text:
I wrote the code based on a paper's methodology; are there any legal problems with making it open source?
I coded the methodology based on the paper "Free Water Elimination and Mapping from Diffusion MRI" and I am curious if I am legally bound to take permission from the authors or the journal in making the code open source on Github?

It looks like you've accidentally created two accounts; follow the instructions here to merge them so that you can edit and comment on your own question.

If you do open-source it, you'll do a great service for research. Thank you!

You need to start by reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent.  That will help you ask a more informed question.  Questions are better when you do research before asking, so you can ask an well-informed and well-scoped question.  As it stands your question is too broad -- you're basically asking for an overview of intellectual property law, which seems like too much to ask for on this site.

Also, if you do have a more specific question, you might find a different set of useful comments on the Open Source SE site.

No. You have no obligation to get permission from the authors or journal to open source the implementation.

You should still contact the authors of the original paper and let them know. They will probably be happy to know somebody has brought their methods from theory to practice! (And they will probably point interested researchers to your GitHub code, too)

In addition to @D.W. 's suggestion, you should note you are actually asking about several distinct (albeit related) issues: 1. Writing and using your code at all, even if it were closed-source and offline 1. Open-source'ness, i.e. making the source easily available to people, gratis. 2. Publishing the code on GitHub specifically - they have terms and conditions which regard your legal rights vis-a-vis the source 3. Making the code Free Software, i.e. declaring that others are allowed to create derivative works and use it in other ways (e.g. according to some FOSS license).

You are not required to get permission to implement an idea you have read about in a paper, or to make it open source.
The paper is protected by copyright, but this only protects the text and images in the paper (the expression of the idea), not the idea itself. The copyright on the paper does not prevent you from creating your own realization of the idea in code and distributing it freely. You should also acknowledge the source of the idea by citing the paper in which you read about it, but this is an ethical requirement, not a legal one.
The exception to this is if the methodology in the paper is patented; in this case additional restrictions on what you can do will apply.

Software and abstract method patents are evil, so we hope scholars don't do that, right? *ducks*

The last paragraph depends a lot on the jurisdiction. In EU no software patents exist.

Arguably, copyright could be an issue if the paper gave a large body of code that you copied verbatim, or near-verbatim. But if all you are using is ideas, then copyright shouldn't apply. (IANAL)

So your answer is actually "You might be required to get permission; we can't tell you, as that depends on whether the scheme is patented or not".  That's pretty different from the summary in the first line of the answer.  The exception at the bottom of your answer is an awfully big one...

@Bakuriu: A good lawyer can write a patent that is not a "software patent" and protect something that looks exactly like an algorithm this way. Even for algorithms, you really need to determine whether they're patented or not before you release the code.

It might be nice to point out that it would be polite to ask permission even if it is not required.  Or simply thank them for the paper and state that you have attempted to implement their idea and would welcome feedback.  Acknowledgement somewhere in the project or source code would also be polite.  None of that is likely to be a legal requirement unless the paper has a license on it that mandates it.  It is what many may feel would be good academic practise though.

@PeterShor There should be no issue with releasing source code that implements a patented idea or technique. Source code is simply a different form of expression of the idea not a performance of it.  LAME, a popular open source MP3 encoder, releases their source code that describes a patented process, they do not ship or make available binaries though. It is up to the user to secure permission to use the patented technique.

IANAL and thus I won't give legal advice. Whether you have to ask them or not is irrelevant. Asking them is a courtesy which the authors will most certainly appreciate and might even cause them to endorse your project, maybe even as the official implementation which they might also contribute to.
In the unlikely event that they strictly deny you permission (maybe they already have their own implementation that they want to distribute commercially and thus they wouldn't want a free competitor) then is the correct time to take legal advice. Assuming you're working in an academic institution they most likely have a legal department which you could and should check on. Of course you can also do so before contacting the authors, maybe asking about the proper approach to not make you accidentally liable.
Just don't trust the internet for legal advice.

Might be best to check whether the information in the paper is covered by more than just copyright. In the US, for example, even mere algorithms can be patented, so implementing the algorithm in code, even though the code itself is all your work and copyrighted to you, can still be a patent violation.

I don't think the code itself violates the patent. I think actually running the code may be a patent violation.

@Joost: writing and running code for personal use that uses information from a patent should be fine. Distributing it (even as open source) could be a patent violation. Publishing images produced using it would be a grey area, but probably a violation. Using the code for non-personal use (ie, in just about any organization which might conceivably have access to MRI imaging) almost certainly would be a violation. IF there's a patent in the first place. Definitely something to ask a patent lawyer about, if there is.

@DewiMorgan Other open source projects, such as the LAME mp3 project , distribute source code that if compiled will preform a patented process, but their position is that the source code itself cannot violate the patent as it is merely a description of the process and thus they distributed it freely under an open source license.

@dev If your lawyer feels that's defensible in your jurisdiction, that might be viable. Legal advice MUST be the first step. Chances of LAME devs' arguments standing up in any technically literate court are slim to none, especially since they give links to compiled binaries: there's no "but we're using download.com!" defense in court. Also, if their "but it's only source code" argument were used on a port to an interpreted language, it'd be nonsense: and C interpreters do exist (CInt, Ch, etc). They only aren't sued as it's more profitable to hit up their users for license fees.

@DewiMorgan Ninth Circuit has already held that source code is expression. It's protected by copyrights not by patents. What it does may be patented but you are not performing a patented process by distributing a description of it which is all source code is.

@Dev - What are you on about? Writing books and songs is expression, too, but can also be copyright or patent infringement. Freedom of expression in creative endeavors is clear, but has nothing whatever with patent or copyright infringement.

IMHO you must cite their paper in your Github repository explicitly, but you are not required to get a permission.

This is an ethical and professional/academic obligation, but given the very explicit wording of the question, we should be clear that it is not a legal obligation.

It is neither an ethical, professional, academic, nor legal obligation to use Github for your open source project.

@emory: The original question said it was going to be on github.   I don't think the answer was saying the obligation was to use github, but that since you are using github, the obligation is to cite the source in your github repository.

Although the question asks for the legal obligations and not for the academical ethic standards, I suspect the second has a much stronger effect to the everyday practice. In academical circles, criminality is nearly unheard, violating the second is not. Thus, on my opinion, question doesn't focus the real problem.

Actually, if the legal situation is hazy, citing the work on GitHub may be asking for trouble (regardless of ethical considerations).

I can see no legal situation here, when the authors published their work it means that they have transferred the IP to the publisher! they could submit the work as a patent if they were no happy others implement their work. Having said that this does not mean people can implement the idea without citing the work it is absolutely unethical. So the common approach is to cite the paper in the Github repository and any other publications as a result of this implementation.

@PooyanJamshidi, that's wrong.  See the other answers.  Publishing involves giving the publisher certain copyright rights, but nothing about patents -- the technique could still be patented.


text:
Emailing potential PhD advisors (recent change in research interest)
I'm currently getting ready to apply to graduate programs in Chemistry, and am beginning to contact potential advisors. My problem is that until recently, I was planning to focus on field X, but have realized that I cannot see myself doing a PhD in this field.
After reading some papers in field Y, I am really excited about the possibility of doing research in this field, and have identified some potential advisors in field Y.
The problem is that all of my previous experience is in field X, and I don't really have any experience in field Y. Should I address my reasons for deciding not to pursue field X? And how do I demonstrate my sincere interest in field Y?

To demonstrate your interest in field Y, you can start by learning it, considering reviews, books, papers. If X and Y and not so separated, then it is not any problem, it depends also on the required background.

Some of the other students in my lab came from different fields. They always showed an interest in what we were working on even if they didn't have the technical knowledge just yet. I think if you let your potential advisor know that you are interested in their area of research, that you have some skills that they are looking for or can be just as useful in the new area, then you should be fine. Just let them know your desire to work in the field and the skills that you can bring to the lab. I don't think its necessary to specifically talk about why you are not interested in field X, but it is important to show that you can contribute to field Y. Do your homework on the lab and talk about specific projects that they have worked on. You don't need to be an expert, but if you ask intelligent questions about their projects, they tend to take that as a sign of interest. Also be ready to relate what you have done in field X to what they are doing in field Y. Often, students coming in from other fields provide a different prospective that ultimately makes the lab better and the research being produced stronger. Good luck.

I don't see much of a problem here. You've had a change of heart. It happens all of the time to many people. I had a change of heart no less than 5 times when I was an undergraduate.
You can demonstrate your interest in Field Y by approaching these potential advisors and telling them about your predicament. Tell them you've been in Field X long enough and want to go the route of Field Y. Tell them you're at a turning point and it's time to make a change sooner rather than later. I suspect they'd be happy to have you tag along with them.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How strict are paper revision deadlines?
I recently received a "revise and resubmit" decision for a submission to an Elsevier journal, and the deadline to resubmit is in about 5 weeks. Since I have to consult with my coauthors for my revision, and one of them is a professor who's not exactly fast in replying emails, I'm worried whether I'll be able to get a revision ready in time.
Is the resubmit deadline strict? Once the deadline passes and I don't make a resubmission, is the paper immediately rejected? Is it usually possible to ask for an extension?

If you expect problems with the deadline, then it is good to let the editor know as quickly as possible. In the end she decides what happens when you are too late. If she says the deadline is strict, then you have something to presure your coauthor. If she gives an extension then that is a solution too (but don't be too late for the extended deadline...)

@MaartenBuis this is not a comment but an answer!

The strictness of the deadline strongly depends on the journal and the context of publication.  For most papers to most journals, there is potentially a great deal of flexibility (assuming that you ask early and are polite about it).  The main exceptions that I have encountered are:

High-impact journals sometimes expect you to drop everything else on their behalf, and thus may give both a short deadline and little flexibility.
Articles submitted for a special issue sometimes need to hit particular dates in a production schedule, and thus may not have much flexibility to give.

But don't assume that in the case of non-special issues they may be able to "simply" postpone your contribution to the next issue. After all they would need to somehow "fill the pages" with other material (possibly with articles already scheduled for next issue and thus currently having a long deadline) - and they'd need to do so on rather short notice if you are late in communicating deadline problems.

@HagenvonEitzen For most journals that I have encountered, this is dealt with either by 1) the rather long times between acceptance and publication, when a paper sits in a queue waiting for its slot, or 2) being entirely electronic and not having to worry about number of pages in the first place.

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


text:
Does publishing in journals known as "predatory" hurt one's reputation?
Does publishing in what is known as a "predatory" (such as OMICS) journal diminish ones reputation? Do these publications help at all when applying for grants (or do they impede ones chance)?

Yes, your reputation is diminished, because people will think you couldn't get published any other way.  It will actively harm your chances at pretty much any interaction with reputable organizations, including grant proposals.  Don't do it.

(One of my pet peeves.) Publications can harm only passively. I guess you said actively to mean seriously / heavily / strongly; it's unlikely that any actions will be taken by the publication.

@PiotrMigdal: No, "actively" is the right word here. What jakebeal's sentence means is that publishing in a predatory journal will not merely fail to help one's chances, and not merely take effort away from things that will help one's chances; but rather, that it in itself will harm one's chances. This doesn't necessarily imply anything about the strength of the harm (except that it is enough to be worth mentioning). (If it makes you feel better, the "it" here refers to publishing, not publications. And publishing certainly is an action.)


text:
Should I get a master's in math before getting econ PhD?
I'm planning to apply to phd programs in economics and I'm hoping to eventually work in academic research on economic theory, social choice theory, welfare economics or related areas. I'm wondering if doing a masters in math before applying to economics phd would be worthwhile? Seems like it might be nice to have the math stuff down really solid, so I can focus on economics in grad school.
By the time I finish undergrad (in U.S.), I will have taken the following math courses (one semester each): Multivariable calc, linear algebra, abstract algebra, real analysis, topology, optimization, probability-statistics, basic numerical analysis with matlab programming. Econ courses that I'll have taken: year of micro, year of macro, year of econometrics, year of graduate micro.

"Should I get a master's in maths...?" yes. :p

The main problem with taking a course/major/degree in a subject like math, in the hopes of it improving your ability to perform at some other field, is that the math program will most typically not have been designed to cater the curriculum to the tools that will be most helpful to you in your future career. So effectively a 2 year degree program in math might be equivalent to 3-6 months of "math for Economists", or whatever degree program you might seek. While math is useful in many fields, exactly what specific kind of math is useful varies tremendously!
A simple example of this is statistics. Most math programs may only require 1-2 classes in any kind of statistics (Northeastern's Applied Math program, for instance), and beyond introduction to statistics the methods used in one field are often very different than one taught in another. Depending on how you choose your electives, you could very well come out of the program with little more than the equivalent of "I took some extra math classes as an elective" during your undergraduate degree, as far as actual ability to perform useful research at a PhD level is concerned. I'm not going to say it's a total waste of time - but it's kind of a weird "side quest" to go on.
Its not that you wouldn't learn anything useful - it's just that the time would not be spent very efficiently if "being a great non-mathematician" is your end goal. In comparison, you might instead take advanced math classes or an independent study while still an undergraduate (especially if you can identify someone with advanced knowledge of math useful to economists).
You would also do well to look at prospective PhD programs and see how they handle classes. Many PhD programs in the US require you to take advanced classes catered towards your degree, while also allowing/requiring you to take some advanced classes in an area outside your key classes - and you could use those slots to work on improving your relevant mathematical knowledge.
I would only remind you that everyone contemplating high level research - even mathematicians - wishes they had a stronger background in math, because there's always more math to learn and you'll have long died of old age before you learned all that might be of potential use to you. But if you plan to use math as a tool to aid other goals, then you can expect to pick it up like any other tool as you progress in your work.

I agree, I was once had the pleasure of meeting Jeffrey Wooldridge (a famous econometrician) and asked if he sometimes struggled with math, indeed his answer was yes

My father, a retired Civil Engineering professor, used to say that it was easier for a good undergraduate math major to succeed in a graduate economics program than for an economics major (without heavy math). His idea was that "math" was the most critical part of advanced economics, and the math students had a head start.
This advice would apply to graduate math majors as well.

I disagree completely with this, what good is the ability to compute a horrible Riemann integral of a function if you do not understand why, say, consumer surplus is a measure of welfare. Math in economics is tool to describe the world... It's not the actual goal of any analysis

@Repmat: My father (the civil engineering professor) said, "The concepts are easy for most people, the calculus is hard." (for indifference curves, elasticities, etc.


text:
Why is Scottish BSc (Hons) 4 years while English BSc (Hons) is 3 years?
Why BSc (Hons) in Scotland (in Computer Science but in other subjects probably too) is 4 years long and in England BSc (Hons) is 3 years long? Does it cover more material? Does it mean that MSc in Scotland is shorter than in England? In general, how long is MSc in these countries? Is it 1 years or 2 years?

@Davidmh Really? Aren't they usually 1 in both? For example: http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/admissions/msc_computer_science/

@Davidmh Most Master programs in the UK I know are only 1 year.

Yes, my Scottish taught MSc was a year

This is the UK we're talking about.  Does there need to be an explanation beyond "That's how we've always done it"?

In Scotland, you can attend university after completing Highers, which are taken in the same year as AS levels are taken in England. Therefore, many Scottish students leave school a year earlier. Theoretically, the first year of university in Scotland is less advanced than the first year of university in England (although speaking from experience, I don't believe that this is practically the case). In recognition of this fact, it is often possible for English students to enter their course directly into second year, with a higher grade requirement.

I have a vague recollection (from quite some time ago) that Scottish school-leavers who'd completed their sixth year (CSYS then, Advanced Higher now) could enter in the second year of university as well. The Edinburgh page suggests this is still the case but isn't very explicit on the matter. I never encountered someone who planned to do it, though...


text:
Study expanded from three to five rounds: How to write this down?
Update
I will suggest treating the email communication as a figure and adding a note to the figure caption. IMO a caption is overkill when the appendix title is sufficient, but it's an ok tradeoff to cover the bases.
Would still love to have other ideas to have another option or two.
(To be clear, I am not the student.)
Short question
When a study expands beyond the time communicated to participants, how does it affect reporting the results in the examples of communications with participants?
Background
The student conducted a study designed for three rounds. During Round 3 the study was expanded to four rounds; and in Round 4 it was expanded to five rounds.
All communication with participants up to Round 3 set the expectation that there would be only three rounds (i.e., letters to recruit participants, to select pilot study participants, and to give instructions for Rounds 1 and 2 in the actual study).
The appendices have copies of all of the communications. The earliest communications mention three rounds. None of the communications mentions the reason for expanding from three to four rounds or from four to five rounds.
Do you alter the early communications by inserting square brackets with corrected text as you would for a quote, such as “the 3[5]-round study”? Replace all mentions with a generic placeholder, such as “the  study”? Add an explanatory note for the reader? Or just leave everything as is? Or ...?
If it makes a difference, the paper follows APA style. The university has no standards for this situation.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it seems too specific to quantitative social science research.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's not about academia.

Are you saying the academia stack exchange is limited to quantitative research?

@shake baby ... Umm, the question is about a dissertation. How is not about academia?

https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic

@einpoklum: I disagree. While this question may stem from a social-science problem, it is actually mainly about reporting scientific results. The latter may be again specific to the field of social sciences (though I doubt this, see my answer), but even then it would still be on topic.

@RJo: No, I'm not saying the site is about qualitative research, I was just pointing out that it seems to be a question about the content of your research in a certain domain, and the answer would involve domain-specific knowledge.

Wait - you didn't explain to your own participants why the number of rounds were increased??? Also, all this is almost certainly covered by IRB protocols, and I expect your IRB would want you to explain in detail both to them and to the participants why the parameters of the study were changing.

@Bryan - I am not the student. And yes, the student did explain to the participants via written communications why the rounds needed to go from 3 to 5. And the explanation is in the body. My question was about annotating the communications in the appendices.

Just describe what actually happened like you did to us. Also explain why this happened. There is no reason to slavishly adhere to some style that doesn’t fit special situations like yours.
In general, your thesis (and any other scientific publication) should contain everything needed to reproduce and assess the results. As the circumstances you describe are certainly relevant to this (e.g., participants may drop out of the study after prolongation), you cannot possibly leave this unmentioned.

Agreed, must mention what happened and have done so. The point is not to avoid mentioning it, but to account for it in an way that will avoid confusion when someone is looking (for example) at the sample communications in the appendices, and to not overexplain. Your reply prompted an idea on how to handle the situation.


text:
When is a student's failure to pay their editor an ethics violation?
Some years ago, I was stiffed for $100, but I let it go and took steps in my business model to be sure it never happened again. However, my colleague, is being stiffed for $600, an amount that is pretty painful to ignore.
Situation

The university provides a list of approved editors to students. (The editors are not university employees.)
Student pays deposit for editing their doctoral proposal.
When invoiced for the balance, student ignores the editor. They will not
respond to texts, emails, or phone calls.
Student is still in the doctoral process.
Student is also a prof at a different university.

Is any part or parts of what has happened an ethics violation that can be reported? If yes, to who (the chair? DSEM? student's advisor? Other?)
Clarifications
Editing Context
This is a response to questions from viewers of this post who might find it helpful to have more context. Please take note this is in a U.S. context.

DSEM = Dissertation Scholarship Editorial Manager. This person approves the readiness of a study for the next step at different stages (i.e., ready to write the proposal, ready to defend the proposal, ready to defend the final, ready for dean's review).

At the start of their writing, all students are advised to plan for an editor because in the end, all final doctorals must be submitted to DSEM with an editor's signed certificate of compliance with APA and university standards.

Some students take this immediately to heart, starting with the doctoral justification. Others do nothing until either the chair or DSEM insists on it.

Chairs who take their role seriously will know early on which students need immediate editor help to ensure that DSEM approves the work at every stage. Other chairs will "pass the buck" and let DSEM reject the manuscript over and over.

Although students do not need to use an editor from the approved list, it's high risk because students do not know what they do not know about the expected standards or process and therefore how to vet an editor's qualifications.

In addition to proofreading and copyediting for APA standards and university Handbook standards, it is very typical to provide coaching on how to synthesize, "connect the dots" within and across chapters, write transitions, and more.

On occasion, the university does contract directly with an approved editor on a student's behalf. This is not the case in this situation.

Debtor's Academic Experience and Credentials
To the degree that a LinkedIn profile can be trusted, the debtor claims to be a

graduate with a PsyD in Industrial Organization at the same university related to this post;
current adjunct instructor at a different university and a technical college, and an adjunct professor at a community college;
past dean of academics at a business school; and a
past faculty program advisor at a different university where they provided subject-matter expertise in "... global financial markets, legal environments, ethics, ... ."

It's possible the school will consider this a matter outside of their domain, since you're not one of their contractors.  Whoever provides the list to students might want to know, however, since presumably this is symbiotic relationship.  Small claims is pretty familiar with contractors being ignored, and doesn't require a lawyer.

Regrettably, this is across state lines, so small claims is not feasible.

Where is this? Usually people aren't profs without doctoral degrees. Why is someone needing to edit it? Is it a scientific or copy-editing service?

To Azor Ahai - I do not know the details for this prof/student, but it is not unusual for someone to be teaching at a U.S. university and to be working on their doctoral or to be working on a second doctoral. Also, it involves editing for APA standards, university Handbook standards, and coaching on how to synthesize, "connect the dots" within and across chapters, write transitions, and more. Believe me, it is way beyond proofreading or copy editing.

To Anonymous M - I do know that the student is an adjunct prof at a different university. As in most cases, this student looked for editorial help at the insistance of their prof who recommended this editor from a list. If the student were at the same university, it would be easier to try the guilt trip.

@RJo I would call that quite unusual. It's usual for someone to teach while a grad student, but that's not a "prof." Second doctoral degrees are also exceedingly rare.

What field is this? This setup is strange for me.

Also, what's DSEM?

The doctoral is for a dissertation (PsyD, not PhD, my error) for Psychology in Organizational Development and Leadership. As if that were not unseemly enough, the university where the student teaches has a religious affiliation. ~ As for DSEM, it means Dissertation Scholarship Editorial Manager.

Maybe they should be described as a "teacher" rather than as a "prof"?  I mean, their institution might assign them whatever job-title they'd care to, but use of that job-title in a general-context might be misleading.

@RJo: Those clarifications should be edited into the question.

@AzorAhai-him- In the US, typically only a master's degree is required to be a professor at a community college or for-profit-type "universities". This may not even be required in vocational fields.

@user71659 that is why I said “usually,” and I think the matter bears clarification either way

Point 1 may need some clarification. Is the University's role in the exchange simply to provide a(n informational) list of vetted editors ("here's a list, do with it what you will"), or is there additional involvement? (e.g. is the University involved at all with coordinating communication between the parties, or involved with setting rates or handling money?) -- From what I'm reading, the current answers assume the University simply provides the lists and then washes their hands of the matter. Answers if the University has more involvement may differ.

Why in the world would an editor in this situation provide edited copy before payment in full?

Anecdote: I once got a substantial amount of money owed by just writing a legalese sounding letter telling the other person to pay up. Didn't even contain a threat to send a lawyer after them (that would have been step 2). Use his work address if you don't have a home address.

Do professional debt collectors not exist where your are? That's exactly what they exist for

If you want a place to report someone's unpaid debt, in such a way that future potential creditors are warned, that's what credit agencies are for.  Likewise, others providing editing services may be well advised to demand payment in advance,or at least a larger deposit, or to run a credit check on customers before extending them credit.

I'm responding as a dissertation and faculty editor with various types of relationships with universities (approved editor, designated editor, and on the payroll).
First, this is not merely a case of ethics: theft of services is a crime and your friend could simply report it to the police, which would undoubtedly get the debtor's attention. In fact, a simple letter stating that intention might be enough to get the bill paid.
The ethics involved here are more general rather than pertaining specifically to academia. Along the lines of "If you see something, say something." If your friend does not report the debtor to the university, that sends him the message that he can get away with theft. Assuming that the debtor is willfully refusing to pay his bill (and not, say, incapacitated), he has a character flaw that is likely to be repeated in future contexts. Any current or future employer would not be well served by employing him. In that sense, it's a service to the university and society to report him.
I agree with Graham that the editor who is a victim of theft would be justified in reporting the incident to the student's department, especially since the university maintains a list of approved editors. The editor does have in some sense a relationship with the university despite not being on the payroll. It's in the university's interest to stop incidents like this to keep this DSEM system moving smoothly. Otherwise this debtor could very well cheat his next editor.
Holding the debtor accountable is the right thing to do morally, and anyone who is aware of the situation should exert whatever influence they have to correct it. I see no reason why the student's advisor could not have an informal conversation with him about the bill.
I would try the following solutions, in this order:
(1) Letter to the student stating the intention to take action to collect the bill.
(2) Speak with the student's advisor.
(3) Letter to the department chair.
(4) Report it to the police.

I have accepted Eggy's answer because IMO it illuminated the nuances in the original question, other answers, and comments, and was supported by the context of Eggy's background. ~ This was a hard call. ~ I think the topic will remain popular, and I invite StackExchange Academia posters to keep weighing in.

Whilst there are certainly ethical issues around paying debts, the ethics processes in universities are not really there as a mechanism for adjudicating ordinary commercial disputes like unpaid invoices.  A claim for an unpaid invoice can be pursued in the small claims court in your jurisdiction and that is the appropriate forum for it.  Sometimes invoices are unpaid because there is a dispute about the delivery of the service pertaining to the invoice, and these are the types of issues that are resolved in small claims court.  It is unlikely that a university would want to wade into the details of a dispute over service provision and payment, and so it is unlikely that the university would consider this issue to fall within the scope of its ethics policy.

Never
Failing to pay one's personal debts may be immoral or illegal, or even a violation of personal or business ethics, but it has nothing to do with academic ethics - even if the debt is for academic-related services.  And any other kind of ethics is outside the scope of this site.
Academic ethics might be relevant to the question of whether it's ethical to use a third-party editor for academic work, but I don't see it as having anything to do with the financial side of such an arrangement.
If your colleague tries to "report" this person to the student's advisor, employer, or any official at either university, I would expect them to say: "That is a matter between you and X, it has nothing to do with me or the university.  Goodbye."
(The other alternative, if they have a strict interpretation of FERPA, would be: "I can neither confirm nor deny that there is any student named X affiliated with this university.  Goodbye.")
Actually, in some jurisdictions it is illegal for a creditor to reveal the existence of a debt to any third party for purposes of collecting it.  So your colleague must tread very carefully.
By analogy, look at what happens when a student owes money to the university itself (overdue tuition, library fines, what have you): the university might withhold any further educational services (by preventing the student from taking classes), but I have never heard of them invoking any kind of academic ethics procedure.  If they don't do it for money owed directly to them, they surely wouldn't do it for money owed to an unrelated third party.

Hmmm. There is ethics beyond a very narrow view of "academic ethics".

@Buffy: Sure, but I believe it's also beyond the scope of this site.

To Nate - Yes, I struggled before posting this query because it seemed a gray area. I am finding the responses helpful and am very appreciative of those who have weighed in. I hope they are also find the query helpful for their own academic purposes.

And (@Buffy) some universities in some countries consider their remit to be rather broader than what I at least consider matters of academic ethics and behaviour.

It's not clear to me the question is limited to academic ethics. Oh well.

If you were asked to write a job reference for such a student and one of the questions was along the lines of "do you have any reason to believe that the student is dishonest or unethical" what do you write?  IMHO there is an academic issue here if an academic may be aware of the situation.

@DikranMarsupial: If I'm writing the reference in my capacity as a professor, then I would only report instances of unethical behavior that had been adjudicated as such by the university (assuming that institutional policy allows me to report them at all).  I certainly would not report uncorroborated accusations from an unknown third party.

@DikranMarsupial: Straying into general ethics, I think failure to pay a debt is unethical only if the borrower incurred the debt with the prior intention to never pay it; or if they accept that the debt is valid, and have the means to pay, but do not.  In this case, I have no knowledge of the student's state of mind on entering the bargain; nor whether the validity of the debt is in dispute; nor what the student's financial means may or may not be.

@NateEldredge _1 if the student told you that they intentionally failed to pat a valid debt, what then?  My point was that these things are never completely clear cut, and some judgement is likely to be needed in some cases.  There are cases where academics are aware for sure that students have done unethical things (and e.g. obtained criminal records), at which point the reference question can be quite difficult to deal with from an ethical perspective.

@DikranMarsupial I'd probably still leave it out of a reference. People grandstand, and say strange things when they're in debt or under stress, I could well believe a student who was struggling would make references to "dodging debt collectors" or something similar. I guess it depends on how much they went into it. Generally, for stuff that I don't know about personally, I take the most charitable interpretation of their actions. If the job wants to know about their financial status, they can run a credit check. Broadly my role is to speak to their academic ethics.

@lupe that still leaves the question when you know they have a criminal record (perhaps that is relevant to the job).  Nate's comment was useful as it suggests a way of addressing the question, while making it clear that you are only answering relative to academic ethics, however I am still not completely convinced that is an ethical thing to do in a wider sense as when writing a reference you are doing it for both the candidate and the employer (IMHO).

@DikranMarsupial - that's fair, and I'm not totally sure on the ethics of addressing that, I think it's an interesting discussion though! In the circumstances, I'd be pleased to be constrained by the university legal team on what I could say. On one hand, a student is presumably past whatever punishment has been assigned to them, and therefore should be seen as rehabilitated, and the criminal record system is not great. On the other, there are definitely crimes that, if I knew someone had committed, would make me extremely unwilling to write a reference. It's super interesting

@lupe: On that note, there are jurisdictions with "ban the box" laws, which forbid potential employers from asking about a candidate's previous criminal record, or from using it as a basis for employment decisions, or severely restrict when and how they can do so.  I don't know what happens if a reference discloses the criminal record - maybe the employer simply has to ignore it - but it would seem to defeat the purpose of such laws.

@NateEldredge -. I don't think there's any circumstance under which it's reasonable for me to disclose something like this in a reference, but I could see circumstances under which I'd refuse to write one, so that makes it more complicated still :p - but, yeah, I'd be seeking advice from the University before doing any of this

It may not be directly actionable by the university.  However if the student is failing to respond, it is perfectly justifiable to directly contact their advisor at the university they're a student at, their departmental head at the university they're a student at, and their departmental head at the university they're a faculty member at.  Phrase it as "I'm very sorry, but I can't get hold of them and perhaps they've moved house and you're the only other contact point I can think of" or something like that, which makes it all sound reasonable and polite.  But be very clear that you're trying to contact them because they owe you money for work on their course and they haven't responded to you.
As a faculty member, it also becomes easier to visit their actual university to demand payment in person.

At any point when the student attests to the school that the unpaid work is their own
This answer has come to me after considering the answers and the comments from other posters, as well as my understanding that students must attest to the work being their own.
Here is my line of thinking on when failing to pay the editor (or a fact checker or anyone else who was hired to help the student) crosses the line from a contract dispute to an ethics violation.

The editor has provided services that the student accepts (in essences, approves).

However, the student cannot attest to "owning" the effort until the service has been paid for.

To attest that all of the work is theirs is true only when they have, indeed, paid for all of the work. If they have not paid for the work, then they cannot ethically claim ownership of the entire work.

Depending on the institution, the student may not be asked to attest to the "their" work until they pass their final oral defense. In others, they might be attesting to "their work" at several major gates in the process.

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


text:
Peer assessments critical of nervous speakers: better to redact or send as-is?
In the projects of one of my courses, I have asked the students to provide peer assessments of the presentations (recorded as videos) of other groups. Peer evaluations is something I have introduced recently: with classes online I wanted to find a way to encourage students to watch the presentations of other groups. Groups have 4–5 members. The evaluations are anonymous and are shared with the evaluated group in full. In general the system has worked well, with perhaps one exception ...
As part of the peer assessment, a number of categories were provided. One of these related to the quality of the presentation. I've noted that in a number of cases, the students have commented about the lack of confidence of a specific speaker affecting the overall presentation quality. In certain cases there are several comments about the lack of confidence of a particular speaker affecting the quality of the presentation; in some cases the comment clearly indicates which speaker is referred to.
As the professor of the course, I personally would not comment on such issues as I also have (had) my own demons regarding public speaking, and I think such a comment might be counterproductive in terms of knocking a student's confidence; in general I would try to be positive in such situations based on the personal experience that generous comments helped my own confidence.
I'm wondering if I should edit these peer assessments to "censor" such comments about students who are nervous when speaking. On the one hand, it feels a bit harsh to criticise someone for something they find difficult to control, and I worry about a student being troubled by such comments. On the other hand, I dislike the idea of censoring honest feedback; the categories are associated with grades, and removing such comments might make the grade seem unfair; also perhaps I also misjudge the situation and such feedback can be constructive in a way?
My question is about whether or not such comments are constructive, and if not, would it be justifiable and/or wise to remove or censor them in the peer assessments?
(I have also thought about changing the comment so that it is not clear which speaker is being spoken about, but with such small groups I think it will be clear in any case.)

Don't confuse peer assessment, which affect grades, with peer feedback, which needn't. The comments are useful as feedback and, since your students are probably inexperienced at such presentations need a lot more practice to become skilled at it. "You seem nervous" is useful to hear, but nervousness shouldn't affect grading. In fact, being effective in spite of it is a good thing.
I once had a student who stuttered so badly that he was difficult to understand. One of the requirements in the course was that each team member had to be part of the project presentation. He did what was necessary.
And, I think that peer assessment should be filtered through the professor rather than applied in a mechanical way. If a grading related assessment is unfair, the professor needs to moderate it. And students should also get feedback on their feedback so that they learn how to do it better. Your students are probably inexperienced in presentations, but they are also probably inexperienced in giving constructive feedback.
And when possible, feedback as well needs to be filtered as necessary. Some happens outside the professor's view of course, but the feedback needs to support learning both for the giver and the receiver.

OP asks whether the comments are constructive, and this answer addresses that (affirmatively). However, OP also raises the question of whether it is appropriate for them to censor feedback that is not constructive, and this answer doesn't address that. I.e.: granted that the feedback in this case is constructive, should the instructor censor feedback in a case in which the feedback is not constructive, or is actively counterproductive?

@Ceph, yes, feedback should also be filtered through the professor when possible.

I do not see any reason why a comment like "the speaker was nervous" or "the speaker lacke confidence" should be censored, so I would not censor it.

it feels a bit harsh to criticise someone for something

This is not technically criticism; it also is not really useful, or harmful.

something they find difficult to control

Speaking with the appearance of confidence is something that is achieved with practice.  So for most people, they can control it by practicing.

I am highly skeptical of peer assessment in general, and I hope you provided training on what students should include before you had them do it.

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


text:
International standards relating to a professor publishing a student's thesis work without the student as co-author
I am looking for international standards that speak specifically of a professor taking the thesis work of an ex-student that they had supervised and publishing a journal paper on that work (and just that work) without the student's name.
This relates to a specific case that I am aware of where the official university finding essentially admits that the aforementioned incident did indeed take place (it is largely undeniable), and quotes some generic definitions and policies regarding plagiarism, but finds that the aforementioned incident does not imply plagiarism and/or academic misconduct (due mainly to a supposition that the student did nothing more than grunt work, which I don't believe to be true at all, which contradicts the university's own expectations for the academic title obtained by the student, etc.).
The finding is an obvious attempt to sweep the case under the carpet.
However, the fact that this is clearly a case of plagiarism is sort of "folklore" to me and I cannot find something authoritative to back it up (lots of blog posts, etc., but no statement that speaks specifically to this sort of case written by an authority that an official from a well-respected university would be reluctant to explicitly discount or contradict).
Aside from my gut, my question then is: does this sort of scenario constitute plagiarism and/or academic misconduct with respect to some specific international standard?
(I would very much appreciate answers with pointers to a statement from a well-known professional organisation, reputable university, high-profile journal, etc. The specific area is Computer Science, just in case.)

The fact that the university expects students to do more than just grunt work to obtain an academic title does not imply that a student who obtained an academic title did more than grunt work. I have no doubt that there are MSc and in particular BSc theses where more or less every non-trivial result has been supplied by the supervisor. Supervisors and examiners may be a lot more generous and compassionate than you assume.

Presumably you mean published standards. You won't find any. In fact, in the US you won't find even a national standard as we have 50 states with their own standards and thousands of independent universities that may or may not have thought to have a standard. There is a general moral sense, of course, but even that isn't universal and many people will disagree. What you want, is your own, published standard, based on ethical principles. Yes, the ethical principles exist and are widely, if not universally, shared.

It is hard to prove the non-existence of something, but if there is a lack of international standards, I would be happy with "the next best thing", including, for example, the standards published by reputable universities, publishers, journals or organisations that speak specifically to this case. (If the ethical principles exist and are widely shared, then it seems likely that there must some sort of paper trail to evidence that.)

Journals/conferences or arXiv and other repositories may have explicit rules regarding plagiarism. Since you mention that the field is computer science, the list below has a few pointers.
If the university has found that the plagiarism incident took place, there should be emails or other paper trails that document the incident (or the MSc thesis itself). Such document can be shared with the editor of the journal where the work is submitted, even after acceptance or publication. If the editor does not investigate, it would be always possible to repeat with the next editor as new editors may have some power over previously accepted papers. (Of course, in the editor investigates, do not keep sending the complaints to new editors if you are unhappy with the first investigation).

For IEEE conferences and publications, the page https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/plagiarism/plagiarism.html appears to be the official go-to document
For instance http://cvpr2020.thecvf.com/submission/main-conference/author-guidelines has a pointer pointing to the link in the previous bullet.
the AMS (Americam Mathematical Society) at http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics has "The knowing presentation of another person's mathematical discovery as one's own constitutes plagiarism and is a serious violation of professional ethics. Plagiarism may occur for any type of work, whether written or oral and whether published or not." The Committee on Professional Ethics of the AMS is a possible body that would deal with plagiarism complaints.
https://arxiv.org/help/moderation "Rights to submit material. Submissions to arXiv must be the author’s original work, and users must have the right to grant the rights contained in the selected license. Users must ensure the submission does not, to the best of their knowledge, infringe upon anyone's copyright. Users should not submit comments by referees. Users should not submit plagiarized material."
https://www.comsoc.org/publications/ieee-communications-society-policy-plagiarism-and-multiple-submissions "pre-publication author misconduct, such as double-submission or plagiarism, will result in rejection of the manuscript(s) and a minimum 6 month ban on submissions to fully-owned IEEE Communications Society publications by the author(s)"
The exact sentence "All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors" has many matches on google. It may come from a COPE document that is being reused for various conferences/journals ethics document.

That last point is very useful, thank you!

There is no international standard because authorship practices vary.
COPE is the closest thing to a standards organization, but they do not publish authorship standards, or any other kind of standard.
References:
https://publicationethics.org/files/Recognise_Potential_Authorship_Problems.pdf
https://publicationethics.org/files/u7141/best_practice_for_issues_around_theses_publishing%20(1).pdf
Academia varies more than you think it does – The Movie (why there are no standards)
Publishing a student's thesis without their name is certainly unethical.

COPE is a useful pointer, thank you. I don't find any concrete documents that speak to this particular case, but this is precisely the type of organisation I am looking for. They also allow for submitting cases to be publicly adjudicated, which might be a direction to pursue if all else fails.

If it ends up that you do not agree with the university's standards, the publisher or journal may also have their own ethical guidelines. A publisher may not really have the power to independently investigate the case, but to me it sounds plausible that publishing a student's thesis work as the PI's sole work may be a violation.

If the student contributed anything non-trivial to the paper, then there is no doubt
that he/she has to be a (co-)author. Every good scientific
practices document I've ever seen agrees on that (with the caveat that
the meaning of "non-trivial" depends on the subject area). But the
crucial point is that the university claims that the student did not
contribute anything non-trivial. Now suppose this is true. Is the
student then still entitled to be a co-author? BTW, it would be very
useful to know more about the type of the thesis (BSc, MSc?) and the
grade (above or below average?).

@Uwe, it was somewhere between BSc and MSc. I don't have access to the grade, but we could assume a perfect grade.

On top of getting the paper retracted by the editor as explained above,  each research institute will have his rules. Most of the time, those rules can be enforced by law.
Look at the good scientific practices document of the university. That will be the official document that a court would have to refer to. There is probably an ombudsman in charge of the first steps, ultimately a lawyer might be involved.


text:
How to train students to write high-quality research papers?
As someone supervising postgrad students, I wonder what is the best way to train these students to write high-quality research papers?

The best way seems to be through coauthorship but ...
On the one hand I can be hands-off and rather give them feedback as best as I can but let them do most of the work themselves, sort of like a "sink or swim" strategy.
On the other hand I can be hands-on and rewrite the paper (or large parts of it) and hope that they learn from the example I give.
On the one hand I want them to learn to write papers without me some day and I want them to learn as quickly as possible to take load off me.
On the other hand I want us to publish in the best place possible with as little stress as possible.
On the one hand I want them to see the peer review comments from what they themselves have written.
On the other hand I do not want them to be discouraged by the peer review system early on and do not want to submit papers I know we could have written better.
On the one hand I want them to get confidence by being published and presenting work at good venues.
On the other hand I wonder if they need to get there themselves to get that confidence boost.

At the moment I'm very hands on. There's a few factors for this: I don't like submitting papers that are not up to a certain standard, I'm a native English speaker in a non-English speaking country with non-native speaking students, publications are a high priority for me, etc.
But recently a friend/colleague warned me that I should not be so hands-on with the writing of the papers of my students. He pointed to recently graduated researchers in my area that published good work as students but who struggled after leaving their PhD supervisor saying their supervisor did them no favours in the long term ... that by being so hands on, while the students have success getting published and so forth with me, I'm not really doing the most important thing a good supervisor should do: making myself obsolete.

My question is how to train students to write good research papers and in what ways can I balance being hands-on and hands-off?
I'm also interested in methods not directly involving coauthorship.

We're talking about Ph.D students here I assume? not undergrads?

In my experience working with (European) graduate students, a big step was teaching them the structure and logic of writing a paper. Early on, for the first few drafts (that they wrote), my response was generally a one-page outline that was how I thought the paper should be structured. Once they got the hang of the logic and flow needed to lead readers through the paper, the rest was just finding the right words (by far the simpler task). So, focus first on the logic and flow to make the point(s) properly.

@M'vy, mostly postgrads, yes, but the question generalises I feel.

How much time do you spend with them reading good and bad examples of writing?  How much time do you spend discussing how badly written published papers could be better?

@Walter This could also just mean you're bad at teaching.

Since best way to learn writing is writing, making them do and giving them feedback is not that bad as you describe it.

Your goal of teaching students to write well is fundamentally at odds with your goal of publishing high-quality work quickly.  Which goal is more important to you?

@A.W.Grossbard Your comment assumes (implicitly and incorrectly) that my experience relates only to my own studends.

@JeffE, do you not consider a well-written paper to be part of that high quality work?

I have 0 experience on writing research papers. If I wanted to learn how to write one, I would look at sample research papers and how it is structured. Then I would fill in the details of each section to provide flow.

This question might also have some answers here: [https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19756/how-can-we-promote-better-writing-skills-in-academic-education/19773#19773]

@AntonioVargas Of course I do! The problem is with the desire for speed. Learning to write well takes time. If you don't hage time you dan just write the paper yourself, but then how will yur students learn to do it?

@JeffE Ah, I understand what you mean.

You have too many hands.

For what subject? For science I would say, first step is to get excellent results. The paper is then the easy part.

edit: To clear a misunderstanding that might have arisen (see the answer of Kimball): the papers described here were not solo-papers. Neither me nor my advisor would ever have the idea to write a paper together and then put only one name on it...

My instructor did a really good job with that (and is still doing it), so I'll explain here approach as I experienced it:
For our first paper, we were sitting in her office, she wrote it and asked my opinion from time to time. I was still really new to everything and agreed most of the time, but I also already learned about some questions that should be considered and, of course, I learned the style she was using first-hand.
For the second paper, we started in the same way. At some point, she told me that I should write a part (the proof of a theorem, a short paragraph,...) myself. Of course we discussed the content first, but I was responsible for writing it down. I already had the first part of the paper that we wrote together to use as a starting point, to adjust my style to it, but I was still ultimately responsible for it myself. Once I finished it, she looked over it, gave me comments and asked me to write a new version. And a new one. And a new one,... until it looked just as good as the rest of the paper she wrote. Of course it would have been easier for her to just write it down herself, but doing it this way I learned how to write myself and I had the success of having something I wrote myself in a paper. (Yes, I had to adjust it a few times, but ultimately I did write the final version that we published)
For the third paper, she told me to write it completely myself. Once again we went through a long process of her commenting on things and me correcting it, but in the end I had a paper that I wrote myself, and I felt really proud of it.
After that, she got me some review jobs, so that I could learn what to look for in a paper, how to recognize strong parts and flaws and (I assume) so that I don't just copy her style but also see other authors and learn from them.
All in all, she did a really good job and with only three publications yet I feel like I am now able to write a paper on my own.
Now let's end with some general disclaimers: The approach given above assumes a motivated student that wants to produce good quality papers and is willing to adjust it until it looks really nice. A lazy student who just wants to increase his paper count with the least effort possible is of course still a problem. Also, your students should be able to produce papers in English. If not, point them towards English courses offered (most likely) at the university, help them install spell-checkers on their computers, etc.

This approach will fail miserably in disciplines where graduate students don’t usually write 3+ papers. Case in point, I authored two papers during my PhD, and I was above average among my peers (with the median being somewhere below 1).

The question asked for a way to train students in writing papers, so I assumed that they will indeed write some. I don't know of a way to teach paper writing without at least a little experience. If you want to teach it in a way such that students will already be able to produce good papers from the first one they ever write, you might consider this approach and then don't publish the papers, or only publish them locally among the research group, etc.

Right, I see how my comment could be misunderstood. Of course you can only learn by doing. My point is that your approach explicitly requires writing multiple papers; yet this is a luxury not generally available in my field, so the approach won’t work. Instead, the student really needs to do the busy work (ideally with support form the PI) from the first paper.

I got the context of your answer, and don't disagree with it, but I wasn't sure about the OP's situation, which is why I thought I'd offer an answer for other situations.

Accepting this as the most general answer: start by setting an example writing most of the first paper about their work, and then "ween" them onto writing papers by themselves with extensive feedback. (Other answers of course have complementary ideas.)

Good writers read a lot.  Writing an academic paper in a vacuum can seem overwhelming, but writing an academic paper after studying the presentation and writing style of some well-written papers (preferably in your field; hopefully your field has well-written papers!) gives some idea of what works and what doesn't in an academic piece.  In particular for me, my ideas of how to create and present my figures and what makes good discussion and conclusion sections have been entirely influenced by others' work.
ZeroTheHero's suggestion of actively engaging your student in a discussion about why the good papers are good (and the bad papers bad) is a great one.

I think the suggestions in other answers are good, but I think the approach depends on the situation, and Dirk's for instance seems quite different from mine.  E.g., solo papers in math, I do not think is it normal or appropriate for an advisor to write any of the paper (cf. Can an advisor write a student's PhD thesis?)
I did my PhD in pure math, where a thesis typically amounts to 1-2 solo papers, and they are often not written until after graduation.  I think my advisor was very helpful about teaching me how to write, and this was my experience:

First, unlike many cases, my advisor had me write up my results as 2 papers before writing my thesis.  I was fortunate in that I got 2 stand-alone results sufficiently in advance of graduation for this to make sense.  This meant that my advisor could give me tips and feedback throughout the writing process.  (This also meant I didn't spend the first year of my postdoc writing up my thesis, which is far too common in math.)
Before writing, my advisor suggested how to pitch and organize my paper.
After writing a draft, he read through the paper and made many comments.  As I recall, sometimes he read the paper while I was in the office with him, and I took notes on his comments, and sometimes he read the paper by himself (at least with my thesis) and made comments by pen, but then would go through them with me when we met.  Many of these comments would be about little details, like how to phrase things to make it more clear, whether something needs a citation, but some of these comments were also on broader principles (e.g., state your main result clearly at the beginning).  What I think was important, was he would explain why it's better to write this way instead of that.
We would go through a few iterations of this until he was happy (I think) with the paper.  One time, after going through extensive comments and rewrites twice, he told me to just start over and write it this way instead.  I was frustrated at the time, but in retrospect think it was very good advice, and have several times since found that starting over quite helpful.
He also gave me advice on where to submit, and fortunately I got referee reports before graduating, and he helped me deal with revisions.

Besides this approach, which I think is great (provided the advisor is a good writer themself), here are a couple of other comments.

It takes time to learn how to be a good writer, and getting feedback from different people is instrumental in this process.
While I agree with one of the other answers that reading good papers is helpful, what I actually found more helpful was reading bad papers.  After spending loads of time of struggling to understand things which are poorly written, you realize certain things to avoid in writing, and how you would prefer it to be explained.  Perhaps more importantly, this should impress upon one the importance of writing well.
General English writing guides (e.g., Strunk and White) can be helpful for instilling basic writing principles, as well as grammar.  There may also be various articles on writing advice in your general field--we have several in math, and there are general science ones as well--that you can recommend to your students.
Good writing is of course subjective, and depends on where you're coming from, and one person I thought was a great expositor, another colleague thought was hard to understand.  Anyway, I think it's good to encourage students to develop their own style and realize different approaches have different advantages.

First, congratulations for taking care of the students and your proposed goal of making them better writers.
As a self-educated non-native speaker, this is what I would suggest. I know that this might sound simplistic, but you really don't need many principles (which doesn't mean writing well is easy to accomplish):

You can't be a good writer if you're not a good reader. That means not only that your students should read a lot but more
importantly they need to pay attention and care about what they
read. Asking students to read and explain articles helps a lot.
Then, they are able to identify first-hand how writing style and
clarity affects understanding in readers, which is the whole point.
Know your audience = learn your genre/style. For better or worse, scientific writing is not creative but absolutely
straightforward. The structure is standard, even the writing style
is standard, but of course, you need to learn it. This is
sometimes difficult, particularly to young/non-native speakers that
associate long-grandiose-impressive-but-unintelligible prose to "importance" or "high status". I would suggest you give them a copy of this excellent book: https://www.amazon.com/Science-Research-Writing-Non-Native-Speakers/dp/184816310X
Practice, practice, practice. And get feedback. The more you write, and the more you see that audiences get what you mean (even if they disagree), the more confident you become.

Above all, please teach them that clarity, conciseness, and particularly writing a clear conclusion or proposition (something new the reader can learn from them) that derives from the experiment/work is the main goal of their writing, not to show how creative or eloquent they can be.

Is writing style really standard in science?  In math, there are some basic structural aspects that are standard, but there are certainly very distinct styles (e.g., beginning with generalities or beginning with "examples"), with different people preferring different styles.  Broadly, I believe these styles grew out of different mathematical cultures, e.g. the French school versus the Russian school, and now within even small communities you can find various styles.

That's a good point - I didn't express myself correctly. There are variations depending on many things (field, theoretical vs. experimental paper, etc...), but what I mean is that it's not "creative writing". There are well-established styles and you should (particularly at the beginning) pick one.

The way I found very effective, is indeed to have the student as a co-author for a paper. The student would do most of the practical work (or it is split between multiple students). Then it is discussed how to organize the paper and everyone would describe their part of the practical work in a section - that way, if there are multiple students involved, they have to discuss and normalize their terminology for it to make sense as a whole. The advisor would take a look and comment on the structure and content mainly (top-level) until a complete basic version is established. In the meantime the advisor would write an introduction and/or related work section etc. Then students and advisor take turns "improve"-reading the whole paper or distinctive sections.
Each time the advisor does a pass, he adds commentary where needed or roughly restructures sections to give the students the general direction of how to improve then let them do the details. Initially this means a lot of big changes, but in time they get smaller. Finally it gets more fine-grained and the advisor changes individual sentences to improve the language, shorten paragraphs etc - in essence he goes from top-level to fine-grained changes in a way that he'd always spends about the same time with his pass.
The students would exactly see what he was changing and could object - for instance, if they thought the reformulation didn't match what they initially intended to say with regard to the experiments etc. Through those discussions and being hands-on involved in the changes (after each advisor iteration, the students work with the text again and can also do whatever they feel as improvements), the students should feel as still having control over the text, but they also learn by doing.
I think this is a quite motivating approach and also very helpful to really improve our own writing style - in the end, everyone can learn from everyone and by iterating over the text of others, it is made sure everyone understands the whole content to some degree at least. For the advisor it means he has a more or less constant level of effort - sure, towards deadlines the iteration frequency may increase ;)

There are some good suggestions in other answers that mainly are related directly to writing the paper. A further point: in my opinion, to become good at writing papers you need to try reviewing them.

Where possible, and with the permission of the editor, work with your student on some real reviews that you've been sent. Even better, if you are reasonably confident in their ability, pass the review onto them entirely (again, via the editor).
Make sure that your department has a journal club that your students attend. And attend it yourself so that you can highlight points that may have been missed.
What about having a "review exchange" prior to submission? Your student exchanges manuscripts with another student (not necessarily simultaneously), and they participate in a mock review process. This could help with your worry about submitting a paper that is below par. Disclaimer: I've not actually tried this...

To the immediate question, I don't think co-authoring is the best way to reach this goal.

Like most sports, arts, games, and crafts, writing isn't one skill. Each is a cluster of skills, rules, templates, techniques, and strategies. FWIW, I think editing is it's own cluster of skills that merely overlap writing.
Being "good" at a given sport, art, game, or craft isn't about methodically following a massive script or checklist, even if it's full of observations from the best of the best. The lion's share is about "naturally" synthesizing elements you've repeated often enough that you can can perform them on autopilot.

If you think about it this way, hopefully the following approach will make sense:

Break what it means to "write high-quality research papers" out into a list of priority-ranked skills, rules, formats, techniques, and strategies you'd like your students to know. Be pragmatic about a skill's usefulness. Correct citations might be important, but it's probably a bad idea to spend a week learning to flawlessly cite without referencing the style guide before you can clearly explain methodology.
Know what the baseline looks like, and start with a diagnostic. Get a sense of whether any students need significant foundational work in writing or English to be ready to work on your initial goals.
Chart a progression that balances focused skill acquisition with synthesis. Students should be continually picking up a handful of skills and working towards synthesizing them into increasingly complex forms and longer work.
Approach every skill from multiple angles. What's appropriate will vary, but some ideas are: having them break down pre-selected examples, find their own examples, compare examples they found, get together in groups to debate the best/worst examples anyone in the group found, revise/improve "bad" examples, write their own, compare theirs with classmates, revise or critique previous work in light of new techniques
If it's important enough to mark, require corrections/revisions. It only takes a little more work on your part to make sure students promptly put your feedback into practice.
At the risk of stating the too-obvious: know if your university/college has a (graduate-)student writing center, and if so what they offer/are capable of. It's not like you'll be able to outsource this task on them, but they may already have workshops/groups on some topics you want to cover. If so, attend one and see if it's a suitable standin.

I can't tell if you're supervising all of the students in a specialization/degree/program/etc., or if you're only supervising students who seek you out as an advisor.
This is a lot of extra work for you and a captive audience, but if it's an elective relationship and you can get away with making it clear that this is a requirement for working with you, you'll at least filter for motivated students.
It's probably good for time and resource reasons if this opportunity is built into degree requirements as a single or multi-year course track. If budgets aren't austere and politics don't intervene, the funding request for a pilot program aimed at improving the quality, quantity, and placement of publications would seem to write itself.
Because writing happens to also be a good way to learn, it's even better if certain proficiencies are a core goal of your program reflected in all courses. If there are courses in which students read existing literature or formulate small research projects, these are opportunities to build literature reviews, critiques, research proposals, and other forms of writing into the pedagogy.

Tips
Some of these may be less appropriate in some fields; take with a grain of salt.

Get them to critique/review poor, fair, good, and excellent papers. It is much easier to see problems in someone else's work than your own; but after having done so you start to see the same mistake in your own work.

Compile a list of good resources on good writing, and encourage students to start there and go beyond on their own. Or you can write a "writing manual" or "top 20 things to avoid" yourself. I read my supervisor's advice on writing many times while writing papers and my thesis.

(This one is tough but important.) Do whatever you can to teach students how to answer the question "Is this good?" for themselves. It's relatively easy to spot grammatical errors, confusing wording, and problems with flow; it's much harder to look at a work overall and comment on the quality.
Here's the advice I would try to drill home: you must go to first principles. It is about the individuals who
read your paper and how they will react. Some will be students, some
professors, some from other fields, perhaps even some laypeople. The
more you respect their time, the less effort it is to read the
paper, and the more you can inspire and excite them, the better.

(Also tough but important.) Try to break the "follow-the-rules" mentality. It is a creativity killer. Actually I think breaking this mentality also leads to better research. Of course, we need to follow the rules some of the time, but the education system creates students who believe that following rules is sufficient to create success, because that's how it works at school.
What I would drive home: Remember that you have a blank page. You can put anything on it
if you think it will be effective (but make sure to get opinions on it
before submission). Usually this means creative diagrams or poignant
examples which get several ideas across effectively. Try to think of various ways to explain things and go with the one which will have the best impact on the readers.

Advice
I think it's admirable that you are trying to look after your students; many people have the attitude "they are adults" and I think it's a lazy and narrow-minded approach. So please continue.
That said, it sounds like you are mollycoddling them: "as little stress as possible", "do not want them to be discouraged", etc.
Putting one's hard work up for scrutiny by experts in your field is supposed to be stressful. Students need to know what the reality is like. Some of them will tolerate it very well, and you're holding them back by hand-holding them. Others will struggle with it, and if you hand-hold them then they will still struggle once they graduate. There's a good chance that if you have high (but realistic) expectations, they will rise to the challenge—or they may realise this career is not right for them, and if so, better now than a few years down the track.
By all means help them get emotionally prepared, step in when they are about to hit a crisis, and so on. But give them as much independence as they can handle, have high expectations, and when possible, allow them the satisfaction of publishing their own work, even if you know it could be improved (provided it's fit for publication).
To be clear, co-authoring a paper can be a very valuable experience for students—not because it insulates them from stress and discouragement, but because they learn about the thinking process and the tricks of the trade.

One thing that my advisor has always done that has been helpful for many reasons (not just improving writing) is to encourage me start writing up problem statement, partial results, etc. as a project is progressing.
Often other students seem to wait until they think they have enough results to publish a complete paper before even starting writing. I've tried this approach in the past as well, but I think early writing has significant advantages.

It ensures that both myself and my advisor have the same understanding of the problem.
It ensures that I understand the problem (or the proposed solution) well enough to articulate it in writing.
I can get early feedback on the structure and content, and particularly the description of the motivation for the work.
It can be used as a starting point for paper later down the road.

I would set a timeline for revisions.  I would pick a format [APA for instance].  I would fail any student who did not follow the format or copied too much.  Create a way to make the students select a topic and 'working' title. Next, and since your main issue is sensitivity.  I would force the students to turn in a rough draft after a couple of weeks.  Then, I would collect all the papers.  I would shuffle them and hand them out for the other students to critique.
After my professor did this for me, I have become a way better writer!

I think the main flaw with this approach is that if you let the drafts correct from people who do not know how a paper should look like, they will miss a lot of important points and gain a wrong self-confidence.


text:
Is it better to lecture with a board or a document camera?
I will be teaching my first class this fall. The course will be an undergraduate engineering course, so there will be some derivations and other math.
I am trying to decide if I should present with a white board, or with a document camera & projector.
Most people in this SE can probably speculate on which is better, and for what reason.
I could present so very elaborate arguments also, one for each side. However, elaborate theories are not what I am interested in.
Has there been any published research to show that one is better for student learning than another?

Edit:
There is a question of what a document camera is. There is a wikipedia page about it.
Just to summarize what it is, when lecturing, instead of writing on a black board, you write on a normal piece of paper. A camera looks at the paper as you write, and projects it with the same sort of projector you would use for power point. Here is what they look like:
When lecturing with these, generally the professor will sit behind the desk, and talk as normal, just write everything on paper and the students can see it. It is similar to using transparencies, like my physics professors used in the 90's.
A nice comment by @Alchimista

I've personally found teacher writing on board more interesting than those projecting. Is matter of flow, which is more natural in the first case. It seems to me that projecting was invented to communicate time effectively without omissions, and resembles more a briefing than teaching. Obviously projected slide can be used in parallel, when complicated graphics plays a role. I won't draw the schematic of an eye if I can show a nice figure of it, for instance.

This agrees well with my assessment; as a student I prefer instructors who use the blackboard. However, teaching with a doc-cam is much easier to learn than writing on a black board. I would speculate that because the interaction between professor and student is stronger using a board, that it is more effective. I assume that there has been some outcome bases assessment of this by someone, and that they published at least an abstract. I posted this here because (1) I want make a choice based on something more solid than my feelings, and (2) it might help others to teach more effectively.

There's lots of published research which shows that lecturing and presenting are worse for student learning than interactive techniques.  Is there some reason why you think it makes a meaningful difference to students?  I'm sure there's a difference, but I doubt it's meaningful.

Come on, people. The question specifically asks about published research. So why are you voting to close it as "primarily opinion based"?

@axsvl77 No, I am saying this question is a bad question because I do not think that the answer will help anyone teach better.  Essentially, I am skeptical of the premise.  I look forward to an answer that proves me incorrect.

I doubt you will find any such "research". How would you construct the experiment? How would you validate it? How would you control for extraneous variables, of which there are probably hundreds?

I've personally found teacher writing on board more interesting than those projecting. Is matter of flow, which is more natural in the first case. It seems to me that projecting was invented to communicate time effectively without omissions, and resembles more a briefing than teaching. Obviously projected slide can be used in parallel, when complicated graphics plays a role.  I won't draw the schematic of an eye if I can show a nice figure of it, for instance.

@Buffy Also, I understand that there are whole fields of research to determine what sort of teaching method is best. Most universities will have centers to teach people how to teach. Whether that is a valid field of research, and the validity of those experiments is not the subject of this question.

Yes, of course, but the research focuses on more substantial things than this. I've been part of it, actually. If you like to use something you will probably be more effective with it than if you don't. Students will benefit or not from that alone. But that is an entirely different idea.

An "advantage" of the setup you show is that you can go back to an earlier point to reinforce it or to answer questions. Harder on the white/black board. But is it more effective to show the same thing over again or to rephrase it and rewrite it? That could be a research question. Answering the same question in the same way not illuminate much. Variety is the spice of learning.

I think this is too broad... EdTecher and teacher here. You want to have a good fit between your tool, the specific material, your students, yourself and the environment. Maybe asking for pros and cons of both would be easier to answer. Then you can decide based on the material.

The term epidiascope is worth looking up...

@Buffy Education research has standard answers to all your questions.  In short, linear mixed effects regression.

There's many more advantages with the projector; you can show material you create in advance or from books; you can hide/show stuff you did intermittently to quiz or remind; you can keep/distribute the hardcopy of exactly what you wrote in class. Also instructors with various health problems may need to be seated. I'd be surprised if there was much research making definitive conclusions against it.

@ASimpleAlgorithm Those are all advantages for the instructor. None of them actually imply better learning. Maybe even the opposite.

@Buffy I'd say they give the ability to provide better teaching, some perhaps requiring a little creativity to imagine how. Meanwhile I admit I'm having difficulty imaging the opposite.

Not research, but I have yet to see a document camera that doesn't introduce a noticeable lag. The board is definitely better. Old-fashioned overhead projectors were great if you wanted to, say, annotate a diagram, but they're getting harder and harder to find.

The issue of how technology effects communication and learning is definitely of interest, from a linguistics perspective or from an educational perspective.  Most importantly, at the chalkboard it is easy to point.  A document camera allows pointing, but it is awkward.  Tablets make pointing very hard (I learned this the hard way).
This is not at all my area, and I have not vetted the following papers.  They look interesting, and perhaps give you a start in accessing the literature.  Mostly I found studies of tablets, but did find one discussing the advantages of a document camera for some students with disabilities.

Maclaren, Peter, David Wilson, and Sergiy Klymchuk. "I see what you are doing: Student views on lecturer use of Tablet PCs in the engineering mathematics classroom." Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 33.2 (2017).
Maclaren, Peter, David I. Wilson, and Sergiy Klymchuk. "Making the point: the place of gesture and annotation in teaching STEM subjects using pen-enabled Tablet PCs." Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA 37.1 (2017): 17-36.
Williams, Jocasta, and M. F. Fardon. "Lecture recordings: extending access for students with disabilities." ALT-C. 2007.


text:
Sub-Hypothesis Notation?
What is a standard way of notating sub-hypotheses? Should it be H1, H1b, H1c?
I’m revising a paper for a French author, and she’s written them with bis and ter, as in:

H1 (“cultural assimilation” hypothesis). Immigrants of Asian descent ... [then]
H1bis. The aforementioned effect is stronger ... [then]
H1ter ... .

I’ve never seen that before, but then again, there are a lot of things I haven’t seen.

Bis, ter, and so on sound like part of a Latinate number system. This might be favored by certain (Francophone) authors, but it is rare overall, as your unfamiliarity with it shows (it looks semitransparent to me because I had to study Latin way back in high school). I personally favor H1 for the main hypothesis and then H1a, H1b... for subhypotheses (and even H1ai, H1aii... for sub-subhypotheses, although whether you need to go that deep down is a different issue).

In my field (social sciences), H1a, H1b, H1c is standard. Some use H1.1, H1.2 and so on, which is also widely accepted.

Okay, so just to confirm: The main hypothesis is H1 and the first sub-hypothesis is H1a, followed by H1b, etc.?

Yes, that's OK.

Okay, cool. I know that's exactly what Koldito said, but wanted a second opinion. ... I appreciate the help. It's not an easy thing to Google.


text:
How to organize a work-in-progress workshop for PhD students in the field of law and related social sciences?
I would like to organize a work-in-progress workshop for PhD students at my university. How can I make sure that the participants really profit from the workshop and receive valuable feedback?

This is an extremely broad question. Many factors determine whether a workshop is successful. One thing to consider are motivated and senior discussants. You can assign a small number of papers to each.

Can you be more specific on your discipline, how long the workshop should be (from your point of view), how many PhD student should/could participate, how much money do you have (or any funding behind your idea), what do you exactly mean by feedback and feedback from whom?

I think following the model of the HESG (http://hesg.org.uk/) would be a good idea. Have the students presented 'advanced' drafts of papers, then have another student discuss it. The author is then able to reply to the Discussant's critiques, and the audience can also weigh in.
(Im sure this model isn't unique to the HESG, but its where I've come across it).

For many years we ran such a workshop. It was done periodically on a week end. The students weren't simultaneously taking classes, only working on dissertations. There were about 15 students. Their advisors were (more or less) expected to participate. Part of the day has individual meetings with advisors and part of the day has presentations. The people present are the students and most of the advisors. This was broadly computing, software engineering, human factors, etc. depending on the students. Not hard theory, though.
Students would give a short presentation of their work, bringing everyone up to date on progress, but more importantly on blocks and issues that they faced. Not every student got to present on a given Saturday, but many did. After each presentation would be a brain storming session trying to give advice on overcoming blocks and dealing with the issues. Several students would have the same sorts of issues, so it was pretty synergistic.
If an advisor couldn't attend we still wanted the student to attend and would try to get some contact with another faculty member or the program director. The issues were often generic enough that students could get help on all but the more esoteric aspects of their work.
The day would end with dinner for everyone and a social gathering.
Prior to their dissertation work, the students had been working in teams on their course work so were very knowledgeable about one another and friendly. Each cohort was very cohesive.
Having it all on one day gave students and professors an easy way to schedule advising as well as permitting the sharing of ideas among a larger group of researchers who were working on different things.

I've used past tense here as I've now retired. The same thing goes on still, though. It takes one or two people to "drive" such a structure, encouraging the faculty to participate regularly. It probably won't happen without a dedicated "champion".