even when the professor was not eager about the topic). Likewise, I cannot imagine any of these professors to be concerned about a publication - ...

... even if completely off-topic for the institute - that lists the institute as an affiliation. Either, it is seen as free advertising in a community the institute had not yet reached out to, or it is simply ignored as an operational necessity ("wherever you work is your current affiliation"). So, in short, we do not really ask to get permission, but rather to inform and possibly even get some good additional suggestions on how to further dive into the topic. Of course, this is not uniformly regulated and not all professors might be as uncomplicated as the ones I'm referring to.

@MaartenBuis  I opt to wait little bit before accepting an answer. Finally, I will choose the one with the highest number of votes. See, however, my answer below.

Short answer: Technically, option (4) is correct; but option (2) is closer to good scientific practice.
Long answer:
It's not mentioned explicitly in your question, but I assume we're talking about a case where the professor / advisor did not provide any significant contribution to the paper, as otherwise there would be no need to ask. So:
First of all, O.R.Mapper's answer is absolutely correct - there is no obligation for anyone to get consent for publication. I guess they assume that peer-review will ensure quality publications.
However: In your comment to his answer, you write that

I think I was explicitly told that according to the rules of good scientific practice only (3) is possible.

I disagree that good scientific practice means offering authorship to someone who only proof-read the paper, even if he is your boss/advisor. But neither is it good scientific practice to submit anything for publication without discussing your ideas and/or results with anyone. So while (4) is technically correct, a variation of (2) is probably the best option wrt to scientific practice:

2) The author seeks for an informal internal review, gets the blessing from a professor and does not forget to acknowledge him/her.

Note that this review need not be from a professor, in my experience other PhD students often provided better feedback because they read the draft more thoroughly!
During my time as PhD student, I published several papers without my advisor as co-author, and didn't face any consequences. Of course, that doesn't mean that your boss/advisor won't give you a hard time (won't make you face consequences) if you don't add him as an author or at least ask for his consent. But then, this is rather department-specific (if not professor-specific) and may also vary between different fields.

Your answer and @O.R.Mapper answer and comments are quite indicative: on one side they declare the desired/idealistic situation, on another side both admit that "that doesn't mean that your boss/advisor won't give you a hard time (won't make you face consequences)" and "it may be that there are some departments/labs that have such rule". In order to implement (3) one needs to exercise some authority. And this cannot come out of blue, but must be supported by some regulations.

Authority and power can exist without regulation. Your professor can make your live really uncomfortable. That is power, and they can use that to impose rules, like rule 3, that have no foundation in other regulations or laws.

Rule 2 and 4 are not "ideal", they are what I have experienced all the time. The fast majority of professors are humans who take their responsibility as mentor and advisor to their junior collegues and students seriously. (They may not have the resources, time, and/or skill to do it as well as one might like, but that is another story.) The worst thing that would happen to you when you publish without telling your professor is that (s)he is disappointed at not having the opportunity to make your work even beter and thus improve your prospects more.
Having said that, in any groups there are bad apples. I fear that you are in such an abusive situation. This is why I have been unwilling to categorically say that rule 3 never ever ever applies. If you are in such an abusive situation, going against your professor based on advise from an internet forum is probably the worst thing you can do.

Earlier answers to this post are good, present reasonable arguments, however, all of them lack legal rigour. Therefore, I decided to post my own answer to the post. As a basis I am using Gesetz über die Hochschulen in Baden-Württemberg (Law on universities in Baden-Württemberg). Similar law exists in all other Lands.
§3 Freiheit von Wissenschaft und Kunst, Forschung, Lehre und Studium; wissenschaftliche Redlichkeit (Freedom of science and art, research, teaching and learning; good scientific practice) seems to be relevant. In section 2 we read

Die Freiheit der Forschung umfasst insbesondere die Fragestellung, die
  Grundsätze der Methodik sowie die Bewertung des Forschungsergebnisses
  und seine Verbreitung.

which translated in English reads:

The freedom of research includes in particular the formulation of the
  research questions, the principles of the methodology and the
  assessment of the research results and its dissemination.

The latter surely can be narrowed to the publication of results. So far so good, this excerpt seems to back all the previous answers. What remains to be seen is who is the subject of this declaration. I have only a limited knowledge of Jurisprudence, however, I would argue that this concerns University as a whole, not its particular members. Insofar, we are in the grey zone. Fully clarification can only be reached by the stare decisis, i.e., precedent.
I was not able to find any legal cases for any of the categories listed above, i.e. Postdoc/Privat Dozent/Junior Profs. However, I found a verdict of the Federal Constitutional Court (Urteil des Bundesverfassungsgerichts) dated by 05.29.1973 [1 BvR 424/71 ua - BVerfGE 3, 79], see also (VGH Kassel, Beschluss vom 12. April 1984, 6 TG 5049/83, juris) that

Er kann aber auch außerhalb seines Fachbereichs forschen.

or in English

He can conduct research outside of his specialist field.

where "he" refers to a university professor.
This substantiate my initial guess that this category of scientific stuff indeed possesses the full freedom of conducting the research. For this reason situation as described in another post here would have never happen in Germany. However, for all other cases, to the best of my knowledge the question remains unregulated.

The basis of that article is article 5 of the German constitution.

"What remains to be seen is who is the subject of this declaration." - actually, it's all in the text you are quoting from: The first paragraph first restates that universities are subject to the freedom of research, and then continues saying that the country and universities are obliged to ensure members of the universities (this usually refers to anyone officially "affiliated" with it) can take advantage of certain constitutional rights - namely those that ensure freedom of research.


text:
When picking a journal for my research should I value the publisher's reputation over the journal's impact factor?
I'm in the process of selecting an appropriate journal for my article. I short-listed a few journals based on topic coverage, IF and speed of the review process.
I am confused: should I select a journal with higher IF (2.3) published by a non-reputable publisher (MDPI) or should I publish in a journal with low IF (1.2) published by a reputable publisher (IEEE)?
By reputation I mean the reputable publisher (IEEE) is specialized in my area of research and non reputable (MDPI) is an Open Access publisher.

@CapeCode I found a lot of discussions regarding MDPI and mostly people are referring to Beall's list of journals. If a journal is already listed in Scopus, Pubmed, has an impact factor  and ranked as Q2, then how can we give importance to Beall's list?

it is best to read the journal articles yourself. There is a world of difference between an MDPI article and say an article from a reputable IEEE journal.  You will find that MDPI articles are poorly written and presented, and contains incremental/trivial/not-interesting ideas.

Impact factor and "reputation" (aka prestige/brand value) are rarely useful criteria. https://thinkchecksubmit.org/ provides some advice.

Another way to see which is reputable or not, besides the impact factor, is the Editorial Board. Which of these journals have, in your opinion, the strongest Ed.B. (measured by expertise/fame etc). Journals with stronger Ed.B. will guarantee better visibility of your result and, probably, more technical/specialized review process.
You should also know that IF is, sometimes, artificial in the sense that it does not capture the exact quality of the journal. In my field, TCS, there are many highly ranked journals (for example Combinatorica) the impact factor of which is less than many mediocre journals. But does it mean anything? No.
Also, more specialized journals (and hence with lower IF, although that's not always the case) have better visibility on your own field. Submitting your paper in a general purpose journal includes the risk of your paper getting "lost" in otehr unrelated, or borderline related, papers which means high risk of being overlooked by potential readers. You might say that this can be solved by posting it on ArXiv but I found out many interesting papers for my research the way I described above.
At the end of the day, nobody is scrutinizing IF: what matters is how reputable and well known the journal is and how easy or hard is to publish there.

+1, but re: Submitting your paper in a general purpose journal includes the risk of your paper getting "lost" - this is not AFAIK a concern in my field (pure math), where in many fields the top papers are typically published in general math journals.  E.g., in number theory there are far too many papers in specialist journals (even just the good ones) to pay attention to, and publishing in top general journals helps highlight your papers IMO.

The publisher's reputation is more important.  In my area, MDPI publishes poor quality papers.  The impact factor can be inflated easily; e.g., the journal publishes hot topics, has many tutorial/survey/introductory papers, etc.  All these factors can improve a journal's impact factor.

My recommendation is to choose the publisher's reputation over the impact factor. MDPI is not a reputable publisher, nor will it ever be.
I used to work for MDPI a few years ago, so I can attest that the negative comments people have written on forums about MDPI are mostly truthful. MDPI's main aim is to make as much money as possible - they'll publish anything and everything. That means employers will not be impressed that you have published a paper in an MDPI journal because literally anyone can do that. It reminds me of kindergarten when the teachers would give every kid in the class a prize, but we all knew it was worthless because every kid got one. MDPI will publish anything, so long as you pay their fee.
Don't fall for their claim they're Swiss (they're Chinese). I would say around 95% of the papers are written by Chinese students.

"That means employers will not be impressed that you have published a paper in an MDPI journal" Yes, that's one way to put it. To be a bit more blunt, it could very well happen that some people in a hiring committee think that a paper in such a journal actually adds negative value to your publication list.

@JochenGlueck. Agreed, and that reminds me of another point: MDPI boasts they have a very fast turnaround. Editors are pressured into editing the papers quickly at the expense of quality. That shows money is the priority, not quality.

Journal reputation comes first - because people recognize the journal name, but not the publisher that publishes it.
For example, I'd be surprised if most scientists can name the publisher that publishes Nature or Science. In fact, try it as an exercise: search for the top ten journals in your field with the highest impact factor, and try to name the publisher that publishes them. If the journal name doesn't give the answer away (many IEEE journals have "IEEE" in the name) I'd be surprised if you can name more than half.
MDPI is somewhat special because their journals follow a standard naming pattern, but even then: if you take every journal in the world whose name is a single word, and attempt to identify which are published by MDPI, I'd be surprised if you get more than half of them right.

MDPI uses generic names for journals and they are similar to the names of other journals. That makes it difficult for people to differentiate them. For example, ScienceDirect publishes 'Cell' and meanwhile, MDPI publishes 'Cells.' If an author lists all of his/her published papers on a resume, the reader might not notice the additional 's' on MDPI's journal. ScienceDirect is a better publisher in my opinion.

@Only_me I think your comment reinforces my point, since ScienceDirect isn't a publisher. People know journals better than publishers - hence journal reputation comes first.

Yes, I agree with you; journal reputation comes first. I was adding my two cents about MDPI's naming conventions since you mentioned naming patterns in your post.

Ultimately you should ask your supervisor or close colleagues which journal they recommend. You can also look at in which journals the top researchers in your field usually publish.
In the absence of better reasons, personally, I would value publisher reputation over the journal's impact factor. Especially in your case since the two journals have comparably low IFs and MDPI is a dubious publisher.


text:
Check Robustness of ISI Q1 enlisted Journal?
Recently, I've received an acceptance for publishing my paper in an ISI enlisted Journal called Indian Journal of Science and Technology. Definitely, it's great.
How can I check the robustness of this journal? How much value will carry on it in academic world?
Can anyone help me, please?
http://www.indjst.org/index.php/indjst/index

Check this before submitting, not after your paper is accepted. This habit can only result in troubles and lots of wasted time for you, the editor, and the referees.

Exactly, but I am new in this are. That's why too many questions in my mind and bothering all of you...

Nop... my question is different than your suggested question and answer... @Sathyam

@tisuchi Please read the question correctly. The author had given the list of journals en ISI

yes.. I read. My question is not whether above journal is an ISI or not. I am talking about the robustness of my mentioned journal. TQ @Sathyam

I strongly suggest you follow the advice in the marked duplicate and judge the quality and impact of the journal for yourself, rather than relying on indexing services.

Are you sure this journal is ISI-listed? This journal does not seem to be in the ISI Journal Citation Reports, suggesting it isn't indexed. The Q scale, as the answer notes, is from SCImago, which is a different system.

...and if it's not ISI-listed but claims it is, that's a pretty substantial red flag for its reliability/robustness

ohh... I see... But following link shows that this journal has enlisted with ISI ... Of course its not enlisted with Q Scale with ISI. @Andrew
http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jlresults.cgi?PC=MASTER&Full=Indian%20Journal%20of%20Science%20and%20Technology

Interesting - so it's not in the JCR, but it is indexed in one of the subsidary Web of Science collections ("Zoological Record"). This is borderline and not entirely wrong to describe it that way, but it wouldn't be how I'd normally define "ISI-indexed"

Ohh.... Now it is clear to me. Thank you for your clarification.


text:
If a paper cites a work and its translation, is it counted as two citations for calculating h-index?
If a bibliography mentions a work two times, once in its original and once in its translation, how does this count in the author's H-index?
E.G.:

Everyman, J. (2000), A work on citations, Cambridge.
Everyman, J. (2001), Un lavoro sulle citazioni, Roma.

The (2) is the italian translation of the (1).
This means that the author gets 2 citations, but they actually refer to only 1 work. How does this affect citation count and metrics?

The h-index, as usually employed, does not take translations into account. The case you cite would be effectively the same as citing two genuinely different publications by the same author. Under certain circumstances, this might increase you h-index by 1. I leave it to you to decide whether this is fair or not.

Any source for this answer? Do you know how, say, Google Scholar handles this? Is a work and its translation collapsed into the "All N Versions" link in GS, and if one paper cites multiple "versions" that GS has collapsed into one publication, how is the citation count reported in GS?

Thank you Koldito. If I understood you correctly, you're saying that citing both versions in the bibliography would be a non-correct practice?

It guess that it doesn't really matter how google scholar counts it, as citations in ArXiV papers,  tech reports or just "pdfs on academic web pages" also count towards the h-index. Only citations in peer-reviewed publications should normally count for the h-index. So google is off from the usual way of counting anyway.

@DCTLib There is some difficulty in defining "peer-reviewed publication."  Is it only journals in ISI Web of Science?  What about crappy but non-predatory journals? What about conferences?  What about reports? Where do you draw the line?  My point is, Google is making one of several reasonable choices in this computation.

@jakebeal - True. It's just not the choice that you would use for computing your h-index when you want to list it in a job or grant application --- whichever you end up using. If you have to later justify your h-index value and exercise sheet pdfs show up in the list of citations, then this doesn't look good...

@FraEnrico: I only told you how the h-index works. Whether citing both versions is a correct practice is a totally different issue. Personally, unless each version contains material that the other doesn't, I'd only cite one of them (preferably, the English language one, which is presumably accessible to a wider readership).


text:
What is a "trade journal"?
I often encounter the expression "trade journal", but what is it exactly, and how does it differ from "academic journal" or "scholarly journal" or "scientific journal"?

From Virginia Tech Libraries:

Trade journals are geared towards professionals in a discipline. They report news and trends in a field, but not original research. They may provide product or service reviews, job listings, and advertisements.
Scholarly journals provide articles of interest to experts or researchers in a discipline. An editorial board of respected scholars (peers) reviews all articles submitted to a journal. They decide if the article provides a noteworthy contribution to the field and should be published. There are typically little or no advertisements. Articles published in scholarly journals will include a list of references.

Yes. I would consider Physics Today to be a trade journal, while Physical Review is a scholarly journal. While Physics Today has articles they are overviews for the general community (albeit technical), not original research. Chemical Engineering News, Semiconductor Today, and what not are similar examples of trade journals.

would Quanta or Nautilus be considered as trade journals? Also the science section of NYT or Telegram?


text:
What must an international graduate student do before arriving in the US?
I am an international student, and I am going to be doing an MS in Structure and Materials in Aeronautics at MIT. Before I arrive, what do I have to do?

Since you have mentioned MIT specifically, just go to their website, they will outline all the requirements of the graduate admissions process.

@jakebeal it's not clear to me from the original text whether the OP means he intends to gain admission to this program, and is asking how, or he is already admitted. I ran with what you started... How sure are you of your interpretation? Thangaraj Sundaramoorthy can you clarify?

@ff524 I'm not certain of my interpretation, but of the two possibly interpretations it is the one that is actually answerable here and likely to have value for others, so I went with that.

@jakebeal agreed. I just want to make sure the OP realizes that if he's not admitted yet, he has to do... an entirely different list of things.

I don't know why this was closed as "primarily opinion based" - the answers are perfectly subjective and not at all opinion based. "Too broad" could have been defensible...

Some key things that any international student will typically need to do before arriving in the USA:

Obtain a student visa.  Your institution will be able to support you, but you are likely to need to lead the process yourself, including going to a US consulate in your country.  This can take a long time, so it is important to start many months in advance.
Make sure you have any required vaccinations and health certificates (I'm not sure whether this is part of the visa, or separate; your institution and the US consulate can advise)
Find housing.  Some universities will help with this, many do not.  For example, MIT is notoriously bad about this, and the Boston rental market is insane.
Ensure that you will have health insurance.  The US (still) does not have a national health system.  Your institution will likely provide insurance, and may assist you in enrolling, but not all institutions will.
Ensure that you will have access to money from your bank accounts, if needed.  This can sometimes be a difficulty, and many things in the US are much more difficult to do without a working credit or debit card.
Ensure that you will have a working cell phone.  The US does not use the same standards as most other countries, though this is slowly changing.  Just changing to a local SIM card may or may not work.

Caveat: I might be missing some things from this list...
Regarding scholarships: the USA does not have any organized system of scholarship exams.  In many cases, however, graduate programs in STEM fields ensure financial support for their students through TAships or RAships.  Any reputable Ph.D. program will do this, but Masters programs are much more mixed. Check with your particular program to find out what they advise.

For what it's worth MIT's housing is bad for upper-year graduate students. First-year students have priority in the graduate housing lottery precisely because the market in Boston is insane. But getting in after the first-year is really, really hard.

@aeismail To the best of my knowledge, housing is not still not guaranteed, and especially not for Masters students.

No, they can't guarantee housing, because they don't have enough to do so. But it's still better than it used to be, and they are working on it. (Disclosure: I am an MIT alumnus.)

@aeismail Me too... and since I was from the area, I never even tried to compete for on-campus grad housing.  :-)

Great list. Some banks offer "international travel cards" which are prepaid debit cards loaded with the currency of the country you are planning to travel to. This is what I used my first few months in the US.

To add to jakebeal's answer:
When an international student is admitted to a US university, they will be contacted by the Office of International Students (these offices go by various names, which are usually a permutation of the words office, international, students, and/or scholars).
The folks at the international student office are the best (and in fact the appropriate) people to contact with any questions about the logistics and details of being an international student, including visa issues, housing, travel, etc. Many of these will be addressed on their websites, see for example: ISO at MIT, OISS at Rice, Berkeley IO, Harvard IO, etc.
In addition to the international student office, you should consider looking up whether there is a community of students from your country at the university. Some of these organizations also help out incoming students, and might have helpful information on their websites. For example, Sangam at MIT, ISAR at Rice, KSAS at Stanford, etc. (There are often active Facebook groups/pages as well, where you can ask specific questions.) In addition to information specific for your community (e.g. best ways/rates to call a particular country, closest places of worship, etc.) these organizations are also helpful for more informal things, like finding a roommate from your country. The graduate international student organizations at my graduate institution also picked up students from the airport, which was extremely helpful.
And some things to think about doing, which haven't been mentioned yet:

If you can find out which textbooks are going to be used in your courses, it'll possibly save you a bunch of money to buy them ahead of time in your home country
Same for kitchen utensils, clothes, shoes, etc.
Certain food items are hard to find depending on where you will be. E.g., in a large city like Boston it's not hard to find Indian spices, compared to being roughly impossible in smaller collegetowns.
Be careful about bringing electrical items from your home country. US power supply is 110V, unlike several other countries. If you must bring electronics, e.g. a laptop, make sure you have an appropriate power cord/adaptor (the power outlets in the US are also a different configuration than in several other countries).

Source: I was an international student in the US both for my bachelors and doctoral degree. I was also heavily involved in the graduate Indian student organization at my graduate institution (Rice University) and occasionally worked with the office of international students and scholars there. In fact, I compiled a "Starter Pack" for incoming Indian graduate students to Rice which might be helpful to you.

To be contrary, is finding a roommate from the same country the best thing to do? It gives a sense of stability, which can't be under estimated but it also lessens the integration into the remainder of the student community. In my experience (admittedly not extensive) the international students who communicated solely with other international students didn't integrate well, whereas those who chose to live where fate took them knew many people from all over the world as well as a sizeable portion of people from the country of the university.

@Ben in general I agree; as an international undergrad and grad student my friend circles consisted more of US students than fellow Indians. However, there can be good reasons to want a roommate with the same background. E.g., it is a wonderful feeling to talk to someone in your native tongue-something I didn't appreciate until I was in a situation where I couldn't, even as a fluent English speaker. Or, you might desire that only vegetarian food be cooked in your kitchen (I'm an omnivore, but not everyone is). Such concerns are not very important to me personally, but are to many people.

On food... if you're looking for your home cuisine in a restaurant, it can be hard to find anything good outside of big cities. For groceries, however, even in medium/small cities, there is often somewhere that serves the international grocery needs of faculty, and they will know which store it is.

@jakebeal my college was in a small town in upstate NY. The nearest grocery store with a non-trivial international section was about 40 minutes away by car. Since I didn't have a car (faculty members tend to, international students don't always) this was generally hard to get to. However, senior students in the same community are more likely to have cars and are often generous with rides, which is another good reason to contact some international student organizations!

@AruRay Good point about cars... that's another thing that Americans (like myself) tend to forget about the difficulty of living without...

I used to be an avowed pedestrian, then my bike changed my life, and then my car changed it some more! It is easier to get by without a car for an undergraduate, but for a graduate student it's worth getting, unless your town/city has fantastic public transport (unlike Houston, TX).

I just started as a graduate student in the US, and here is what I learned from my experience and that of some of my friends:
1) Get the visa and book tickets to fly in
2) Book a hotel / hostel for the first night. Even if you manage to get a rental before going there, it is unlikely that you will be able to sign the contract and get your keys on the first day.
3) Try to find a place to live. Your university may have a site where students who have an apartment can look for roommates, and if the rental market is really bad, this is a good place to start looking. Don't freak out if you don't have a rental before flying to the states. You can be more efficient once you have arrived. I stayed in a hostel for 3 weeks when I first got here, before I could find a place and move in to it.
4) Make sure you have health insurance / travel insurance / home insurance for the first few weeks. If you get health insurance through MIT, it will likely not start covering you until term starts, and you can get stuck with a $5000 bill for a broken leg or food poisoning or something like that. Not a fun way to start your time here.
5) Look at phone contracts online and pick one that would suit you. If you have an unlocked smartphone, you can just go to a store your first day in the US and get a SIM. Smartphones from the rest of the world are compatible with the US system, as long as they are unlocked. You will need a working phone pretty quickly here, so this should be prepared before you go. If you don't have an unlocked smartphone, you can buy a simple phone for $10-$20 with some number of minutes on it.
6) Make sure you have access to plenty of money. The first few days will be expensive when you are setting everything up. Figure out how much money you think you will need, and make sure you have access to double that in an emergency, including a few hundred dollars in cash (if your bank decided to shut down your card for accessing it abroad). You won't need all of it, most likely, but unexpected things will pop up and you will be grateful that you budgeted extra money.

SIM cards will definitely work a large city like Boston. In smaller campus towns, however, you may be out of luck.

@jakebeal True. I wrote the answer considering that both the asker and I have experience from larger cities, where it will not be a problem. In a small town it might be a good idea to buy a SIM online and have it mailed to the department and pick up when you arrive.

I'm actually saying something a little stronger: the cell phone infrastructure in many smaller cities is not yet upgraded to be able to support a SIM card in an international phone.

Good call on the travel insurance. A friend of mine was stuck with a hefty bill after getting sick before college health insurance started.

@Jayraj One of mine did too, so that's how I know.