text:
I believe fellow TAs are giving students answers and inflating their tutorial average, what should I do?
I am first-year graduate student doing teaching assistance for an introductory calculus course.
The course is taught by four instructors, with 12 teaching assistants in total and I am one of them.
Each instructor has three assistant underneath him or her and I am associated with one of the instructors along with two other TAs.
At the end of each hour long tutorial, the TAs will conduct a 20 minute mini-test. Each test has two computational questions selected by the professor. The test questions are related to the lectures prior to the test, and the time prior to the test is for the TAs to review concepts in the lectures and do some examples and exercises from the book. The exercises are drawn from the same source as the test questions, but they are obviously not supposed to overlap in any way.
I don't have strong evidence, but I believe that the other two TAs (who have been  doing this course for longer than me) are giving the student answers, and their students are outperforming those students in my section because of it.
What aroused my suspicion was when I graded the tests from their tutorials. We grade these tests on a rotation. There have been 9 tests so far, so at this point I have graded three of the tests.
What I found is that the students of their sections will give perfect, textbook solution like answers. All the students would make the exact same assumptions, almost as if all 30-40 students are copying from one another. In my section, the students struggle with their questions, sometimes not finishing them. When they do provide answers, there is a large variety of responses as expected of a calculus course. Therefore the students in my section have lower averages.
I don't believe that they are giving students answers directly. Some students would have sounded the alarm by now. What I suspect to have happened is that these TAs are doing the test questions during the tutorial and mixing them into the reviews. This would explain why so many students would follow the exact same procedure, yet still making some mistakes.
I wonder if these TAs are gaming the system. The system being the TA reviews at the end of the semester. These reviews are internal and are used to promote or select future TAs. I also feel bad for the students in my section. I feel that they are being cheated by the people who are supposed to instruct them.
I don't have firm evidence, but I fear that the professor is also in on it. When I first observed this large disparity between student performance, I mentioned to the professor. But there was no reply. Therefore I am afraid of talking to her about this. I am new to the school therefore I don't have anyone I can trust.
What should I do in this case?

Can you ask for student class notes when other instructors taught? You could find test questions solved in class

I hate to say this, but is there a chance that you're simply not as good at teaching the material as the other two TAs? I have seen first hand the big difference a good instructor can make, compared to a bad one (not saying that you are, just a suspicion).

@DSR Hm that's is going to be difficult randomly asking a first year student for their notes. But I can try.

@YiFan Even if I am not good at teaching, there are students in my class who who well on these tests. Plus this doesn't resolve why so many students would make the exact same assumptions for the quiz and have exactly same steps.

@YiFan At first I thought these students were cheating off of one another, but 12 in a row? Can't be possible.

@Olórin You could document your observations and send a friendly email to your professor without accusations. You can also discuss with them before :"will be emailing you the details". You'll have some proof of it if your performance is questioned. But it is risky for your reputation if professors are in on it. How deeply does student underperformance affect your chances of getting TAship?

How does this improve your CV?

You say there are four professors teaching this class, have you tried reaching out to the other three?
At the end of the day - if the professor is aware of it and condoning it, then there's not much in the way of academic misconduct, but arguably a bad teaching methodology. If the tutors are acting against the policy set out by the professor and they don't care/aren't acting themselves, then there's little you can do about it I think. At the end of the day, you have done your due diligence and reported the matter to the professor.
If nothing happens and your tutorial groups suffer a significant grade disadvantage due to this, and the professor is still ignoring it, then perhaps a slightly underhanded way of handling it is casually mentioning this to your own tutorial groups. The students would undoubtedly be furious to hear that their poorer performance is due to other tutorial groups cheating!
A 'meta' remark. A lot of times issues like these are extremely difficult to prove and press forward, even if your fellow instructors are in the wrong. They often have implications outside the class, and often the party raising the issue (you) will simply be remembered as a 'troublemaker' (good luck trying to run a research project with graduate students/professors that you accused of academic dishonesty, let alone if they suffer disciplinary action). So there is the question of how much is this bothering you and how much you'd like to push it forward.

It is only my personal anecdote, but sometimes student populations can self-select into weaker/stronger subsets. (Which is to say, foul play isn't necessarily 100% guaranteed despite the lopsided outcomes you are seeing.)

One semester, I was assigned to TA one section of students in the morning and another section in the afternoon (both sections were for the same STEM-101 course, going to the same lecture hall for the same professor's lectures, but then splitting off into different sections to work on problem sets in small-groups with TAs available to help with questions).
My morning section seemed to be, on average, more of the "early-bird" and "studious" variety; whereas the afternoon section seemed to be more "laid-back" and "halfhearted" about their studies.  Despite my teaching both sections with the same practice material, in the same way with the same effort and care, the second section seemed to always be about half-a-letter-grade behind (on average) compared to the morning section.
Were I not working with both sections myself and grading the work of both sections myself, I would have found the half-a-letter-grade disparity to be extremely alarming - presumably due to either better/worse teaching, easier/harsher grading, or perhaps even cheating.

After a semester of interacting with the students I came to learn that more of that morning section were 2nd years majoring along a competitive premed track, compared to my afternoon section which was comprised mostly of 1st-years from a spattering of different non-premed STEM majors.

Well, you could roll with the system and make sure the review does cover necessary material...
Also, can you change the course you TA for ? If not immediately, then for next time?

Well, it wouldn't make sense to cover the exam questions before an exam! But Yes I will keep in mind not to touch this course again if the same instructors and TAs are still teaching.

As you say "it wouldn't make sense..." but either they gave you all the stupid students and kept the best for themselves or something else is happening...

Exactly. We also just had a midterm, and the students who got perfect on the mini-tests in their tutorial sections do not seem to fare better than the students in my section.


text:
Is it true that 'nice' professors fail to produce good students?
This is a very tough question to ask because there are so many advisors on this forum so I am expecting most inputs from the current grads. This question largely stemmed from a post I read online about picking advisors.
The top recommendation offered on a list of things about picking supervisor is to never pick someone who is nice, friendly and available. Specific examples being "nice associate professor ladies" and "prof emeritus".
This quote caught my attention the most

If you’ve never cried before, during, or after a meeting with your advisor, something is amiss.

But this is just one person's opinion. So my question is to what extent does this idea actually hold in academia? Is there any truth to nice profs are less capable than mean profs in producing good students?

Certainly somebody who is not prepared to be honest with you is no good. But seeing students being reduced to tears as a reassurance of this, and almost as a "badge of honour", is very poor, and indicative of the view by some that a PhD is a hazing ritual. Maybe the student is not crying because they are organised, they can take criticism, and the advisor is not abusive in the way they give it?

I disagree with this simple-minded view. Being nice has nothing to do with how well you teach your students. You can be nice and a good professor. In my experience, the exact opposite has been true; previously, the most incompetent teachers I have had have also been complete jerks. But I have better teachers now and they are all very nice, laid-back and still far more knowledgeable and more competent than any other teachers I've ever had. You don't need to be an asshole to teach well. You just need to be a good teacher. Some teachers just don't have it.

For me, the opposite is true. I would probably not take an advisor if I heard about someone crying after a meeting with them. In the past I only took advisors that were nice, friendly and available - and it worked out very well for all parties involved. Of course this might not be a good fit for everyone.

This is a typical case of syllogism in academia. Since some successful researchers are known to be jerks or socially challenged, it is assumed that it's the explaining variable.

If you’ve ever cried before, during, or after a meeting with your advisor, something is amiss. — There, that's better.  The opposite of "fierce" is not "nice", but "pushover".

I have worked with some pretty, if not very, mean people over the course of my life. Some were even decidedly immoral. I have never cried. I have gotten angry and put them in their place. You will generally find mean people to be bullies. In fact, there is much information available on the subject of "workplace bullying". There is no reason at all why anyone should be abused by a superior. A mean boss is an indication that they are not as capable or competent as they would have you believe. They are liked by few and people rejoice when they are finally gone.

@Inquisitive All true, although "putting him in his place" may not work for an academic supervisor. In this case "transfer to a different advisor" may be more realistic than putting him in his place.

It is interesting to see such an utter nonsense based on a logical fallacy in the Academia. I have seen so many more cases when people cried because their superior where abusive, sexist, racist, totally ignorant, unhelpful or irresponsible, than cases when "honest critique" made them cry that is just incomparable.

Below is the author's take on her own advice. She provides some context that confirms several answerers. http://theprofessorisin.com/2014/02/23/the-5-top-traits-of-the-worst-advisors/#comment-21139

This question smells like some weird gaming of the SE system. It has an inflammatory click-bait claim, from a low-rank account holder, with a link to an outside blog that offers professional services for sale. And it also has a uniquely confirmatory 0-score answer that was awarded a 100-point bounty down below.

@DanielR.Collins Daniel I can assure you no gaming is involved here. I asked the question whilst I was applying for graduate school. I am a low rank account holder because I spent nearly all my points on bounties. I happened to read the article because the professor I was applying for felt a bit "too nice". There is nothing inflammatory about it. I awarded 100 point bounty to that user because I want to promote more people to use academia stackexchange to make it a better place. Understood?

That advice from the blog says to avoid an advisor who

1.  Is nice, and friendly, and available.
And never gives you the fierce criticism and the tough pushback that forces you to confront your weaknesses, take risks, stop whining, cut the excuses, get over your fears, and make hard decisions about reputation, money, and jobs.

It's the part beginning with "and never" that describes a problematic advisor, not the "nice, friendly, and available" part.
An advisor who is unwilling to criticize a student and share harsh truths when necessary is certainly problematic for many students. But I wouldn't necessarily conflate that with being "nice." For most students, an advisor who is genuinely nice is a good thing.
As for

If you’ve never cried before, during, or after a meeting with your advisor, something is amiss.

Doing a PhD is difficult and sometimes discouraging  for most people. My advisor is one of the nicest people I know, and I've walked out of his office on one or two occasions and gone off somewhere to cry. Not because he isn't nice, but because what I'm doing is difficult, and sometimes we have to have some very difficult and/or discouraging conversations.

not the "nice, friendly, and available" part — It is reasonable to assume that the author finds the text that she put in bold after the big number 1 to be more significant than the later, smaller, unbolded text.  She chose to emphasize "nice, friendly, and available", not "unwilling to be direct and brutally honest".  So, no, I don't think OP is taking the advice out of context at all.

@JeffE fair point

@JeffE: the more so as already the 5th paragraph goes:"This is perfect illustration of my thesis in this blog post [...] that the very worst advisor is the nice advisor. Nice serves nobody in the academic career at this point in time. I write below, “If you’ve never cried before, during, or after a meeting with your advisor, something is amiss.”  Many have taken exception to this advice, but I stand by it entirely, ..."

I would argue that the author of that post originally used the juxtaposition of nice and spineless as a rhetoric device but has since deluded herself into thinking that they are one and the same.

There's a grain of truth in this blog post, but generally I wouldn't consider this advise a "truisim", as it is pretty simplified:

Not all students are the same. Some need deadline pressure, some need a "no bullshit" advisor who keeps them down to earth, some mostly need encouragement, and some students really just need an advisor that gets out of their way. Assuming that everybody needs a strict, no-bullshit guy as advisor to become the best researcher (s)he can be does not correlate with my personal experience.
Being "nice" isn't the same as not providing helpful feedback. Giving harsh feedback isn't the same as giving helpful feedback. You don't want an advisor who holds back criticism to spare your feelings, but you certainly also don't want an advisor who puts you down even if your work is good. Most importantly, an advisor that criticises without suggesting ways to improve your work isn't overly helpful.
The job title (associate professor or emeritus) or the gender ("lady professor") have next to nothing to do with whether a professor is more of the supporting or of the tough love type. However, the career phase may be relevant - the pressure to have each student perform is usually much higher for a tenure-track professor than for an emeritus, which may of course influence how they act.
Seeing "unavailability" as a good thing is downright awful advice. I can understand that the line of thinking is that good profs. are necessarily busy, but I am questioning what you as a student profit from a prof. who never has time for you. Better to look for somebody who is good and has time to teach you (yes, those people exist).

If you’ve never cried before, during, or after a meeting with your advisor, something is amiss.

I have never cried before, during, or after a meeting, but I have definitely advised fellow students to get the hell out of their research group when they told me that this regularly happens to them.

If you don't believe me just go on ratemyprof dot com and see the comments for profs who are rated at the top and those at the bottom.

Don't infer how PhD student - advisor relationships work based on one-course ratings of undergraduate students. Frankly, undergrads look for pretty different things in their teachers than PhD students in their advisors.
What I suggest you really do is look at the track record of potential advisors. How many students finish? What do they publish during their PhD? What do those that finish do afterwards? This is, I think, the only metric that really counts.

+1, especially for #3. I wish people would police themselves better in this regard. Academia should be a meritocracy, and perpetuating sexist or prestige based prejudices runs directly counter to (my picture of) the ideals of academic research.

@dionys Hear, hear!

On 4., I think there's a careful balance.  I agree that "unavailable" isn't itself good, but you do want an advisor who has a high profile, goes to conferences, etc.  So a lot of activities that can make them unavailable can also be ultimately beneficial for the students.

I'm nice AND I've made students cry.  One has not much to do with the other, usually.

The list that you link to is misleading. I hope we can all agree that students should try to stay away from '5. Steals your ideas' and '4. Is crazy-making inconsistent', but 3,2,1 are contradictory. 3. says to stay away from abusive, negative and undermining advisors, and then 1. turns around and says you should find an advisor who is sort of an asshole to 'prepare you for the REAL assholes' in the world; 2. says stay away from advisors who are never around, and then at the very end of the post we are told to stay away from advisors who do have time for you. 2. also says to stay away from the big guns -- since they are never around -- and then 1. condemns such students as 'wussy'. What is a student (or an advisor) to do!
While I understand what the list is trying to do -- pointing out that advisors who might seem safe, friendly, and comforting might not be the best advisor for you in the long run -- I don't think this has been done particularly well. In particular, students and recent graduates who are in fact nice friendly people will possibly take away from this list that they are 'just not meant to be in academia'; this is utter BS.
(For the last, consider the many advisors that you point out use this site. They are spending their time giving careful insightful advice to strangers on the internet - simply because they are sincere strangers genuinely interested in understanding things about academia. That's pretty nice of them. Look up some of their CVs. They're doing pretty well for themselves.)
Re: `nice' professors, the author of the list seems to be think that someone who is 'nice' must also be incapable of telling their students hard truths when needed. This is false. The author also seems to think that if an advisor has a lot of time for their students they are a bad advisor. This is also false. The author seems convinced that an advisor must make you cry to be a good advisor. Oh, for crying out loud!
Advisors, like all else in life, are not one size fits all. When choosing advisors, it's important not just to try and understand their advising style, but also to understand your own learning style. And to do so honestly. Ask yourself how you work. What motivates you? What keeps you going on the bad days? In short, what sort of advisor do you need to succeed?
For me, my biggest barrier was my self-confidence. I had plenty of previous success, but I just didn't see it, or discounted it easily as luck. I realized I needed someone whose judgment I could count on, who I could trust to tell me when I was screwing up, and so when they didn't say such a thing, I could infer that I wasn't. I needed someone who believed that I could succeed, and so on the bad days, they kept me going. This advisor turned out to be someone who remembered my birthday, and who gave me tons of support in every which way, but this did not detract from the fact that he would tell me when I was wrong - and I often was. Graduate school made me cry on occasion. It was challenging and progress was rarely quantifiable (see my previous question here), but my advisor was the type of person you go to when you need to cry, who helped you deal with the many issues of graduate school, as opposed to being one of the issues themselves. Am I successful? Well, I graduated with my PhD (in mathematics) last May in 5 years with 5 papers with two more on the way and am currently a postdoc in a pretty good place for me. Empirically speaking, I've been doing well so far, although who knows what the future holds.
On the other hand, perhaps you are truly independent. Can you get by with minimal supervision? Are you truly a superlative researcher already and all you need is a problem to work on and someone to eventually sign a thesis (such individuals do exist) ? Can you say this with complete conviction with much evidence to back you up? Then most likely you will succeed with any advisor whatsoever. Find the person who looks best on paper that is willing to take you and go nuts.
Others work best when being constantly challenged. There probably are individuals who would thrive with an intense advisor who pushes them constantly and think of them purely as a publication-producing machine. Again, this depends on you. Personally, I would say No Thank You, but that's just me.
It is worth noting that a particular faculty member might also employ different advising strategies for different students. They too understand that not all students are the same, that some need well-defined parameters and boundaries, while others need freedom to explore, and so on. On the other hand, students do need to manage their advisors somewhat as well (this at least is something that is mentioned in the original list that was linked to on the question). If you know that your advisor is a rambler, make sure to bring a list of questions you want to ask them to every meeting (I used to do that, because my advisor and I were both talkers). If you are worried that your advisor changes their mind very often (see 4. on the list), make sure to send written summaries of your meetings to your advisor. If you need deadlines to get yourself to do things, but your advisor does not set them for you, ask them! Advisors are not mind-readers. If they won't set deadlines, set them for yourselves.
Advising is a two-way street. Each person has a role to play. In my experience students get to choose their advisors much more so than advisors get to choose their students (although I accept that my experience may be non-standard). Figure out which advisor is best for you. This is possibly different from the advisor who is best for your roommate, your siblings, and the rest of your cohort in graduate school. And when you have an advisor, figure out how to make that relationship work for you. In the end, while the advisor has a huge role in a student's success, there is only so much an advisor can do, and ultimately, it is all about the student.

For what it's worth in the comments to the link posted by the OP, in response to a comment to her original post (from 2012), the author writes

This was an early post, one of my first (possibly my very first–i have
  to check!) written when I had basically a nonexistent readership. I
  would not write “nice always loses” now because I’m much more aware of
  the degree to which people read this blog as “truth.” Indeed, I am
  somewhat more careful with nuance now, although yes, hyperbole remains
  part of my schtick, in blogging and in life, as my friends and family
  know all too well.

Of course, she did choose to repost it 2 years later without rewriting it in any way, so take the author's comment as you will.

The later comment by the blog author is very telling. "Schtick" seems like an appropriate word: the author is using this blog as promotional material for certain expensive professional services, and it seems as though this kind of soi-disant "no-nonsense" viewpoint is an important part of her brand image. I guess it is difficult to charge several hundred dollars an hour to tell people that the world is complicated and different things work for different people.

For what it's worth, let me add that my advisor was very nice, friendly, and available, and gave me "criticism and pushback" precisely when it was necessary.

Other people have already said essentially the same thing, but if I record it as an answer people can vote accordingly, so:

If you’ve never cried before, during, or after a meeting with your advisor, something is amiss.

It is just silly to take this as a piece of advice.  The "cry test" makes no sense, because when exposed to identical circumstances, different people may or may not cry (and when two different people cry in response to the same thing, the meaning of it may be profoundly different).  Look, not everyone cries on the job, period.  The one time I can remember tearing up in a professional context is when I got a telephone call from a colleague of mine telling me that his department was going to offer a(n excllent) job to my (excellent) PhD student, just in time for me to look his (well, certainly very nice!) parents in the eye on graduation day.  In other words: tears of joy and relief, not tears of "someone was not nice to me".  I have had five PhD students, and the number of them who have cried before, during or after an appointment with me is....I have no idea.  (During: zero.)  In order to guess the answer I would have to try to probe the emotional architecture of these adult professionals with whom I have an adult, professional relationship...so I won't.
To say it in a slightly different way: the nice/mean thing is some fingerpaint approximation to what students should actually be taking into account.  I am, for my weight class, a relatively ambitious and demanding thesis advisor.  I think most students would describe me as "professionally intense".  But I am most certainly "nice" to my students...in fact, nicer than you might expect from watching my interactions on this site.  I view being nice to students as part of my job.  I have never yelled at a student, not once.  Earlier today I returned my cable box, and I got heated with the woman there in a way that I absolutely never would with a student.  (And it turned out that she was right, I was wrong, and I went back in to apologize.)  This is not really about me at all: the point is that nice/mean is a poor approximation to what one is really looking for an advisor, and an advisor who was actually not nice would be a terrible person to work with professionally.  So please don't choose "mean" people to work with....obviously.

Similarly, I always felt reassured talking to my advisors. It was my own internal narrative that brought on the tears.

In my experience as a physics PhD student finishing his work, a nice advisor isn't necessarily a bad advisor.  Quite the contrary, IMO, you must feel comfortable with your advisor because if you are going to go through hell (and you will, have no doubts about that), you better go with a leader that you like and respect.
My advisor is a nice person and treats you with respect and is fairly understanding of the problems that will arise during your work and I still have high-stress-related health problems.  So, don't worry about not having hardships, you will get plenty.
What you need is an advisor that is honest with your results, have a down-to-earth approach and keeps in mind that you have a deadline.
An honest advisor will tell you that what you are doing is wrong. That is important.  There should also be room for flexibility so you can develop your ideas.
Finally, if you are supposed to graduate in 3-4 years and you have people from that group graduating in 5-6 years, that is not a good sign.  Life does not end after the PhD degree, after all: it is just the beginning of your career.
I haven't finished so I can't say whether I will be a high-quality or low-quality student, but the other students who have graduated under him are doing very well (everyone who wanted to continue in academia got postdoc positions.  The one that didn't continue went to the private sector for a ton of money).
About crying, as others pointed out, it depends on each individual.  Allowing myself to be more judgmental, the one who said/wrote that quote simply has a liking for the dramatic.
Nice, friendly and available? Nice and friendly is useful to keep your  sanity (the physical, emotional and mental stress is bad enough even with a nice and friendly advisor like mine), and also useful when you need to ask questions.  But available is important since you will need to get advice time to time, even if you are very independent.
As someone else pointed out, if you are independent, you will need less "advisor-time", but it is still necessary.  If you are extremely dependent... you shouldn't really be doing a PhD (After all, it is a title acknowledging the ability to do "independent research").

Is nice, and friendly, and available.

And never gives you the fierce criticism and the tough pushback that
  forces you to confront your weaknesses, take risks, stop whining, cut
  the excuses, get over your fears, and make hard decisions about
  reputation, money, and jobs.

As ff524 has pointed out there is an expanded context to the question of "nice", but I think the author of this blog, wrongly, has associated nice, friendly and available with a number of other traits. I have been mentored by "nice" professors, who were friendly, available, cared about me as a person, etc. On the other hand, these were also people who looked at my papers and said "This part doesn't make any sense...", pushed me to submit several papers to better venues than I thought they deserved, and taught me that until it's published, it doesn't count.
Similarly, I'd seen people with "fierce", "tough" advisors who have done very little in terms of productivity, because they're too busy being torn down to build anything.

the nice associate professor ladies (and the occasional man) in the
  department, the ones who remember their birthdays and sometimes bring
  in homemade bread.

I have had a mentor who remembered birthdays, had people over to her house for lab dinner, etc. She was also an academic badass. For that matter, "the nice associate professor ladies" both described a number of very formidable scientists in my departments, and are people who have thrived in a setting that is not always friendly to women. There might be a reason for that.

If you’ve never cried before, during, or after a meeting with your
  advisor, something is amiss.

I have never had an advisor make me cry. I have occasionally cried in the course of my career, or had a minor breakdown, but it's never been because my advisors weren't being nice.

Do not attach yourself to someone “nice.”  Attach yourself to someone
  “intense.”

False dichotomy is false.

They might not be all warm and fuzzy, but they’ll have you prepped to
  deal with the REAL assholes who are always circling out there, waiting
  to pounce.

One of the things I was taught by the warm and fuzzy types was how to be both nurturing and to fend off the assholes.

Nice loses in academia.  Not because you need to be mean, but because
  you need to be fierce.

Again, nice and fierce are not necessarily mutually contradictory. Generally, I found this whole section pretty off-putting - it fosters an absurd image of academic machismo that I think we could all stand to get away from, and shores up the same excuses many people use to be abusive to their students and junior colleagues. Which somewhat undermines #3 on their list.

just want to add that being nice is a social strategy, it doesn't say anything about the person's character. (idea from Gavin de Becker, "the Gift of Fear")

I don't see how nice and friendly exclude being being open and honest. Note that "nice" and "friendly" are primarily emotional wheras honest criticism deals with a factual level. To me the problem with the opinion of the blog post is that the factual level is unnecessarily and unduely mixed with the emotional level, and in particular - in my opinion - aiming at the wrong emotions.

IMHO difficulties should be treated in an profesional and appropriate way. Which IMHO is rather factual.

If you’ve never cried before, during, or after a meeting with your advisor, something is amiss.

(I should say that crying students are extremely rare over here and would generally be considered a rather alarming sign.)
What is amiss here IMHO is that while emotions are a good indicator of how well the emotional level is or isn't, they are no (good) indicator for the factual level. Suggesting to seeingly choose an advisor whom you expect to treat you in a way that makes you cry is not only nonsense but seriously bad advise. You'll head for an emotional trap without having any kind indication that this would help with the factual level of critique.
You may tolerate a certain lack of professionalism on the emotional level iff you know that the factual judgment is extremely good. But this is an implication, a logical one-way.  If a supervisor not able or willing to handle things professionally on the emotional level, why should one trust them to deliver a fair judgment on the factual level?

I hold that a symptom of great character is that great people make/help/let the people around them grow (as opposed to: break them as in "make cry").
There will be enough situations to excercise your frustration tolerance also with a nice and friendly supervisor.
If you decide to play with danger, fair enough. But IMHO doing this in a thesis situation is not the most intelligent choice: theses are exam situations where you are expected to show top performance. That is, performance in your subject area, not as a dompteur of difficult supervisors.

Disclaimer: I've never cried before, during or after a meeting with a supervisor. I get angry instead. Which isn't better for the factual critique anyways.

The emotionally harsher encounters I've had were with people who had no problem in telling me that I did wrong - but where the "wrongs" were arbitrary to me.  Arbitrary ranging from

arbitraty as in the most plausible explanation I have is that everyone had lots of external pressure so emotions spilled over
(in other words: if there was a factual level, I completely missed it),
to situations where I perfectly agree that the supervisor has the right to ask what they asked (factual level) - but where I also insist that this does not constitute the right to get mad (emotionally) instead of calmly stating the factual requirement.
In other words: situations where I put in the effort to sort out how far I accept the critique - and where unreasonable requests (here: correctly guessing non-standard expected behaviour) start which could only be delivered under the cover of emotional pressure as there were no convincing factual arguments.

Some more anecdata:

I've seen (and also comforted) students who did cry after meeting a supervisor/professor - but so far it was never an encounter with someone whom I'd consider a good and thoroughly professional supervisor.
I've met professors who were talking about other professors as "too nice" - though in every single instance the ones commenting were professors which I had already marked on my personal blacklist of people I'll be wary of or had even been warned about.

there are profs who are more on the intense, no nonsense side, and then there are the profs who are more easy going.

Personally, some of the most intense research "sprints" that I had took place under an easy going supervisor. And I tend to think that this is no accident.

go on ratemyprof dot com and see the comments for profs who are rated at the top and those at the bottom.

Another contradicting point of anecdata. Poll for the most favourite (school) teacher. Bets were on the funny and easy-going sports teacher who also had the "easy subject" bias in favor. But it turned out to be the very demanding, but thoroughly clear, honest and fair maths teacher. Sports teacher "only" made the 2nd place.
Teachers who pretended (tried?) to be "nice and friendly" at the expense of fairness were clearly despised.
This coincides quite well with what I hear from students now (with an additional keen judgment of who knows what they're talking about and who doesn't).

When you mean a one-way implication, it is a good idea to write "if" with just one "f". Otherwise all the mathematicians get confused.

I have read all the five items and I honestly believe four out of five of them are very much misleading.
Here are my opinions about those five items:
5.    Steals your work.
True, but too obvious to state. This is not only true for advisors but for all mankind. And I assume that someone with an average intelligence would intuitively aviod any kind of person who steals.
4.   Is crazy-making inconsistent.
I think science itslef is crazy-making inconsistent.
On the contrary, if someone is obsessive about one path of action, then how can he or she improve any scientific study?
Suppose that John works on subject A and conducted experiments titled E1.
The advisor might say that the experiments are inconsistent and throw them out and conduct E2 type of experiments.
However, after one week, another related subject B may be included into the publication and E1 type of experiments would right-to-the-point to settle the relationship between A and B.
Guess what, "How could you write this chapter about B without mentioning E1 type of experiments??"
3.  Is abusive, negative and undermining.
If the student is either lazy or ignoring the comments from advisor, then the advisor must be negative and undermining.
What is the role of an advisor if his/her advises are ignored or undermined?
The writer also mentioned about the advisor backing off.
Well, this must be a huge loss for the advisor!!
2.  Is never around.
No one on the surface of the earth has the right to judge a professor's working hours but the employer.
Moreover, calling an advisor bad just because of his/her adacemic activities is nothing but pure ignorance.
Or it might be envy, I don't know.
1.  Is nice, and friendly, and available.
This is the funniest claim I have ever come across.
By the same reasoning, a good medical doctor should always reprehend the patient, the best teacher never smiles.
We, of course, should always remember that once a person's mood is set, then by no means it can change. Therefore, if one is nice, he/she is nice forever.
Otherwise, we are dealing with an intense person.
Summary
I do not think the goodness of an advisor can be measured.
The writer is

Holier than thou. It can be clearly understood when you read the writer's vita

I have trained numerous Ph.D. students, now gainfully employed in
  academia, and handled a number of successful tenure cases as
  Department Head.

Despises a lot of professors.

tl;dr
In my opinion, you should nevermind the corresponding blog post.

I haven't read enough about what other people answered to your question, but I really cannot help to share my story with you now.
I think it really depends on what you want, and your attitude. I switched adviser in my third year of my PhD, from a professor who was "very nice" to someone who everyone gossiped about how pushy he is. You might think I'm crazy, but right now I am very happy with my decision.
The adviser I was working with was unbelievably nice to me when we first started working together. She never got mad and always sent me some interesting article, and told me to "take your time and learn slowly." Well, I thought I the luckiest PhD student I could've ever imagined, but then everything changed when one day for some reason she just flipped out. She called me on the phone and insulted me saying I'm useless, work so slow, not productive, and very "spoiled". She said she put in so much effort in me but received nothing. She said she kept trying to "be nice" to me, and I just took it for granted. I was extremely shock, since no one ever in my life insulted me that way, not to even expect it would be from someone who treated me so nicely before.
After about a week of thinking I decided to switch adviser, and of course, she completely lost it. She said I used her, and she felt very betrayed (it sounds crazy but I'm really not making things up...) My new adviser felt very awkward and was still trying to be polite with her, but she kind of insulted him back... He didn't bother to fight with her and started working on research very intensively with me right away. He never tell me to take my time, instead he is very demanding, and keeps coming in the office to check my progress. But he is reasonable. Because I work hard, he never gets disappointed at me even I cannot meet the deadlines we target. I am very happy with him right now, even though I know a lot of students left him because he is so demanding.
On the other hand, the professor I worked with before stole my work. She took my work, which I proposed and worked on it for almost 2 years, and sent to some journalist and published news. In the article, her name was mentioned everywhere, while my name was just mentioned as a "programmer", when the truth is I proposed the idea, collected all the data, did all the analysis and wrote all the words for our papers. At the same time, she was telling everyone that she "fired" me, and she's gonna sign some ridiculous paper on preventing me from doing anything slightly related to what I worked on before. I've never disrespected a person so much in my life before. Who cares how successful she is in academia and how she puts on a show to trick people into thinking she's a nice person.
I know my case is a bit extreme... But what I want to tell you is, don't judge by how "nice" an adviser is. Those things are not real. An adviser that you can really work closely with, and communicate with, is the most important. They can be the harshest people in the world, but as long as they are reasonable and thinking good for you, they're good choices. Sorry for the super long story, just don't want anyone to repeat my horrible past.

this post and answer are from a long time ago, but in case people are still reading this particular thread, the "extreme" scenario also happened to me in my past postdoc (being shouted at, having foul language used on me, saying that I betrayed him, etc etc). I went to university Ombudsman, and was told that such behaviors should not be tolerated and should be reported but I just didn't have mental energy to deal with it, esp. he's so chummy with some students. I still have ptsd from it. I really hope one day we can have an equivalent of the #metoo movement but about academic bullying

I can tell you a few things from my own experience doing independent studies and summer/winter research projects as an undergrad in computer engineering (with aspirations of continuing to grad school, though I decided not to in the end).
1) You need a professor who will push to and motivate you to work and be productive. Not mean, but firm. Since you often have your own hours it's very easy to slack off and procrastinate, so it's helpful to have someone who's making sure that you're producing. Especially if you hit a snag, some helpful suggestions can ease you over the hump and you'll start being productive again.
2) They need to give you constructive advice, which often needs to be focused. This can include what do do or how to do it. It must be specific enough for you to understand what they want, not just a vague "look into this". One of my best professors would mention ideas and topics, and say stuff like "figure out how to do x, then see if you can y", and each step was helpful in either improving my skills or deepening my understanding. He didn't give answers or spoon feed anything, and demanded good work. But his guidance and direction was focused and thorough enough to allow me to rise to the challenge and produce the quality work he expected. Other professors who were "nicer" in the sense that they accepted less may have been easier but didn't push me to accomplish as much.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is there any general consensus that either Elsevier or Springer is viewed as more prestigious for publishing in engineering?
What (if any) is the general consensus out there regarding publishing in  one of these journals vs the other?
I am a mechanical engineer, specialising in fluid flow and heat transfer, so would it be better to publish my findings in a relevant Elsevier journal or equivalent Springer journal?
Is one or the other viewed by the academic community as more prestigious, or does one offer greater exposure for my work?

+1. I think this question embodies the idea that there are no stupid questions. The OP obviously thinks this is a reasonable question and instead of closing it as "opinion based" we should consider answering it with why the titular question isn't really the correct way to think about the issue.

+1. Although the question is based on a misunderstanding, I'm sure it's a misunderstanding that other people have when they are new to academic publishing.

+1 for Which would be viewed by the academic community as more "prestigious" and which would offer greater exposure for my work? Although, I think you'd better to re-phrase your question to something else.

@strongbad in that case, I think it's effectively a duplicate of http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/101/96

@EnergyNumbers yes and no. That question focuses on disreputable publishers and I think this question is on reputable publishers.

@strongbad collectively, the answers there are much broader than just about disreputable publishers, and answer the intent of this question here. So this question here is already answered there.

@EnergyNumbers I wouldn't object if the community thinks it is a duplicate. I was worried about the opinion based votes to close.

Also, which car is better, Volkswagen or Volvo?

I've edited the question. Clearly it is no longer soliciting individual opinions; it now asks whether there is a general consensus in the academic community, and the answers are perfectly reasonable and objective, and not at all opinion-based. I am therefore reopening, but if anyone wants to challenge me on that, I'm listening.

Elsevier has a sucky reputation imo.

@ff524 great edit. I think many of the comments are obsolete as a consequence.

Elsevier is now a disreputable publisher in a lot of fields, especially math...

You need to understand that the quality of journals is not bijectively related to the company that publishes it. Elsevier and Springer are publishers, they have a portfolio of journals and are sometimes hired by professional or academic societies to provide publishing services.
The quality of the journal depends on other factors, mostly the editorial strategy which is the job of the editorial board, who are independent from the publisher. As a result, even though both the company that you listed are reputable publishers, there are large variations of quality within their respective portfolios.
The best way to know which are the good journals in your field is to ask your colleagues in particular your adviser. You can also ask the scientific librarian(s) of your institution. This is a typical task that they do. Another clue is which journals publish the good papers you read and intend to cite. If you are in the biomedical sciences, the impact factor is a useful metric, although like everything, it's not perfect.
There are also limiting factors to consider, it might be that your institution or your funding agency have requirements regarding the public archival of preprints. One example is the NIH Public Access Policy, which requires that:
"all investigators funded by NIH submit an electronic copy of their final peer-reviewed manuscripts of articles that have been accepted for publication. Submission is to take place “upon acceptance,” and the article must be made available in the PubMed Central database within one year of publication."
(All the medicine-related Elsevier journals I know about comply with this requirements, but it's best to check).

Elsevier and Springer are sometimes hired by others to provide publishing services, but they also publish many journals of their own.  (I don't know statistics, but my impression is that they own far more journals than they publish for others.)

The prestige of a journal and the exposure it will offer your ideas are not determined by the publisher.  Sure, some publishers are better than others on average, but differences between individual journals are overwhelmingly larger than systematic differences between publishers, so there's no way to give a remotely useful answer based solely on the publisher.  It's like asking "Would I be happier living in France or Germany?"  Someone must have gathered statistics on average national levels of happiness, but individual circumstances and the particular opportunities available in each country are vastly more important for answering this question.  (And the issues and opportunities vary so much between people that there's no hope of compiling a comprehensive answer.)
To start on finding your own answer, you can look at the journals that publish papers you care about or consider related or comparable with yours.  If more come from one publisher than the other, then that may give you an answer for your particular research topic, but again you should pay far more attention to the journal than the publisher.  And why restrict your attention to Elsevier and Springer?  It doesn't make sense to cut down your options dramatically until you have a pretty detailed idea of what's out there.
If you don't know what sort of papers a journal publishes (not just topic, but also importance, prestige, etc.) and can't even form an opinion by browsing, then it's probably not a sensible place for you to submit your paper.  If you are just starting to publish, then you may not have a lot of opinions already, but now is a good time to start forming them.  You could also ask your advisor or another mentor for advice on this topic, to get insights aimed at you specifically.
Of course there may be other considerations besides prestige and exposure.  For example, some people boycott Elsevier.  On the other hand, Springer is also a big commercial publisher that could be considered problematic for similar reasons.

As I see it, the OP is in a stage where he has to choose between an Elsevier and a Springer journal.

I want to expand upon something that Anonymous Mathematician wrote: Elsevier is the subject of an ongoing boycott. As of now, 14,784 researchers have pledged to not submit, referee, and/or perform editorial work for Elsevier journals.
In my opinion the boycott is completely justified: not only are they selling our own golden eggs back to us at exorbitant prices, but they engage in shady practices such as "bundling".
Many people disagree with and don't support the boycott. But whether you agree with it or not, the fact that 14,000 researchers are refusing to deal with Elsevier bodes ill in the long term for the quality of their publications.

I respect your political opinion, but I don't think it's appropriate as an answer. OP is asking about prestige and exposure not about the business model.

The purpose of the boycott is to reduce the prestige and exposure of Elsevier journals, at least until they change their business model. The only reason that my opinion is relevant to the OP's question is that an additional 14,783 researchers agree with me. (Some of them Fields Medalists, etc.)

The business models of both publishers have a real negative impact on the prestige and exposure of their journals, one considerably more so than the other.

@JeffE I have to disagree. In my field, the top journals are published by these companies or other publishers with the same model, like Nature.

I fail to see how Springer is much better than Elsevier when it comes to exorbitant prices and shady practices such as bundling. They may bundle less overall, I don't know, but in France at least they bundle very badly.

@Jigg The negative impact may not be enough to change the rankings of journals in your field, but that doesn't mean there's no negative impact.

When you say that the journals are "equivalent" I'm assuming that they have similar impact factor/eigenscore/snip/sjr and any other metric of journal "quality" or "influence" or "popularity".
So it comes down to Elsevier versus Springer versus any other publisher. Regarding your questions:

Which would be viewed by the academic community as more "prestigious"

I don't think it matters. Prestige is usually per journal, not per publisher.

which would offer greater exposure for my work?

This also doesn't depend much on the publisher. However, I will give you some points that you might want to consider.

The ability to publish in open access. Most publishers offer this option. This will allow people who do not have a personal or institutional subscription to the journal to view the final version of your article. This usually requires a fee.
Time from submission to acceptance. This usually varies by journal and does not depend on publisher. Some journals take even a year while other boast on their web pages that it takes several dozens of days. If the journal does not disclose this information, you can take a look at some of the recent published articles in that journal. They usually mention the submitted and accepted date. Note that this varies a lot between papers, so take a look at more than one or two to get a feeling.
The time it takes for the journal to publish the article after it was accepted. This usually has two phases. The first is when the article appears in an online only form. The article is not assigned to a volume yet, but it is fully accessible and citable. This is the "in press" stage. The next phase is when the article appears "in print". This is when the journal assigns the article to a physical volume, and the final citation is available. In most of the cases, you wouldn't care because the article is already available in the "in press" phase. However, not all journals offer their articles in this phase so this is something you want to look out for. Also, when articles are still "in press", some databases do not index it fully (Scopus is one that comes into mind) and your article is less "discoverable" than it can be. So you might want to check that articles in that journal do not hang out in the "in press limbo" for too long.

That said, I personally think it doesn't matter too much. The main thing that affects how well received is your paper, is the paper. If it's a good one, all the nit-picking is not that important.

Ask people you work with.   See where they're publishing and ask around.  What holds for one field may not hold for others.  Prestige of journals is subjective and based on the opinions of a relatively small group of researchers.  Asking here will get you many useless opinions, because the only opinions that matter are those of your potential readers in you field.
Also look at each journal's practices and policies to see you feel personally comfortable supporting them.  It's 2014 and many people do not even look at the "journal," they simply search google for your paper.  Your aim should be to increase visibility to your work and not hide it behind, e.g. needless paywalls.  Choose a journal that will allow you to do this in a reasonable manner.   Consider journals that let you additionally post preprints on your personal website or arxiv.

As said before, when it comes to prestige the publisher does not have much weight, the journal does.
But I have to disagree slightly with other answers when it comes to exposure: some publishers have their journals available by many more universities in the world than others, thus bringing some more exposure to the work they publish (exposure is not only availability, but availability is the first logical component of exposure). Now that large commercial publishers bundle a lot, sometimes selling all their journals to a whole country, all their journals (however obscure they sometimes are) are widely accessible. However, this does not make a big difference between Springer and Elsevier, who are both big commercial publisher with mostly convergent commercial strategies. Note that open-access journals are of course even better for availability; but the fact that SpringerLink and ScienceDirect (the platforms used to access Springer and Elsevier journals) gather so many titles under one roof makes it more likely that someone will easily find a given article (an open-access buried into the depth of the internet might be available but difficult to find).
Another difference between publishers you didn't asked for but that matters is the quality of publishing work (copy-editing, assistance to editorial boards, etc.) For an author, the work done on the articles themselves is important. If you think it doesn't matter much, then think about the difference between
A. a publisher that sends you galley proofs to be checked in one week, without any indication of what has been changed from your own manuscript (but many tiny and not-so-tiny changes having been made), and
B. a publisher that sends you an annotated version of your manuscript, showing all modifications made to it, together with the galley proof that resulted from this process, so that you can check each modification easily.
The difference is in hours of work, unless you blindly trust copy-editors. And this would not be wise. Unfortunately for you, from my experience and all the testimony I gathered about various publishers, Elsevier and Springer are pretty similar when it comes to service to the authors: they do a pretty bad job.
So in conclusion, I would say that publishers do matter to authors even when they do not want to take any political stance like the Cost of knowledge pledge. But it is hard to find a strong difference between Springer and Elsevier (if you want names of publishers that do a great job, I know a few but for mathematics).

Which publishers for mathematics do you regard highly?

I would primarily advise MSP (Math Science Publishers), which is both community-oriented and really good at its job; and AMS which does a very good job for authors. I also had relatively good experiences with World Scientific (which is commercial) and EDP Sciences.

From my recent experience and from my recent question asked here. I would say the publisher reputation matters but it also varies country to country. People from various internet communities urged me to publish in a low IF journal published by highly reputed publisher (IEEE) instead of publishing high IF journal published by less reputed publisher (MDPI). The MDPI journal is not only has higher IF but also has  4.3 Normalized EigenFactor and has citation relationship with journals like Nano Letters, Science and Nature. Upon discussing same issue with my supervisor and people from Asian communities they said go for MDPI. I will suggest check the various indicators of journal from JCR and Scopus reports and select the journal based on its current and  previous 5-10 years indicators.

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


text:
For graduate admissions, are difficult classes valued over perfect grades?
I am an undergrad at a top 5 research institution for context, and this is pertaining to math Ph.D. admissions.
I know looking at grades in isolation w.r.t. admissions is a questionable thing to do in the first place, but from an admissions perspective, are difficult classes valued over perfect grades? I guess the example in mind would be, is it better to have a couple of difficult courses + mostly undergrad courses with all As, or a lot of difficult classes but some Bs sprinkled in?

"Is it commonly believed that graduate classes are free A grades?" - No. If that's the case, either the person in question is unusually smart or the course is poorly assessed.

Doing well in graduate classes is much more likely to lead to useful letters of recommendation than getting perfect grades in undergrad classes.

To be honest, you should be worrying about trying to get something published on Arxiv, since that will boost your chances way more than most grades.

@Leonpalafox On that, most professors I've talked to do not value publication in itself, but I am working on a project as I realize it would be good for my mathematical development, rec letters, signals interest and some level of knowledge about research, and such.

That's odd, usually graduate school admission committees put a lot of care on your capability to do research, which is the reason many students in natural sciences take one extra year just to beef up the resume with some publication. And as far as I know, even for computer science that is the case.

Right, but I think math is the exception as the amount of background it takes to produce research that people are interested in is far greater than what most undergrads have, for most fields.

most professors I've talked to do not value publication in itself — Clearly, you talk to a different set of math professors than I do.

far greater than what most undergrads have, for most fields — But you're not most undergrads, are you?

@JeffE I know what you're saying, and I think you probably know what I'm saying? This summer I'm working on moduli spaces for example, but my algebraic geometry is not at the point where I'm going to be producing any kind of outstandingly impressive result, and the same is true for all but perhaps a few undergrads countable with two hands, maybe one. It is certainly the case that there are many many more spots at top Ph.D. programs than there are people who are able to produce significant results as undergrads.

The point is not to produce "any kind of outstandingly impressive result".  The point is to produce, and then publish, a result.

We're on the same page, sort of. Professors have told me it's good to have some experience doing "research".

@JeffE: As a math professor working in areas close to that of the OP (my thesis was on a kind of moduli space), I somewhat disagree with what you're saying.  In many ways I think this discussion is more interesting than the question asked by the OP (though I don't see what was wrong with it and have voted to reopen).  Maybe we could open a new question on this point?

For one thing, when the OP says that "most professors I've talked to do not value publication in itself", he surely means that in the context of undergraduate students.  I agree with that: there are a lot of REUs these days, and a positive proportion of math grad school applicants have published a result.  Having done so is positively correlated with their admittance to the top programs...but the correlation is very far from perfect, and publishing a result is far from a golden ticket to admission at UGA, let alone Harvard.

@PeteL.Clark I thought this was a very good discussion on undergrad research: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/11113/how-important-are-publications-for-undergrads

@anonymous: Good find, that's a valuable discussion.  (I even participated in it...) I think it's a pretty good defense of the point I was making, and it makes me less interested in reopening that can of worms here.  On the other hand, that was four years ago, and I do think that things are slowly changing in the direction of increased undergraduate publication, so in another 5 years or so I think it would be worth checking in just to make sure we all still feel the same way.

I think this is a pretty easy one.

I know looking at grades in isolation w.r.t. admissions is a questionable thing to do in the first place, but from an admissions perspective, are difficult classes valued over perfect grades?

Yes.

I guess the example in mind would be, is it better to have a couple of difficult courses + mostly undergrad courses with all As, or a lot of difficult classes but some Bs sprinkled in?

The latter is distinctly better.  I got a B in the first graduate course I took as an undergraduate.  (I then took 8 more graduate courses and got A's.)  This did not stop me from getting into all the math PhD programs to which I applied, including the top three in the US.

I feel like a single B (or multiple) early on is not so bad though, I have a friend who just got into Princeton who had terrible grades freshman year, and another friend who got a C in a math class who got into several top programs. At what point (proportion of B grades) do you think the situation changes, out of curiosity? I suppose in terms of numbers I am thinking ~4 grad classes vs 8-10, in the first 3 years of undergrad.

@anonymous: Thanks, I agree that my undergraduate transcript was not so bad!  (Actually my GPA was about 3.95.)  I wouldn't feel confident specifying a threshhold percentage of B grades; that is so variable and depends on just about everything, including a specific applicant pool.  But I'll say that committees look for a trend towards increased success and increased mathematical understanding: if you do pretty well in one course then do excellently in later, more advanced courses, then the less than optimal earlier grade is allayed.  I specifically look for this when reading transcripts.


text:
How will my second PhD application be perceived, after abandoning the first?
I'm a second year industrial PhD student in Europe with a PhD contract of 3yrs.
Due to certain reasons, our strategic partners have left the project. As a consequence, we are not able to smoothly continue with the current prototype tests and validation.
I have been discussing this with my supervisor and her suggestion is to build a new prototype. That would be OK if I was offered a contract extension (just to compensate for the fact that the partners have abandoned us). To make the new prototype will take approx 1 year. Basically, I'm not able to perform any research before such prototype is in place.
For this reason I'm thinking of abandoning the program and applying to another PhD position. It is hard to give 100% if thing look gray and mentor is not flexible.
I'm not afraid to start from scratch. However, I'm wonder if new prospective groups will understand my situation and give me a new chance or will my application be rejected? What kind of perception might I expect?

Can you clarify if you are working for a company, or if you are in a university and had funding from that company? Also, the sentence 'It is hard to give 100% if thing look gray and mentor is not flexible.' is somewhat obscure to me.

I'm working for a company. Additonal details: the suggestion to use help from extern partner(s) came from my suprevisor(s). Somwhere in the middle, I signaled that our partners are not showing enough "eagerness", but I was easily tagged as just being "negative". The "100%" related part means that one is loosing motivation when hitting the issues outside of her/his control. Flexibility - I suggested following: extending contract, freezing PhD and working on new prototype as intern, getting help from other employees to speed-up new development and even changing the PhD scope. I was refused.

I understand how you feel, when factors you don't control get in the way it's very frustrating. Is it an option for you to start looking for another position while keeping the current? And switch only if you are sure of getting another, fully funded, position?

Yes. I'm all for that option. My worry is just how I'm going to be percepted by other players, that are to provide funding.

Although such a decision depends usually on personal factors, here are some points on the subject:
I think it depends of what you want to do afterwards. PhD inside companies are usually intended for people who have an interest in finding a job in the R&D department of that company or a competing one. (It's also a great way for companies to hire highly educated people for a fraction of the usual salary, but that is out of the topic).
If this is the case, I would recommend trying to salvage the project, maybe by negotiating a contract extension, adding another aspect (analysis of the data, modeling?) while you wait for the new prototype, etc. As a PhD student it is normally not your job to secure funding, your advisor should be the one concerned about that now.
If your goal is to work in academic research I would recommend switching to another PhD program (preferably in a university). It wouldn't necessary mean starting from scratch, it might be that the work you already did can be used for another application.

new prospective groups will understand my situation and give me new
  chance or my application is going to be rejected

I think that your previous experience will be an advantage when applying to a new position, especially as it is clear that its interruption had nothing to do with your performance. I think the perception is going to be fine, experience is always appreciated.

Thanks for answer. Regarding the prototype: I'm expected to develop the new one. I don't oppose to idea, but it will be a year spent on pure engineering tasks (hardly publishable on its own). As I said it would be great if I'm to get contract extension so that I manage to use the prototype for research.

A year to develop a method/prototype is not uncommon for grad students, the question in your case seems to be funding. If you get funded do it, but don't work for free. Can you file a patent instead of a publication?

Unfortunately, the prototype is not patentable - it is just a tool to validate other methods.


text:
Can you teach at a community college with a master's degree?
I'm interested in teaching a class at the community college level.  I'm not interested in it as a career, but rather because I like teaching people about computer science.  How likely is it that I would be able to teach a evening class at a local community college with a masters degree (Computer Science).
I don't have a lot of formal experience teaching (TA/tutoring).  I spent most of my time doing research in the lab, but during that time I mentored/managed/herded a number of undergrads.
Maybe being a TA would be a nice way to get my feet wet and see if it's for me.  Is that possible, now that I've already graduated?
I have a regular 9-6 job that I would have to work around.

This is an interesting question. With the increasingly large number of PhDs who can't get jobs at 4 year Universities, how hard is it to get a community college teaching job with just a masters degree in STEM fields? This is likely to be field specific, but we should try and address as many fields as we can in the answer to this question, even though the OP is just interested in computer science.

It might be as easy as anything else to just apply and see what happens.

A member of my lab taught a few classes at a four year college with just a Master's, so you shouldn't have a problem.

My parents met in English graduate school.  They became more enamored of each other than their program, so they each got out with Master's degrees and taught community college (full time, at the "associate professor" level) for many years.  This was a little while ago, though; my father passed away in 2000 and my mother has been retired for about ten years.
In my parents' day, some of their colleagues had PhDs, and my understanding is that the main reason that they never had the academic rank of "full professor" was the lack of a PhD.  (Nevertheless salaries were decent, based in part on a strong teachers' union, in which my father played a key role way back when.)  Degree inflation in academia is an ongoing process, and I would expect that a higher percentage of community college faculty have PhDs than before.  Also the precise meaning of the term "community college" varies quite a lot from one region of the United States to another.  I now live in Georgia and eventually noticed that almost nothing is called "community college" around here, but some PhD graduates from my department (mathematics, UGA) go into to teach in what I think are, more or less, what would in other regions be called "community college".
I think the fact that your goal is to teach some courses rather than have a permanent job / get benefits / get a competitive salary makes your goal much more reasonable.  Most community colleges have a substantial percentage of "adjuncts"; in my understanding it is quite rare for these people to have PhDs.  Wanting to teach courses at night should also make you desirable -- more in some areas than others, but overall it is a definite positive.  Also, I would have to think that just about any academic institution in the country teaches courses on computers at this point, so that's a good choice too (the number of people who know something about computers is also quite large, but having a master's degree should get you in the door).
Maybe you know this already, but many courses at the community college level are at the level of a high school course: e.g. many community colleges offer no mathematics course more advanced than "business calculus".  (This of course does not mean that such classes cannot have significant intellectual content or that you won't sometimes get very good students: they can and you will.  As Richard Feynman liked to say, "We are not that much smarter than each other.")  You should check to make sure that what they mean by "computer science classes" is compatible with the courses that the institution(s) is offering: as above, this will probably vary significantly from one place to another.
But overall, what you suggest sounds very possible, sounds like it could be fun, and sounds like you will be rendering a real service to people.  I hope it works out for you: good luck.

My mother teaches English at a community college. I know her TA graduated from a different university. Her TA is also my best friend from kindergarten and after said TA's parents died, my mother has been very involved in her TA's life. So I know that it is possible to TA after you've graduated, but it would help to have some connection to the college. However, there might be more of a demand for TAs in CS than in my mother's field.
One way to "get your foot in" might be to take classes at the college. My mom had applied for jobs at this college for years, but it was only after she took a few classes that she got her job. Her classes were in other departments, but when her professors found out she was interested in working there, they introduced her to people in the English department. Suddenly she wasn't "random applicant", but rather "that person my friend introduced me to and I had that nice conversation with".


text:
How does Stephen Hawking conduct his research?
I've recently watched The Theory of Everything and it got me thinking. How does a researcher with a serious physical impediment, such as Stephen Hawking, conduct his research?
Academic life usually involves studying, staying up to date with current literature, attending or giving conferences, teaching some classes, etc. Each of those activities presents serious challenges. For instance, how does he do math? Everything is done in his mind or does he scribble some notes on software? Or maybe in Latex? I'm assuming he has people helping him, too.
I'm not sure if this is on topic here, so I apologize if it's inappropriate.

I do not know him very much. But, I think that he does most of his academic activity in his creative and brave mind. He is so genius.

you'll find a nice summary of millet's argument here, in Scientific American: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2014/12/31/stephen-hawking-hawking-incorporated-and-the-myth-of-the-lone-genius/

Have you read his article in the Wikipedia? I believe most of your questions are answered there.
As for students and researchers with disabilities in general: Every disability is different and different things can be done to help, from extra time on homeworks and exams, to special reading / blackboard viewing devices, hearing aids, keyboards that require very little finger strength, to having another person take notes for the disabled student / researcher. I'm sure I forgot lots of other tools.
The most important tool for research is the mind and with a keen mind most obstacles can be overcome.

I have. Most of my questions are discussed, but in very little detail. I was hoping I could get more insight concerning the mechanics and not just a general answer.

There is a book by Hélène Mialet (philosopher and anthropologist of science at UC Davis) about how Stephen Hawking is working. For the author, Hawking is, by necessity, the archetype of new scientists who are more than just individuals.
Here you can find information about the book :
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/H/bo3750667.html
If I remember well, the book was in some sort of controversy, but this is just me remembering.


text:
Do the professors really read 10,000 word theses of 10 bachelor graduating students?
I wonder if my head of the program/dean (1 man) actually reads 10 theses of approximately 10,000 words each, when there are only 2 months to graduate.
And does he actually check every reference as, for example, "this paragraph does not belong to the reference [3]." In other words,  does he read all the references, for example, page 260-270 of the book referred as the source?
As I check, the library of my university does not have such books. So does the university support him to buy those books or he has to spend his money on them, and what is the possibility he will spend his own money on it?

PhD students would consider themselves lucky if anyone on their committee besides their advisor read their dissertation; so no. They definitely aren't checking references (although why are you asking??).

Yes, and do they reading all of 10,000 words each thesis. Btw, it's bachelor's thesis

What are your motivations for asking the question?

To target on which part they actually read for the thesis presentation and defend

Your thesis should cite the literature correctly, regardless of whether you expect someone to carefully check that you did.

Azor Ahai is right, they won't check every dot and comma. But they'll be better than you at knowing what they need to check to see if the thesis is good. Best to do it right rather than try to beat the system!

Students always think we won't pick out errors. Tell you a secret: we do. Someone once made a particular statement (verbally) without saying that this was a citation. I told him straight out (without looking up) where he read it. He was duly impressed. No, it was not an obvious source and I may have been lucky. Of course, once you get a reputation, students become more careful...

To be honest, I am writing about AI. Machine Learning topic which I believe my professor doesn't familiar with. Because of that, some of my parts have to change from "widely known information" to "expert information". That's why there are references, which I supposed not to refer to, need to be found after I wrote them. As a scholar, I think you understand what it's like to find a reference for common knowledge for example "neural network has input-output correspondence characteristic"

re: Captain Emacs - I know there is one of the tricks professors usually do is asking again if the statement from him or where he read it; and hope he will tell them the truth. However, in your example, if the student insists that it's from him, then you have to prove it in case you want to claim he was plagiarized. It is even more painful when the student paraphased them.
For example, Hetero-associate network architecture is a network with separate set of input and output neuron. If I insist this statement is from me and my experience. Nothing you can do to prove that this is a plagiarism

@Jake, this kind of game-playing is not a good way to think about research and scholarship. It will corrupt your thinking.

Given the comment stream here, I'll be happy to have you come back in a month or whatever and tell us what punishment you were given.

This isn't an answer, but I'll note that you have gotten a lot of "interest" here from some experienced people. You don't seem like a serious student to me, but someone who isn't really interested in learning, just gaming the system. If we notice it here, perhaps it has already been noted by your professors, in which case, your thesis might get some extra scrutiny. The ice is thin. Don't venture too far out on it.

Realistically, it's unlikely he reads all 10 theses cover-to-cover. But who knows, perhaps it's an element of the job he really enjoys, and prioritizes it.
You should write your thesis as if all parts of it will be read closely. It is impossible for anyone to tell you what sections to focus on for this reader. He could be a big methods guy, or he could decide he doesn't understand your methods in the slightest and focus on the discussion (for example).
I think the comment from Rdd is apt:

But they'll be better than you at knowing what they need to check to see if the thesis is good. Best to do it right rather than try to beat the system!

All your citations should be correct, but no, it's not really his job (at that level) to make sure you are citing correctly. Putting Smith and Jones (2011) when you meant Smith and Jones (2012) will not get you expelled.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment and recall that we can only move comments to chat once.

No, your dean does not read every thesis or check every reference. And this is true more broadly: when you go out into the workforce, you will find that no one will check every last detail of the work that you do. Reports, emails, software code, legal briefs, engineering analyses, the work a plumber does on your house, the work your dean does — all of these are done by people who know that no one will check everything they do, certainly not right away and in some cases not for a very long time, if ever. And yet, successful professionals and in some cases even just average tradespeople still deliver astonishingly error-free work products. Errors do occur sometimes, of course, but they are surprisingly rare if viewed from the premise you seem to be assuming.
I won’t get into an extended discussion of how the world manages to operate this way, but I do think it’s related to why bachelor theses can be correct without your dean needing to read them. It’s related to the fact that the motivation of the students writing the theses, like the motivation of most people doing work that they are good at and take some amount of pride in, isn’t to cheat or to “get away” with as much sloppiness and as little work as possible. Something to think about.

For a period of about 10 years, I gave a popular course on introductory crypto, with the relevant math rolled into it. I did also try to be progressive in what I asked students to do... and one feature, to get "buy-in", was to do semester projects of 10-20 pages (topics of the student's choice, with my approval). The enrollment was typically 130+, so the resulting stack of projects was a foot or two high. Yes, I read everything. Yes, I'm a fast reader, and, yes, having considerable familiarity with most of the background I could zoom through "the usual" stuff.
But, yes, I read them, and made comments. It seemed to me that it was "a good thing" to promise students that their work would be looked at carefully.
EDIT: (thanks @AzorAhai) I mean "cryptography and cryptanalysis", not cryptocurrency... Though, yes, some of the methods of cryptography and cryptanalysis are used nowadays in cryptocurrency stuff, and are useful in understanding it. Cryptocurrency was not apparently significant in 1995...

Then it's really confusing since to some people, for example you, it might be the widely known information but to others, it's expert information which needs a reference. How do I know about what my professor knows and doesn't know?

@Jake Let the papers you read be your guide.

I am not sure what do you mean. To be honest, some information I read from somewhere I forgot where and it's in my head when I write it down. For example, "black hole drags everything toward it". This is not my research for sure but I know it via the internet and don't remember the source. So how do I mark reference for things like that

Haha - Bitcoin was released in 2009! It could have been a ten-year period ending a year ago

@Jake You can see how other (more recent) papers cite the fact to trace back to its source.

I feel the motivation towards this question is not right. Especially with the OP quoting:
"If I insist this statement is from me and my experience. Nothing you can do to prove that this is a plagiarism."
If one wants to construct an undergrad thesis (which from my experience isn't mandatory in any college and only taken up by choice), they should do so with complete diligence. It shouldn't matter who sees what and who reads what. The thesis will be covering a good portion of your degree and by no means should you cut short the process.
In the off chance someone really does take up their time and go through your entire work only to find out few cites and statements are wrong is a complete waste of that person's time. This isn't a long answer question where the importance is given to certain part of the answer.
You should dedicate good time and make sure your entire report and research is without any flaw (as much as possible from your end).

I agree with you but want to point out that the prevalence of undergrad theses is strongly location dependent. In quite a few European countries for example they are an integral part of the degree and you cannot graduate without having written one.

Even in my alma mater, some degrees had theses, and others were optional

Oh okay, I feel I don't need to edit out that part now that someone can read your comment. Hope that is fine.

In Germany, (AFAIK) all bachelor degrees (except Art and design, they offen have equivalent final projects) have a mandatory thesis.

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


text:
Do I hold the copyright on test answers?
If I turn in a test with my work on it, is that work under copyright by me or the teacher? If the teacher does not want to give me the test contents, can I ask for my answers to the questions as intellectual property?
Also, my goal is to be able to see my answers on a test after I have taken it.
While Googling I could only find blogs/posts on avoiding copyright infringement, I had a hard time finding other resources.

This question strongly depends on individual circumstances because intellectual property rights depend on the university's intellectual property policy.  Probably the university wrote a policy that benefits itself.  I'm pretty sure we've had similar questions before.

Does your university forbid you from viewing your grades assessments? That seems pretty unusual.

@DanRomik Forbidding from viewing is unusual, but not wanting to give the exam back is more common, most often because the test questions don't vary too much from term to term.

@Teepeemm I’m aware of that. But OP just mentioned wanting to see the test.

In my university students have the right to see the exam and its evaluation, and to be taught the correct answer; they don't have the right to be given a copy of the exam if the instructor doesn't want to. In Spain at least this is stated in the student's rights law, so must be at least so in any University in the country, public or private.

You've not really said why you want to see your answers, and that really affects your chances.

I'm old enough that I hold the copyright on "True" and "False." Some of you owe me a whopping lot of money.

The University I went to (very large and well known in the US) maintained IP rights to all works produced by students as part of classwork, and even work done using University resources separate from classwork like computer labs.  I do not know if that is common in the US, but it came up in discussion at least the University maintained that it was.  This came up at least once when a grad student who was funding their own education ended up developing a piece of software as part of coursework with large commercial potential, and had to negotiate IP rights with the school to for it.

I think this question should be interpreted according to the goal you have:

my goal is to be able to see my answer on an assessment after I have taken it.

You could ask a lawyer about your precise rights under copyright law, this Q&A site is not a place to ask for legal advice and any answer is going to depend on your jurisdiction and the relevant law/case law for that jurisdiction.
However, regarding your goal, I think the approach trying to compel your instructors under some legalesque framework to return your assignment so that you can see your answers is a bad way to proceed.
Your instructor likely has a reason they do not want to return the completed work to you; I'm guessing the reason is to protect future exams/assessments by making it more difficult to share past years' responses with a future class. Alternatively it could be that they don't have the time to provide this to everyone and see it as unfair to provide the service just for you.
Maybe they have a good reason, maybe not, but you're best off explaining to your instructor the reasons you would like to see the assignment. You'll probably make more progress if you have pedagogical reasons ("I'd like to understand what I did right/what I did wrong") rather than grade-grubbing reasons ("I'd like to argue for points back").
Consider that a reasonable response by an instructor to a student who argued that their assignments must be returned to them for some legal reason might be to simply not have that student anymore. (my understanding of copyright law is that there is no basis for such a request, but I'm also arguing that there's no good reason for you to pursue that argument even if there was)

Re your last paragraph: instructors can turn away students, where you work? That seems unusual to me.

@FedericoPoloni More of a thought experiment.

In my many years as a student, I've had many good teachers and a few bad teachers. Unsuprisingly, the subset of teachers that didn't want us to see our tests after taking them was a subset of the bad teachers. Those teachers were completely impervious to the argument "I'd like to understand what I did right/what I did wrong". My conclusion was that they did not believe a student could possibly improve.

To the extent that there is creative work, such as a nontrivial mathematical proof or computer program, you most likely hold the copyright. The only exception would be if you explicitly relinquished that copyright. That does not, however, mean that an instructor is required to return their copy of the work to you. If you didn't make a copy before turning it in, or if you turned it in under the condition (known to you) that you would not be permitted to copy or publish it, you will have no recourse.

I think the last part is the actual key here. Irrespective of the question if answers to an assignment are copyrightable, there seems to be a misunderstanding about the concept of copyright. Copyright gives you the ability to allow or prevent the making of new copies of your work (work here means the abstract thing, not the physical object i.e. the paper it is written on). It does not give you any control over existing (legally obtained) copies. And handing in an exam to be graded sounds to me like a classic example of an implicit contract, transferring the ownership of that copy.

"you explicitly relinquished that copyright."  This could be a condition of enrollment at the university.

@mlk Ok, so I turned it in, can I take steps in the future that will make an assignment like an exam paper my property but I am letting my teacher borrow it? My goal is to be able to see my answer on an assessment after I have taken it. [edit] i dont have to be able to see the questions, since they are the teacher's property (i think)

@Evergreen That might be a matter for a separate question, or maybe even a separate site ([law.se] perhaps). As mlk said, though, copyright law will not help you here.

@Evergreen You would need to get the teacher to agree to your terms and I don't know any sane teacher who would do that. As someone who has given his share of exams, I would tell you immediately to either hand it in completely, no strings attached, or to not hand it in at all and fail the exam. If you want to remember your answers afterwards, either use the official way offered by the university (if there is any), or do what generations of students did before you and take some notes on a separate sheet during (if allowed) or immediately after the exam.

"Your ass belongs to me" tends to be a condition of postgraduate stuff. Particularly when scholarships are involved.

Imagine if a writer could go into a bookshop and demand copies of all their works. It's not going to happen, is it?

Copyright can only be applied to "creative works". Its purpose is to protect the financial interest of the creator in such works for a period of time.
It is doubtful, but not impossible, that a court would consider student assignments and exams as "creative" in any sense. Most such things deal with "common knowledge" even though not yet known to students, perhaps.
But an assignment to "write a poem on subject X" would end up with a creative work, though, perhaps, of questionable quality. Likewise some "open ended questions" might qualify, even in something like CS.
But an instructor would have no rights to any creative work produced solely by a student. If it is subject to copyright at all, the rights are held by the creator.

See: https://copyright.uslegal.com

The separate question, unrelated to copyright, is whether you have a right to feedback on what you write in a test. My opinion is that you do, indeed, and any sensible system will have a way to provide that. It doesn't mean, however, that you have a right to carry away a copy of what you turned in, but you should at least have an opportunity to speak with a professor on the quality of what you write there.
And if you think something you write for an exam is worthy of publication, there is no reason that you can't take those ideas and produce something based on it. For that, you will have copyright.

Even if it's covering common knowledge within a field, the particular expression of those ideas (e.g. in an essay or report) should be protected  by copyright.

Where I work, the issue you raise is not a matter of copyright but of university policy: students are given the right to collect marked assignments and midterms, and keep said work, precisely for the reasons you give and so they can assess their academic progress through the class.  Thus I would start by searching for such a policy at your school.  (Note that students can ask to see their marked copy of final exam but not keep it.)
IANAL but it seems highly unlikely that submitting an assignment paper transfers the copyright to the instructor, although the instructor holds the copyright to the actual assignment questions.

In my country (Sweden), the test is part of a government decision (a grade), and is therefore technically a document which must be publicly available upon request.
That is, anyone can ask for (a copy of) this document (other students, other teachers, etc). All finals are scanned and stored, but the duration required to keep it is 2 years, I think.
Note, though, this does not mean you lose copyright of your work; just that it must be available.

Your question must be interpreted with right to information law but not intellectual property rights etc. I have been in research work to place such a petition before the Concerned court as in Pakistan ( I'm from Pakistan) rule of law is a big challenge and I want to help my countrymen in this regard and had been in research works since 2-3 months. I found some rulings of Indian supreme court which had allowed the candidates to inspect as well as get certified copies of their answer papers. (Aditya case). It's all about the right to information. The only defence point from the opposite is it's the fiduciary rights thus cannot yeild the copies or allow the inspection of answer papers to the candidates this view is not covered by the right to information act.
Advocate High Court Malak Usman Rumi Tareen Pakistan.

Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please [edit] to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center.

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