text:
Is doing a PhD in philosophy with a master's in an unrelated discipline viable?
I have a master's degree in computer science, and have been working as a software developer outside of academia for about a decade. I'm considering trying to transition into academic philosophy with the ambition of having an academic career, as far fetched as this may be. I'm evaluating the following two options:

Pursuing a ~1-year MA degree in philosophy first (e.g. at Birkbeck College), followed by a PhD.
Trying to apply directly for a PhD (in Europe, which officially means 3-4 years of study) in a somewhat related subfield (philosophy of technology and science).

Option 2 is something that was mentioned to me as a realistic possibility only recently: apparently, people do get directly accepted for philosophy PhDs with e.g. a math background, and no formal philosophy education. However, I'm not sure if skipping a relevant MA could hurt me in some way.

Would it be a faux pass if I, with my lack of formal philosophical background, tried asking individual professors about the possibility of doing a PhD under their mentorship? I fear that this could earn me a black mark with them and impact my chances for future collaborations (after obtaining an MA). I have a pretty good idea about a topic I would want to work on, and have studied extensively on my own, but I have zero relevant publications. I do have some publications in other scientific disciplines, though.
Even if I were accepted to a PhD program directly, would not having an MA in philosophy worsen my chances when competing for academic posts after having finished my PhD? My intuition tells me that in most case, not having an MA would be negative (I'm no prodigy and am not going to produce some ultra-extraordinary publication record that would outshine everyone else).

I retagged it to add Europe since this would be different elsewhere (such as US).

@XZYZ that would be CS and natural science people. Which obviously doesn't bode in my favor without any other formal qualification.

This really depends on how much accompanying self-learning in philosophy you have already done prior to starting a formal program.  Unless you have a substantial amount of self-learning already in philosophy, it seems to me to be premature to do a PhD program, having come from a background in computer science.  At a minimum, PhD candidates in philosophy would be expected to have learned undergraduate-level material in metaphysics, epistemology, logic, ethics, aesthetics and political philosophy.  If you have already covered those through self-study then you might have the necessary preparation, but if you haven't then you are probably behind the expected level for an incoming PhD candidate.  (And if there are any of those terms where you need to look up the meaning, then you don't have the required background yet.)
It is true that there would be some overlap in your computer science background and aspects of the field of logic and foundations of mathematics/computing, but this is only one branch of philosophy, and even there the overlap would be relatively small unless you have already done a substantial amount of self-study going beyond your field.
Unless a university has a policy to the contrary, there is nothing wrong with making preliminary inquiries with academics in the field to get their advice on whether you know enough to enter a PhD program, and if so, whether they would be interested in supervising you in a topic of interest.  In order to avoid looking silly, I recommend you begin by making some tentative inquiries to see if the academic in question believes that you have sufficient background for a PhD program, or if you should do an MA program first.  If it is the latter, you can still flag your interest in future PhD study under their supervision and then come back to them in a year or two when you're ready for that program.  You aren't necessarily expected to have publications on intake to a PhD program, but some applicants will, and this is an aspect of the competition for places (which is another advantage of doing an MA first --- you might get a chance to write some publications before applying to a PhD program).
Unless you can demonstrate having a reasonably well-rounded background in undergraduate-level philosophy through self-study, I doubt that you will be admitted directly to a PhD program in philosophy.  In the unlikely event that this were to occur, you would find that there is an early period where you are behind your peers and have to rapidly learn material that they learned as undergraduates.  This harms your chances of successful completion of the PhD candidature, but if you were to complete it successfully, it would not worsen your chances of competing successfully for later academic posts.

Not a European philosopher, but....

Would it be a faux pass if I, with my lack of formal philosophical background, tried asking individual professors about the possibility of doing a PhD under their mentorship?

Like most things, it's all about your tone. It is certainly not a faux pas to humbly ask questions when you are well-informed but open about your weaknesses. Though even given this, your response rate may be somewhat low.

Even if I were accepted to a PhD program directly, would not having an MA in philosophy worsen my chances when competing for academic posts after having finished my PhD?

No one cares about your MA (or lack thereof) when you have a PhD. However, skipping this step would likely reduce the amount of interesting things you have published by the time you apply for post-PhD positions. Even if most students in your field don't publish during an MA (not sure), they will likely be able to "hit the ground running" faster than you will be able to.

as far fetched as this may be

You certainly know already how long the odds are (and how low the salary is if you succeed!). I would just ask you this: if you were 100% sure that you would not get a philosophy faculty position, would you still go down this road? Or would you just study philosophy in your spare time as hobby? In the latter case, I would think very carefully before proceeding.

Thank you for confirming my intuitions. "[I]f you were 100% sure that you would not get a philosophy faculty position, would you still go down this road?" - I have been trying to talk myself out of this for about a decade, and it only resulted in misery with severe consequences for my wellbeing. Studying as a hobby has failed to meet my needs, and a regular job takes away too much time and energy. So yes, this is something I'm willing to try, even though I realize the chances of ending where I'd like to be are practically zero, something I've been warned about constantly.

Coming in very late on this and you may have already made a decision but… I recently returned after a 35 year gap to do an MA in Philosophy (Exeter Uni) having graduated in Pholosphy originally. I struggled for about a term before finding my philosophical feet again. One of my colleagues graduated in English two years ago and moved to philosophy. She has struggled more. The primary reason is the mass of basic concepts, schools of thought, philosophical methods etc that are taken ‘as read’ even at MA stage.
A lot of are instilled by debate, lectures and colloquiums with very good philosophers who will knock all your rough edges off and point you in the right direction when you stray down paths that aren’t going to help you. Without this kind of experience, you may struggle.
Take for example the ability to compare different methods such as conceptual analysis, phenomenology, historical epistemology and XPhi. There’s a lot of philosophy to read and understand to get this basic toolkit.
Without the toolkit a PhD would be like trying to make a table with wood but no saw: you might fashion something but it would be hard to sell as a table.
Sorry if this sounds hard but it’s how the PG world tends to work and why it may be difficult.


text:
How does earning a Masters in Iceland differ from the US?
I'm a US citizen with an BA from a US university but I have been looking at the University of Iceland for a Master's in Environment and Natural Resources while scoping US schools as well.
I know generally what topics I'd want to research such as sustainable agriculture, resource management, water management, or policy, but I have no clue what to do when it comes to projects yet. Would these be issues for applying to a program in Iceland? Is it also normal to email professors in Iceland asking to work with them? That doesn't seem to be as much of a thing in Europe as it is in the US for a Master's.

In Europe, to be admitted to a Master's program, there are normally quite formal requirements.  In particular, you need a Bachelor in a to-be-defined field.  If your Bachelor is from another university, or in your case even another country, someone will have to approve its equivalence.  That's usually not the professor's role (though their support might help to convince the relevant offices of the relevance of your background).
I would recommend to first contact the University's International Office, introduce to them what Bachelor you have from what university, to ask them what the procedure would be for you to enroll in the Master course.
In Europe, a Master degree is typically one or two years including course work and a small (~6 months) research project.  You don't need to decide on the research project at time of enrollment, rather when you are already enrolled you can contact professors with ideas, or the professors may suggest ideas already.  Details vary.

Note, also, that Iceland is a member of the Bologna Process.

@Buffy This is very useful information, I was just about to ask whether general European advice even applies to Iceland.

All of this is super useful. Thank you so much for your responses!

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Discussing finances with advisor: Am I being selfish?
I have a bit of a quandary. I applied for a fellowship to send me to a foreign country for two months. They will give me a stipend, and pay for all of my other expenses. In the event I don't receive this fellowship, my advisor said she would fund me the whole summer using her discretionary funds. I would go on this trip and make it back exactly one month before classes start: would it be selfish for me, in the event I get this fellowship, to ask her to also fund me for that last month while I'm back and doing work?
The thing is, the fellowship stipend is about as much as I would make during the whole summer working here, so I would be making more money than I would normally make over the entire summer. Perhaps I am overthinking this.

I am aware that I am in a minority with this sentiment, but I never understood why discussing salary / stipends (also known as contract negotiation everywhere outside of academia) is such a no-go for some. From my point of view, everything you mention is fair game - you are free to ask for this additional month of coverage, but of course your advisor is not in any way obligated to cover you. That you make more money this summer than otherwise does not seem like a relevant information to me.

To make it clear, the fellowship pays for the stipend, living expenses and plane trip. She will not fund me at all during this period. If there is no fellowship, she would fund me for 3 months. If there is fellowship, I would ask her for the last months funding.

I see! Thanks for the clarification. I guess that would then depend on what project you and she can carve out for one month worth of work. Having a one-month student helper and a three-month one are very different.

Perhaps I am overthinking this. — Yes, you are overthinking this.

What you are getting paid when you are not working for your university should not matter. Taking it to a (albeit artificial and ridiculous) extreme, if a top programmer in industry, with a salary of 100k$/year joins a doctoral program in June, would you consider that his salary from January to May is enough so you can not pay him for a couple of years? In my view (and some jurisdictions too), working for free is very close to slavery, and should be avoided when possible.
So, absolutely, you can go ahead and ask her if she will fund you. Your situation is good in the way that if she says no you will have a backup.
With this said, I can understand if she refuses. If it is a single, non continued project, it is not as efficient to hire a person for one month as for three, and if you are not going to do it, she may use the funds to hire someone else for the full time. If you are going to continue doing your usual work during that month, there is not so much difference between being there one or three months, and your case is stronger.
As an extra, during your fellowship, you will probably learn a bunch of new things, so you are an extra asset for your group. You can also offer to give a few seminars on what you have learned in partial exchange for the funding.

I was with you except working for free is very close to slavery -- this statement comes across as out-of-touch, to say the least. One is voluntary and the other is not.

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

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


text:
How strict are listed minimum requirements for admission to a graduate degree program?
I'm a rising senior at a Chinese university. I'm really interested in pursuing a master degree (as a stepping-stone to a PhD) in the US.
I do not know what "Minimum Requirements" for admission really mean. For example,

Applicants should have at least a B average (3.0 on a 4.0 scale) in an undergraduate curriculum which includes a strong emphasis on mathematics.

My undergraduate school applies a mixture of the British and Chinese grading systems. While 4.0 represents a perfect average, less than 5% of students have an average above 3.5, and only about 25% of students achieve a 3.0 (I do not know exact number).
Do minimum requirements like the one above mean "if you get grade lower than 3.0 in any grade system, do not waste your money on applying," or something else?

The question How to convert from one grading scheme to another? is related, but not a duplicate.

One way to judge how competitive you will be is to see where others from your university have gone to get their Master's degrees.  If you would consider yourself comparable to them in terms of your grades and other experience (e.g., research), you should be just as competitive.

The TOEFL requirement is sometimes a stricter requirement than others.

No direct conversion of grades is possible between various systems. So, you will have to argue your way into their program, by presenting your results in the best light possible and making a convincing case that you would fulfill their requirements if you were in their system. Because in the end, your application will be judged by people, not computer. At least if you make it clear that your system is quite different.
One of the ways to do it is, as you started to do, by comparing percentiles: figure out what their grade requirement equals to in terms of quantile, and start from there. “I am in the top 25% of my school, which is equivalent to a grade of XX (based on these official statistics)”. That sort of reasoning.

In general, yes. If your grade is well under 3.0, you may be wasting your money for the application fee. Your application may be filtered out by some secretary.
However, I would strongly recommend you to use other criteria to determine which schools you want to apply. You want to consider the programs and the faculty the schools have. If they have the program you are interested in  and the professors you would like to go with, then go ahead to apply no matter what. You never know.
Another factor is the school you'll graduate from. Many admission commitees are aware of the different standards that different schools use. They understand that 2.9 from school X may be actually better than 3.5 from school Y. If you can afford to the application fee and you really like that school, go ahead try.
Other factors such as TOEFL and GRE scores, recommendation letters and research potentials are sometimes even more important than your GPA.
Good Luck !

This belongs more as a comment than an answer, but I lack sufficient reputation to comment.
In my experience (based on programs I applied to in my field), the listed minimum requirements are well below the de-facto requirements of the program.  This is definitely field specific, though.
The above comment was based on applying to American universities, coming from an American undergraduate and graduate background.  In your case, you should be able to convince them on the application essays of why the listed gpa doesn't tell the whole story.

I actually think this is an answer, and it would have been wrong to post it as a comment.

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


text:
Data/analyses on distribution on academic research income across research active staff
Does anyone know of any analyses of the level of ‘research income inequality’ in research grant income across research active staff? Ideally by field, country, and time?
I.e if you had a list of all research active staff, and the research grant income associated with them in a given year as PI or Co-I, and arranged the list from lowest to highest, what would the distribution look like, and what would the gini coefficient and other measures of inequality (eg 10:90 ratio) be?
I would expect something like an outsized hockey stick, but also that there would be greater inequality in less well funded fields and vice versa.

That's a fairly broad request. It might be easier to find numbers from specific funding agencies. NIH noted that 10% of the investigators receive over 40% of NIH funding. Whether that's an efficient use of money or not is a matter of debate.


text:
How often should one evaluate a plan for an academic career?
I'm about to start my PhD. I feel I should try to plan my academic career; or set some general goals at least. The time line could be something like 5-15 years. The first years are easy to plan: study this, study that, publish a few papers etc. It gets more difficult to make plans beyond receiving the PhD. I think that if I don't know where I want to go with my degree, it becomes difficult to make decisions during the coming years: when to say yes, and when to say no. I know I don't want to just end up somewhere doing what other people think I should be doing.
How do you plan your career? How frequently do you update your plan and/or check have you progressed as you planned?

I think people were reacting to the title of the question, which was way too broad to be answered reasonably. However, the last question could stand on its own.

@CharlesMorisset I'm bothered by this reopening of a very broad, sprawly question. There were no reopen votes other than yours, that I can see. The close reasons themselves give an explanation as to why the question should be closed. Across the whole of Stack Exchange it's accepted that close votes do not need comments to justify them, and I don't see any good reason to change that rule here.

What I tell my students starting out is to make sure that they have realizable goals. Saying "I want to be a postdoc in field X in five years" is realizable. Saying "I want to work for Professor X at University Y on project Z in five years" is probably not realizable. Making sure you have a plausible goal in mind, and the ability to work toward it is incredibly important.
However, it's important to realize that goals and opportunities change over time. What you think you want to do now may not be what you want to do a year from now. So that's why it's important not to have goals that are too narrowly defined—otherwise, it makes it harder to change your mind later and still be satisfied with the way things turn out.
How often do you reassess goals? As often as you feel you need to. But you should also distinguish between the different ranges of priorities—short-range, mid-range, and long-range.  Short- and mid-range should be reviewed on a very regular basis (weekly to monthly); the longer-range stuff at least a few times a year. But these are guidelines that work for me; you need to find a system that works for you.

Here is an advice I give a lot lately: given the state of affairs, make sure each you take a position (start a PhD, start a postdoc, etc.) that you want it, and not that you want what you expect to get after it. For example, if you take a postdoc that you don't really want because you hope to get a tenure track afterward, you have a great chance of regretting that choice a few years later. If you follow my advice, the worst that should happen is that you have fun with research for some years and end up frustrated not to be able to continue.
This advice is probably not that good for PhD in countries where it is a valuable diploma in the employment market; in France, outside academia you do little more with a PhD than without, and the advice stands (I know a few people that ended up high school teachers after a PhD they did not enjoy, that seems quite a waste).
That said, it means you should reevaluate your plans at least at each opportunity (starting PhD, end of PhD, next postdoc, etc.)


text:
Dealing with mistake in scheduling an extra lecture
I am a TA for an undergraduate class, and I have the following situation:
Usually, I give my (one-hour) lectures (which consists of solving exercises and reviewing theory as needed) at Thursdays 12 p.m., but this week they have the midterm right at this time, so I decided to move this week's lecture to Tuesday (today) to help the students. The professor is aware of this and saw no problem, although it might be relevant to say that I had no obligation to do so: I could say "there's no lecture this week" and be done with it. Instead, I said that this lecture would be at the same time, 12 p.m., but I mistakingly wrote 1 p.m. at the webpage of the course. When a student emailed me yesterday asking for confirmation, I hastily confirmed the 1 p.m. mistake, only to realize the screw up.
To minimize the harm, I decided to show up at 12 p.m. and give a two-hour lecture. I put a follow-up message on the webpage informing that I would be there earlier, and sent an email to that student (I do not have everyone's email address). A lot of people showed up at 12, asked their questions, then a lot more people appeared at 1, visibly upset, and asked their questions. All in all, in the end, it seemed that everyone had their questions addressed, so I won't lose any sleep over this.
I would like to know, though, if I could have dealt with the situation better. Or if there is a standard strategy for dealing with this kind of mistake (certainly I'm not the first nor will be the last TA to do this).

I don't really see how you could have done things that much differently: you made a mistake, tried to honor it so that nobody showed up and couldn't ask questions, and was open with everybody as much as possible.
The only thing you might have done is ask people to attend one hour or the other, but they would have in principle every right to attend the full two-hour session if they so choose.
(That is, of course, in the event that you announced the wrong time. The easy way to fix this is to check, double-check, and triple-check the announcement before you post the announcement.)


text:
Risks in accepting a position if candidate considers themselves unqualified and believes they will fail
Freddie was offered a post-doctoral position they did not apply for, by Sasha.  Sasha and Freddie know each other because they used to share an office.  The topic is quite different from what Freddie has known in the past.  Freddie is surprised and hesitates to accept.  Had the position been externally advertised, Freddie would not have applied for lack of self-assessed qualifications, but Sasha convinces Freddie to learn on the job.  Notwithstanding the impostor syndrome, Freddie accepts, being between jobs and enjoying the opportunity to broaden skills if successful.
The risks for Sasha are quite clear: perhaps too optimistic about Freddies skills, and if unsuccessful, that will be bad for the project.  But what are the risks for Freddie in this scenario?  In the scenario in which Freddie is unsuccessful, how damaging would that be to academic career chances?  Is the value of an unsuccessful postdoc positive, neutral, negative?

In a previous version of this question, Freddie was called Sue, and Sasha was called Sam.

Hmmm. Does Sam have motives beyond the job? Does he desire a non-academic relationship with Sue? If so, there is an obvious red flag here and it leaves Sue at the mercy of Sam's good will.

@Buffy Oh! No, I certainly don't think so. Sam forwarded a job opening to Sue for the attention of her husband hoping he could also find work in the same region. (Sues husband was interviewed but not hired.) I think Sam wanted to bypass bureaucracy normally involved with hiring and was aware Sue was looking for work, but I really don't think there's any nefarious motives.

@user2768 You are right.  I have changed the names to be unisex and have removed any gendered pronouns.

The main question here is what kind of postdoc Sasha needs to appoint. Does Sasha have a specific project / task that they expect Freddie to handle? To that extend is this negotiatable?

If Sasha has a very specific task in mind that is largely un-negotiatable (e.g., because of hard commitments to a funding agency, or because there is a specific study that Sasha really wants to do), and Freddie foresees that they won't be able to actually do this, then they are only setting themselves up for failure when accepting the postdoc. The consequence will likely be a personal fallout with Sasha and a big setback to their own career. Nobody wins here, and Freddie should decline.
If Sasha is more flexible, and Freddie can do something that would be of significant value to Sasha's research programme, it is likely that things will be ok. The consequence in this case will likely be that the project gets adapted or shifted to another person, and things will work out alright. (or at least it has the same chance of working out alright than any other postdoc)

Given that Sasha knows Freddie personally, and has explicitly invited them to apply, I presume that the second case is more likely than the first - but a frank discussion between Sasha and Freddie is necessary. It is possible that Sasha is not aware that Freddie lacks these skills, or that they overestimate Freddie's ability to learn the required skills on the spot, but it is equally possible (really: more likely) that Sasha is fully aware that the project will go in a different direction with hiring Freddie, and they are ok with that.
Many academics I know (including myself) care more about the potential of a candidate to do good science in their overall field than whether they are the best fit for a specific project. In other words: I would typically rather hire a great person who is a bad fit for the specific project than a medium person who is a great fit. Ultimately, I care more about good papers being written in my team than what I care about the topic of any particular project. Freddie needs to find out if this is the case for Sasha as well.

Choosing the right postdoc is super important. Not many people will be forgiving to Freddie if she explains that her failure to publish was due to her taking a position she wasn’t qualified for. It may be that some people would be agreeable to take her for a second postdoc, but that involves its own hassles and risks for an already unhappy Freddie.
This is all if the postdoc goes badly.
If it goes well, then it could be seen as better than a postdoc in Freddie’s field! Switching fields makes you a bridge between them and expands your skill set.
To conclude, high risks, but also high rewards!

Are you sure that not many people will be forgiving?  Taking risks and then failing, is that so bad?

It’s often a numbers game. Should I take Sue who had a bad postdoc or Alice who had a great one? There’s one position to fill, often enough...

But what are the risks for Freddie in this scenario? In the scenario in which Freddie is unsuccessful, how damaging would that be to academic career chances? Is the value of an unsuccessful postdoc positive, neutral, negative?

It's probably obvious but I think it's worth mentioning: the risk is to damage their career chances by not producing anything (or very little) during the postdoc. Depending how long and how unsuccessful the postdoc is, this loss of opportunity might undermine their future applications when compared to other candidates who would have maximized their scientific production.
(I'm saying this based on my own experience: a few years ago I had applied unsuccessfully for positions after a couple unproductive years; when asking for feedback I was told that my low publications/year ratio was an important factor)

Notwithstanding the impostor syndrome, Freddie accepts, being between jobs and enjoying the opportunity to broaden skills if successful.

Despite the risk, this sounds a reasonable choice to me. The fact that the PI is aware of the risk but encouraging anyway is a big advantage in this scenario, since the candidate can expect the PI to be helpful and patient. Together they could establish a plan with specific targets for the postdoc, and agree to pull the plug at a certain point in time if things really don't work out.

It's possible Sam invited Sue to apply because Sam did not expect anyone as qualified as Sue to seek the position.  Maybe Sue is overqualified in reality, and should seek a better position.

This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review

@Buzz The asker wanted to know what the risks are.  I have identified a risk.  The real issue is that the asker has multiple questions.  Of course there are other valid answers.

If there are multiple questions in the question, than one ought to suggest improvements by comments or vote to close, not write an answer.

@TommiBrander I post here to give people helpful answers, not to improve the quality of the questions.


text:
Professor for a performance class is scheduling class time different than the class time listed in the catalog
I have a professor who is allotted 8 hours of time, 2 hours Monday/Friday and 4 hours Wednesday nights to rehearse the yearly opera. However, when we received the syllabus (halfway through the semester when the rehearsals began) we found that rehearsals were scheduled M-F nights and conflicted with numerous other things in the department as well as blindsiding our work schedules and etc. Is this allowed? I can't find any language in any handbook obligating the professor to teach in the times that they are scheduled by the registrar.

An abstract answer presumably won't help you.  Instead, if you decide to challenge this, you'll need to know the rules at your specific institution.  But first have you tried discussing it with your professor?  He might be clueless (and unaware of any hardship he is causing).

@EnergyNumbers That's a spectacularly unhelpful comment. One really shouldn't throw away all outside commitments on the whim of a professor who doesn't stick to her/his own schedule.

That being said, I don't understand the question. Is the "yearly opera" the class, or is singing in the opera your hobby which just happens to conflict with your class?

As a quick Google search shows, he's getting a degree in vocal performance, so it's a class. Is there any comment in the class description about 'times to be arranged?'

@EnergyNumbers if this was a student seeking a Master's in physiology and the professor teaching medical anatomy and wanted students to come in to the morgue M-F nights in addition to the 8 hours allocated, the same issue would apply. The subject of course study should not matter if it is an actual course, even if it were an elective.

@EnergyNumbers: It's quite likely that the opera is part of the asker's postgraduate degree.  Performing in a university's opera program would be routine, even expected, for a student studying for an MFA in vocal performance, for example.

Performance groups, even when taken for credit, operate outside the "norms" of scheduling. It is unlikely that your concert will take place at the same time as your scheduled rehearsals, so you will need to make an "exception" to the rules just to participate in the performance—which is kind of the point of the class in the first place!
That said, the faculty member overseeing a performance class does need to be respectful of the schedule to the greatest extent possible. It is not fair to ask students to completely rearrange their schedules when alternatives are possible. If the faculty member does not believe there are enough scheduled hours to get things done, then there needs to be an adjustment in the course.
However, he will "get away" with this unless people make an issue of this. It sounds like there are a large number of people impacted. If so, then there is enough ground support that you can challenge it collectively without reprisal. (You can also "take it up the food chain" if the professor is unwilling to make changes.)

In professional and serious amateur theater companies, I believe the usual approach is that before rehearsal schedules are set, the key performers and crew are asked to submit a list of "conflicts", times when they are unavailable for rehearsal.  The director/producer then makes a rehearsal schedule, indicating which people are required to attend which rehearsals (it is generally not necessary for every performer to attend every rehearsal).  However, if someone has conflicts that the director can't work around, that person may be cut from the show and replaced by someone else.

I agree that it should have been made clear at the start of the class that there would likely be rehearsals outside of the scheduled class hours.  However, I think the most you can realistically expect at this point are minor tweaks in the rehearsal schedule - performance space will already have been booked, and so on.  An opera is usually a signature event for a music department, so they are unlikely to want to do anything that would seriously disrupt it.  You might achieve better advance notice for next year's class, but that's not much help at present.


text:
In writing a paper, how far can criticism of previous works go?
What are the appropriate limits when criticizing the previously published work of others that you're citing in a paper? Are there limits with respect to maintaining decorum and decency?

Good guidelines for this issue can be found in the following style guide: http://redbowlabs.com/~ali/words.html -- it is directed at a machine learning audience, but I think the recommendations are fairly universal.

The field makes a huge difference here.  In philosophy, if you're not criticizing previous works, you're probably doing it wrong.  In some friendlier sub-fields of biology, you are expected to phrase your criticisms as extensions and insights.  Also, the more data-driven the field is, the less it matters what you say either way.

I agree with @RexKerr that the field makes a big difference.  I see far more explicit criticism of prior work in (theoretical) computer science than in mathematics, even though the fields are quite close and some of the same people (including me) work in both.

Generally speaking, any critiques should be brief and directed (i.e., "the cited works failed to consider <X> in their analysis", "to simplify their model, they assumed <X>, whereas in reality <Y>").
If you're criticizing assumptions, be sure to specifically state which assumptions you challenge, and clearly deliniate (with references) why they are incorrect. Note that many papers use incorrect assumptions to begin work in a new field, and your critique should recognize that (i.e., "The seminal paper assumed <X> [1]. We extend this work by removing said assumption.")
If you're criticizing conclusions, again state specifically which conclusion you disagree with, and be sure to provide data/analyses to back up your conclusion.
If you're challenging their data, note that (in neuroscience, at least) this is perfectly common; findings differ all the time. Progress often stems from finding the cause of these differences between data. You should note the difference and mention something along the lines of "Our findings differ from those of <X> [1], and we believe this is because <Y>". Note that it is almost a requirement to mention something like this; if you don't, (1) the researchers whose paper you missed will probably mildly insulted, and (2) people familiar with the field will assume you didn't do your basic literature search, which makes you look stupid.
Needless to say, ad hominem attacks are always inappropriate and should never appear in scientific literature.

I agree, especially with the last sentence.  I have seen papers use very mild language such as "[X] stated this as a theorem without proof, and yet the following counterexample shows why this statement is false."  My favorite is: "[X]'s paper is identical nearly word-for-word to [Y]'s paper."

Could you add a section re:criticizing their methods?

@thedarkwanderer - Honestly, I'm not familiar with many instances of that occurring. From what I've seen in neuroscience, statistics, and signal processing, new methods will almost always be published as a standalone paper. The method paper may contain some data, but the point is to emphasize that the technique works. As such, those methods are INTENDED to generate response. If you think they implemented a method incorrectly, I guess you would just say that, although that sounds kinda like a rookie mistake that you would hope the journal would catch.

I think that simply by thinking in terms of "criticism" you have already gone too far. I try and point out what the previous work has done and demonstrate how my work builds on that. Things like reducing the number of assumptions, doing additional analysis, or using a better method, don't require you to criticize the previous work.

I disagree with the first sentence: criticism is in itself a valuable activity, for the community at large and even for the original author, and explicit criticism should be encouraged, rather than making people try to read between the lines.  However, you're right that gratuitous criticism is a bad thing, and the examples you mention should not be framed as criticism.

@AnonymousMathematician thinking about your comment made me realize my working definition of criticism is flawed. Looking up criticism on Wikipedia, for whatever that is worth, made me realize that criticism is not necessarily as negative as I thought.


text:
Using previous student essays as examples
I teach English as a second language to pre-college adults in the U.S., and I'm interested in the idea of using essays from previous students as examples in a writing class. At a previous institution we used a permission form that students signed giving the university the right to reproduce or modify written work, in part or whole, and with identifying information removed.
However, as an adjunct who will likely work at multiple schools, I would like to have that permission myself as well.

What would be the legalities to consider doing such a thing?
If I have students' written permission, should I still have permission from the institution to do this?
Will a signed statement (in English), given by someone whose understanding of English is demonstrably weak, function the same as any other?
Is there a precedent for instructors to gain this permission? As opposed to the institution as a whole.
Would a blanket statement applying to all assignments work, or should it be for each individual assignment?

Edited to clarify: I'm interested in both positive and negative examples. Perhaps more so negative ones since the errors produced by international student populations would be more authentic and difficult for me, a native speaker, to reproduce.
I also have no intention of publishing them outside of classroom materials. Anonymous Mathematician made an excellent point that withdrawal of permission would be impossible if I did this. The only foreseeable publishing I can imagine would be as a course pack or teacher's guide given to the institution or other teachers, but I would still want to ask for additional permissions to do this.

Whose understanding of English is demonstrably weak? (Sorry.)

The students' are only in the ESL classes based on a low test score in English language skills. While it doesn't prove that they would not understand the forms they sign, it could be a tricky part. Then again, they sign all sorts of documents with just about any college or university, so I'm not sure. I would probably want to make sure I state that translations could be made available if the English form is not clear.

Good question!
I ask students individually by e-mail if I can use their essays as examples for future classes. Almost always they are thrilled and happy. Then again, I only ask people who serve as positive examples. But I think if you explained to an ESL student that they have the bones of a good essay and that you would like to use it as a sample essay for future students to work on to help improve, I think they would be similarly pleased.
This would be more problematic if I wanted to use the examples in a textbook, used negative examples, or if I posted  essays publicly on the internet. Then I might want a stronger version of a copyright waiver, such as what your previous school uses.

Thanks for your response. I clarified my post to address the issue of publishing and positive / negative examples. I would definitely need negative examples more than positive, but both would be preferable.

I think it's all in the phrasing of how you ask them. If you've used student essays previously and have kept the tone positive and constructive even when dealing with a non-perfect one, then students will have faith that you won't be using their essay to make fun of them. I'd also stick to ones that are relatively impersonal (i.e., that don't discuss their personal/ethnic/religious background). Rather than a blanket request, I'd stick with targetted ones.

I'm not a lawyer and can't address the legalities, especially for students with a weak grasp of English.  I'd imagine it would be best to write a clear, straightforward permission form that gives some explicit examples of what you have in mind in addition to an overall statement.  I'd recommend the following principles as well:

Students should be assured that they don't need to agree to this and can withdraw their consent at any time in the future by getting in touch with you.  (The main drawback I see to this is that you wouldn't be able to use their work in published teaching materials, since that wouldn't be compatible with withdrawing consent in the future.  However, if you have in mind large-scale public distribution or anything that hints of profit, you should really make this explicit anyway.)
To avoid the appearance of coercion, it's best not to ask the students until after the course is over.  That way, they won't worry that their decision could affect their grade.
I'd mention this in advance to your department chair in e-mail, not necessarily to ask permission but just to make sure he/she is aware of it.  That way you'll find out quickly if the chair considers it a problem, and you'll have the e-mail as documentation if you run into any difficulties later.  (Adjunct positions can be precarious enough that it's not worth taking unnecessary risks.)
If you request permission for a small number of carefully chosen essays, you can explain to the authors why each one would be a useful teaching tool.  That would likely get a better response than just asking for blanket permission, although it would be more work and cut down on your flexibility.

Great response, and thank you. As far as publishing, I edited the original post to clarify my intentions toward publishing the the essays. I would likely include a notice on the bottom of any materials I make to remind myself and any colleagues I allow access that there are limits on usage.

A technical but not legal suggestion (as I'm not a lawyer).
You can choose a license from Creative Commons and ask your students to release their work in such a license.
Given your needs, you could have something like a CC-BY-SA or CC-BY-NC-SA.
Pros:

these licenses are internationally recognized
there are many translations (so you can actually let the student understand the terms of the license)
you would be given the right to modify the text, print it, share it.

You would have though to release your material with the same license (and I see as a feature, not a bug, but that is a personal opinion): often this is seen as a limitation if you want to publish something, but as long as you don't want to incorporate these excerpts outside classroom materials it's not your problem.

This is asking students to grant an incredibly permissive license, far more so than is required for your purposes, so I'd strongly recommend against this unless you discuss the implications with them in detail.  There's no way I would have agreed to this as a student.  For example, a Creative Commons license would allow anyone to repost the essay on their website to make fun of it or humiliate the author.  (Of course the chances of this happening are slim, but I don't think it's a good idea to ask ESL students to authorize anyone to do almost anything with their essay.)

I think that you are right (theoretically), but the same could happen even with a full copyright. From a practical point of view, everyone with access to a text can copy it on the internet and do what they want (and this happens all the time). I'm assuming the teacher would not state the identity of authors, and I'm assuming a general "good faith environment". Copyright does not protect from bad faith or trolls. CC are at least translated in different languages, and this could be helpful.

I'm also not a lawyer, but a "misuse" of the work violates the license. I'm still not sure if "making fun of the essay" is a misuse, but it's a possibility (see this FAQ at pag.6).

Misuse only covers violations of the explicit license terms (such as not attributing it correctly or implying that the author has endorsed this use).  You're right that in any case copyright can't prevent some forms of misuse in practice, but I still don't think it's appropriate to ask students to agree to a permanent license that has far-reaching terms they probably haven't thought about.  Creative Commons licenses are a great solution when the author wants the work to be distributed as widely as possible and has thought about what that means, but ESL essays rarely fall into that category.

Brilliant idea. I could potentially include a short lesson giving background on CC licenses during a plagiarism / copyright unit. With CC-BY-SA I would be able to compile them into a course workbook or teacher training guide if I or the college choose in the future; with reasonable restrictions.

I don't know it would be too permissive, in fact the alternative (requesting permission for myself alone) is too restrictive if I consider that the institution or other teachers may be interested in using them as well. Even if there was a way for students to release under an open license while extending the interpretation of misuse that could quickly become too much to manage.

Secondly, I would definitely encourage students to request that their name be left out; which should remove most of the concern that Anonymous Mathematician brought up. Another one: would this prevent them from using their own work outside of the CC license in the future? Say, if they wanted to publish it or sell it for some reason?

They can obviously do what they want with their work. As far as I can tell, publishers could have issues. A publisher may have issues in publishing something that has been released before with a CC-BY-SA license. But it's not written in stone and depends by the content itself, the publisher, the license (is it NC? is it SA? etc.).

Another critical issue is that CC licenses are not revocable. https://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_if_I_change_my_mind_about_using_a_CC_license.3F

"Releasing" an essay to the public is overkill. The CC licenses are nice and useful but don't apply them willy-nilly...

@AnonymousMathematician About "For example, a Creative Commons license would allow anyone to repost the essay on their website to make fun of it or humiliate the author.": CC licenses don't waive moral rights of authors.


text:
Can I pursue Masters in a field different to the one in which I got my Bachelors degree?
I will be graduating from BS Aeronautical Engineering in about 6 months. But over the last couple of years, I realized that I'm more passionate about Geopolitics, international relations and diplomacy. So, I'm thinking of changing fields in Masters. I intend to opt a degree in International relations, public policy and economics.
Now, as mentioned in the question, how difficult is changing majors like that? What is the attitude shown by universities toward applicants like me? And how do I go about convincing professors to take me in?

Have you taken any classes in geopolitics, IR, or poli sci? Do you have any internships or significant experiences in such? Those will all help - but otherwise I imagine you'll have an uphill battle going directly into a completely unrelated field.  Try looking for programs that merge public policy and engineering - that'll likely be easier to get into (not that I'm straight up discouraging you from applying to IR/public policy/econ programs, just another idea!).

It is not so rare to see people opting a masters programme that is far different from the undergraduate one. So, there is no need to feel out of the crowd. Such people who go after their passion do succeed, but not without the initial struggle to adapt to the new subjects. This would mean you would have to do more homework yourself than others in the same programme.
The masters you choose should depend on the career you are aiming at. If you are highly confident that you will be working in that field then you may choose the field that highly deviate from your undergraduate degree. But be wary of the fact that you might not be able to switch back. This act might belittle your undergraduate degree, so seeking for a job relating to it might have you at a disadvantage in most communities. That is, unless you choose do masters for that degree too.


text:
Does country of author influence the rejection of research paper
One of my faculty, during a lecture, told the following lines

some good journals and conferences even consider the country of
  authors and sometimes they think that the research papers from a
  particular country may be not good. So, we need to be more careful
  while writing the paper and regarding its novelty.

Is his claim true? Does the reviewers and editors of the journal consider the country as one of the factors in the decision?

Alice: Why does our journal doesn't accept papers from China? Bob: Our journal is open to everyone, we are one world. Alice: But according to the latest stats around 90% of the papers in our journal came from U.S. Bob: That is not our fault, it has to do with the submission rate. Chuck: Things has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. Bob: Thats right, India and China are producing the same amount of papers like the US. Chuck: but not in English, they are preferring their local language. Alice: You mean, our journals rejects paper written not in English? Bob: That's perhaps the reason.

I think the primary source of non-topic-related bias comes from seeing the authors' names.

@Kimball: That would be strange, since many researchers at US universities aren't US born, or have what would be thought of as "American" names.

@jamesqf I meant their specific names, as in who they are, i.e., there is much more bias coming from researchers' reputation and it would be hard to try to isolate bias regarding the country they work in.

You shouldn't think about it that isolated, nor should you quote so much out of context. When the reviewer gets the impression that you could have been more careful while writing your paper, you are on track to being rejected and the country you live in or come from has absolutely nothing to do with it.

I am not sure that I ever seen any substantiation statistical research on it, but it is definitely believed that researchers from some countries  are under pressure to generate large quantities of research papers, but not necessarily under the same pressure regarding the quality of their research. The lists are subjective and vary from one researcher to another, but often include China, India, Russia and post-Soviet countries, etc.  So, yes, peer-reviewers may have a subconscious bias against research papers from these countries. This bias may be further amplified by the language barrier — if the paper is written in sub-par English, it may reflect on the perception of research explained in the paper.
However, reviewers should not allow their bias to affect their decision and there are systems in place to ensure they don't. Good journals have good policies which encourage reviewers to work with their bias and also involve a diverse panel of reviewers to consider the merits of the paper more objectively.
Regarding your last statement, yes, it is always good to carefully check your paper before submission and stress the novelty and usefulness of the proposed research idea.

I'm surprised you don't mention blinded review, which is very common and should eliminate even the possibility of this bias from the reviewers' perspective. It's better to remove sources of bias than to try to "work with their bias". Under blinded review, the author's country cannot affect the reviewers' opinions, because they simply don't know it.

@NuclearWang true, except for the language barrier which was mentioned and potential hints to the culture of the authors based on examples and real world arguments in introductions, for instance. E.g. choosing local celebrities for examples, citing mostly papers from a certain country etc.  Those are not absolute identifiers, but can be (subconscious) indicators.

"if the paper is written in sub-par English, it may reflect on the perception of research explained in the paper." Of course, it may also affect the ability for the research in the paper to be understood. I've read some papers that contain entire paragraphs where I literally couldn't even tell what they were trying to say. And those were papers that made it through peer review.

Nor, alas, is sub-par English limited to those for whom it's not their native tongue.  Though it's often sub-par in different ways.

@NuclearWang Double-blind peer-review exists in a variety of disciplines, but not in all of them. Mathematics, for example, is almost exclusively one-way-blind: reviewers know the authors, but not vice versa.

@reirab Sure, bad language is bad. However, even grammatically correct English can sound "unnatural" to native speakers, creating a bit of discomfort and dropping a shade on ideas described in the paper.

"... believed that researchers from some countries are under pressure to generate large quantities of research papers, but not necessarily under the same pressure regarding the quality of their research". Sadly, it is my understanding this is just about all countries. The severity and source of the pressures can differ by country though.

Having worked in China, I am now biased against research coming from that country. You reap what you sow.

You won't find any editor willing to say that they are influenced by the authors' country. It's both something that's politically incorrect and something that people don't want to think is true for them. But that's not to say subconscious bias doesn't exist. Similar to gender bias, nobody is willing to say they're biased, but somehow, at some level, they exhibit biased behavior.
I'd say that there is some level of bias in respect to an author's country, but it's small and no "good journals and conferences" will ever state that they consider the author's country in a negative way (they might, however, consider the authors' country in a positive way, viz. "authors from developing countries are especially encouraged to submit").

Similar to gender bias, nobody is willing to say they're biased I'd go further and say that most people strongly believe that they aren't. But when it comes to bias their intentions are largely irrelevant.

When reviewing a paper, you subconsciously have an expectation of how good it is. If you know previous work by the authors and liked that work, you expect to find good work in the paper under review (and you are much more disappointed if this expectation is not fulfilled). This can affect the way the paper is read and hence the review as well. Similarly, the institution names of the authors induce some expectation of quality if the institution is known to the reviewer. Double-blind review is supposed to minimize this effect, but there are always some hints left in the paper.
Now a western reviewer may be less likely to know for the majority of Asian institutions how well-reputed they are. This means that the authors do not get a subconscious bonus here. This is normally not a big deal if the paper is good enough, but for journals with low acceptance rates, this can be problematic for papers that are close to the borderline of acceptance.
Likewise, language may be a big deal here. For instance, experienced US-American reviewers may have seen all the usual writing errors that French, Italian, and German native speakers typically make, and because of this these do not obstruct their understanding of the paper content. But for the typical errors made by Asians, this may be different, and a reviewer who is not certain about the meaning of some statements in the paper is just less likely to write a very supportive review. Local customs in structuring the paper and building up a compelling argument may also lead to a similar effect.

As an Asian, I agree.

"For instance, experienced US-American reviewers may have seen all the usual writing errors that French, Italian, and German native speakers typically make...But for the typical errors made by Asians, this may be different". As a US researcher, my experience was the opposite (I believe I am more familiar with typical Asian grammatical mistakes). This is probably because the university I attended was 60% Asian and the majority of my fellow grad students were born in Asian countries.


text:
How can you precisely match Chinese academic positions with western style?
Since 1919 the first time "democracy" and "science" was introduced into China, two academic position systems have been carried out in Chinese research and educational institutions. One is from Former Soviet Union, known as the "研究员" ("Researcher" or "Research Fellow" in rough English translation) system, the other is from western style, that is "professorship".  Who knows how to properly translate "研究员" or "副研究员" into English equivalent positions? This questions confused me and other Chinese academics for years.

I have no idea about the Chinese academic system, but I am convinced that the answer to the titular question will be you can't. The best you can generally do is to do a loose mapping and accept that some nuances will be lost in translation.

There is a Baidu page in Chinese to explain it.

Vote to close as "Too broad". I don't think there is a universal definition of the terms in the Chinese world. As far as I know, there are different systems in the following areas: China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore. Each has its own systems. For the question to be more answerable, you may need to specify the location and provide more details. Hopefully, someone knowledgeable will be able to answer it.(Not me, I am as confused as you are.)

Actually, I think there are good questions about the subject - research fellow (very rough translation), such as: What exactly is the difference between research fellow and professor (still may be too broad), Can a research fellow teach? If so, what is the time limit? quarter time? half time? Can a research fellow teach at a university other than his institute as an adjunct professor? Conversely, can a university professor be a visiting research fellow at another institute while on sabbatical leave? Etc. Pick one, you'll have a rather more answerable question.

@Peter I added "Researcher" or "Research Fellow" English translation into your question to make it more understandable to non-Chinese speaking users here. If my edit changed the merit of the question, please remove it as you wish. Thanks.


text:
Should I talk to my professor about my grade?
I just found my grades for the fall semester, in an introduction to international relations class that I took, I got a B.
I got a 93% on the midterm, which was worth 25% of the grade.
I always came to class prepared, having done the reading, and actively participated, so I probably got an A in participation, which is 5% of the grade.
There was a mock UN simulation which was worth 20% of the grade that I felt my group did pretty well on, but I never got an actual score back. I made some small mistakes, but worse case scenario, I think I got around an 85%.
My final paper, worth 25% of the grade, everyone said that it was a really good paper, and that it deserves an A, even people who took the same class from her, as well as writing tutors that I went to.
The other 25% of the grade was reserved for quizzes that according to the syllabus, we're supposed to take place every two to three weeks. However, she only gave us two. The first one, she failed everyone, and said that she did that to scare us, and make sure that we read the material. The second one, I got an A on.
I asked her about the quizzes, and she said that they were used for extra credit, which doesn't make sense according to the syllabus.
I am really confused about why I got a B, and I think that she might have made a mistake.
Should I talk to her about it when I go back to school, and if so, do you think that she made a mistake?

"She failed everyone" seems to me to be more like "everyone failed."  Perhaps that first quiz was unusually hard, but it was you who failed.

Related question What to do about "grade grubbers?"

Suggestion: Don't ask about your final grade (and its computation).  Instead, ask something like "could I see my grades for [whatever the individual assignments were that you don't have grades for yet]?"  This shouldn't be difficult for her to give--she should already have calculated and saved those grades somewhere.  Then, you can do the math yourself and see why you got a B.

To expand Bob Brown's answer, yes, you should talk to your professor politely with the objective how to improve your study in the future.
In my opinion, your grade is probably on the borderline between A and B. You need to ask her what grade you got for the final paper (worth 25% of the grade). [E]veryone said that it was a really good paper, and that it deserves an A is not enough for you to say you did get an A on it. You need ask her how well was your final paper.
Generally speaking, it's not easy to change a grade after it's out of the professor's office unless there was an obvious calculation error.So, don't expect she will change your grade from B to A unless your final paper was extremely well written.
I won't be surprised if she tells you that your final paper was okay but not good enough for an A. In that case, you should ask her what you can do to improve your writing skills so that you can get better grades for the future essay writing assignments in other courses. Good luck!

To scaaahu, in my college, we have a + and - system. So it was strange that I got a solid B, given that a classmate of mine, who got a C- on the midterm, and wrote a worse paper than mine (I read it, and he didn't even address the points on the prompt), got a B-. It's just strange that I worked so hard, did what I was supposed to do, and got a B.

@KevinGawora Grading on essay writing is sometimes subjective. It is what the professor thinks of your paper counts.

Scaahu, I guess you're right. However, I did recieve 95% on the essay portion on my midterm, so the professor thinks I am a good writer. Therefore, although I might have not necessarily gotten an A on my final paper, I probably got like a B+ or an A-

@KevinGawora The point of my answer is to encourage you talk to the professor for improvement in the future, not to argue for the grade. You are a sophomore year student. You have plenty of chances to make it up for that B. If you keep studying hard, I think you can get very high GPA. A grade B in an intro class is really a minor issue for a good student like you (judging from other parts of the grading you described in the question). Be cool and have a happy holiday.

You can always come and say that you suspect a clerical error somewhere and want to check the calculations. Such a request is totally reasonable and I see no reason to get it rejected because when 4 people (1 professor and 3 TA's) grade 120 students, a few grading errors are inevitable and when one instructor grades 10 students and something distracts him, errors are still possible.
However, the only thing you can insist upon is what is explicitly (yes, explicitly, nobody cares about how you (mis)interpret the words: the Supreme Court role here belongs to the instructor and the instructor only) written in the class syllabus. Again, no argument should ensue if you just say: "Look, it says 120 points is an A, and I have 123".
Everything else is at the discretion of the instructor. You can make a sad face and say "Poor me! Just getting my very first non-A grade after all that hard work!" (or something else with the same meaning) and it may work, but don't get offended or frustrated if it doesn't. As long, as the formal computation yields B, getting anything better is a favor that may or may not be granted in exceptional cases, but not a right to fight for (no "Give me a perfect grade or give me death!", please. Remember that even if your name is Patrick Henry, you are standing not in front of convention delegates, but in front of His Majesty Colonial Army officer, so his choice may be not quite the one you expect... ;-) )

Yes, you should talk to your professor.  Do not use the word "mistake."  Just ask how your grade was calculated.

@saachu thanks for your holiday wishes, and I hope that you enjoy your holidays as well


text:
What is meant by "space" in "respond in the space provided" in IEEE major revision letter?
Recently, I have received the following comment.

When submitting your revised manuscript, you will be able to respond to the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided. You can use this space to document any changes you make to the original manuscript.

Furthermore, I have received the original manuscript (in .pdf) as an attachment. The attached manuscript is highlighted with some red color underlined pop-ups messages.
I am having a doubt regarding the space. What is the space the editor is talking about? Is it the space specified in the original manuscript, or do I need to incorporate the same using a new response sheet.

It sounds like the resubmission form will include a text box where you can write your response.

Does resubmission form means the space specified as a pop-up in the original manuscript.

the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided Please specify what's the format of the comment made by the reviewer(s).

@JessicaB You're probably right. Would you consider expanding the comment into an answer?

Sounds like a relic from the times when submission were handled on actual paper.

@scaaahu. Its in .pdf

Please add the info you provided above into your question. Once you do it, I will retract my close vote as unclear.

The info you added was put in wrong place. I edited it to make it right. Also, I vote to re-open the question.

I voted to reopen after your edit, but it is still not very clear what the pop up messages are. I am assuming that the reviews contain some blank space where you can explain in a few words how you addressed each comment.

This sounds like a question that can easily be answered with a quick email to the editor.

The format of the referee report doesn't matter. What matters is the format of the re-submission process.


text:
Do the fixed-term contracts in academia lead to a brain drain?
A significant, perhaps growing proportion of research at universities is carried out by postdocs¹.  Postdocs are typically employed on fixed-term contracts.  Personally, I know several people who have been employed on chains of temporary research contracts for well over ten years, including some all the way to retirement: their work is good enough to satisfy their PI, but not good enough (or perhaps not interested) for promotion.  Some may seek to move to industry, not because the work is more interesting but because a permanent contract is easier to get, such as suggested in this Dutch-language article), but a response in the same article denies that there is a brain drain.
Is there any evidence for a brain drain from academia to industry, lured by permanent² contracts?
NB: although personal stories/anecdotes are interesting (I could offer my own) it would be even more interesting to see if there is actual research into this question.

Edit: I welcome answers that challenge the assumption that job security as a researcher is more easily achievable outside academia than inside.  Some PhDs do of course become professors, but I've rarely seen professors that have much time to do research, as opposed to supervise research.  My question supposes the perspective of people who wish to do research themselves rather than in a supervisory role.

¹I use postdoc here in the meaning of any time-limited contract which is mainly or entirely focussed on research.
²Of course, no job is certain until retirement, but getting a mortgage without a permanent contract is likely hard/impossible.

From personal experience -- yes. I am a postdoc and I want to keep doing what I'm doing, but I have grown roots where I live (own apartment, child in elementary school struggling to learn a new language, etc) and will not be willing to constantly move to other cities, not to mention countries, for new jobs. Industry offers a way out: if I have to move, it's only once more for the nearest future.

People move from academia to industry at every stage of their career, and that's a fact. But how do you define "brain drain"? What kind of evidence are you looking for? Statistics? Comparing the percentage of people that left 30 years ago compared to now? But that's potentially with very different conditions...

@FedericoPoloni I interpreted the "brain drain" such that a person wants to and would have continued to remain in academia, were it not for the uncertainty brought about by the fixed term nature of the contracts.

PhDs have always moved from academia to industry. And sometimes they move back from industry to academia. The current academic system creates more PhDs than it requires to maintain itself, and has so for a century or more. I would not call this 'brain drain' - the system functions more or less as it is designed to.

@JonCuster But universities might be better able to hold on to good-ish researchers if they could more easily offer long-term contracts.  Of course that would mean, ceteris paribus, that the career path getting into such contracts becomes more difficult (which might not be a bad thing, for moving into industry as a fresh PhD at 25 may be easier than after 10 years of postdoc at 35).

This is probably specific to Europe, or other countries that use this model for employment.  In the US there is no such thing as a "permanent contract" in industry; postdoc jobs are in some sense more secure because you are very unlikely to lose the job before the end of the year.  If someone really wants a "permanent" position, they are more likely to get it by staying in academia and eventually gaining tenure.

@NateEldredge Is it?  In the USA, is it possible to get a mortgage for a person with an employment contract that shows an ending date 18 months from now, with an informal commitment from a PI I'll probably find money to extend your contract?  (I find it surprising mortgages can exist at all in a country where people can be fired at will, but that's another discussion)  Let's take it to chat.

Universities seem to hold on to good researchers just fine - they take PhDs and hire them as professors. It is true that not all PhDs who want to be professors become professors. Just like not all programmers (even with PhDs) who want to work at Google actually manage to do so.

As a researcher at a national lab, with experiences at IBM Watson and Bell Labs (in the old days), I'd have to say you seem to have a very black and white view of academia vs labs vs industry and where the 'best' researchers should go. Not all PhDs want to go in to academia. Not all PhDs should work in academia.

@JonCuster It would seem odd to hold on to good researchers by promoting them to a professor position where they have less time to do research than they had before. Just like how it would seem odd to promote a good programmer to a management position. Do universities hold on to good researchers in research positions? I have no opinion on where the "best" researchers should go; I would like to do research without wondering all my life in what country I will live 2–4 years from now. The question does suppose such is more achievable outside academia than inside, but do correct me if I'm wrong.

I can only provide anecdotal data, I was going to  do this as a comment, but it got too big.
I'm a postdoc (finished my phd in 2012), and I'm tired of it. In some cases (fapesp, brazil) postdocs don't have any rights or benefits (no vacations, for instance).
Worrying about how I'll provide for my family from next August, when my contract ends, compromises my performance... More than that, I don't have continuity, I can't think of anything medium term, because I have no idea where I'll be in one year.
I really like the projects I'm working on. But this whole thing has taken its toll on my and on my family. I'm seriously considering changing careers to get some kind of stability. I'd like to stay on research, but maybe research doesn't want to stay with me :)
update: I do not have kids, it is just me and my wife. We are postponing that exactly because I don't want to subject a kid to this. And its easier to move around when its only the two of us. If I'm honest, I don't know of any other non-religious profession that requires this kind of commitment. Maybe the military, but at least you got benefits, sometimes housing. And financial stability, if not geographical.

Update since this got voted and showed up on my dashboard. My contract got renewed in 2018, when my supervisor looked me in the eye, said "yeah, you should be making more than 50k" and offered me a 45k contract, that I signed. Last straw. In 2019 I finally gave up, went to work in the industry. Cloud infrastructure is a lot easier and pays a whole lot better. Which comes in handy for child costs :)
I'm admittedly salty, but academia is a highly competitive ponzi scheme...

Brain drain?
The term brain drain to me has a decidedly negative connotation of a loss (here to academia).
In contrast, I'd like to point out that education is one of the main functions of a university. From that point of view, highly educated people leaving university for industry is not a loss but an intended outcome.
And that makes it close to impossible to measure how many researchers that should have stayed are leaving because of conditions*.
Here in  Germany, we distinguish between (more-or-less pure) research institutions and universities, where that educational aspect is more pronounced. And in general, academia over here produces far more people finishing "lower" levels than are required to fill in the free positions higher up (e.g. we have 2 - 3 times as many habilitations per year than newly filled professorships).
I grant that there may be an hen-and-egg question here.
I see more of an IMHO totally unnecessary waste in the transition from researcher to research manager within academia - in that I totally agree with OP.

Where to find job security?

I would like to do research without wondering all my life in what country I will live 2–4 years from now.

IMHO this is a totally understandable wish for security and the possibility to plan ahead. I guess there are very few people who don't need this for their whole life.

The question does suppose such is more achievable outside academia than inside, but do correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm not sure whether you get much more of this security with a career in industry - that is, without paying by something else / other drawbacks.

The father of a friend once said that you may expect to be able to work where you like or what you like - but to be able to find employment covering both wishes would be extremely good luck.
Industry may also expect you to move to a different country, or you may be transfered to another site which is, say, 200 km away.
Also, those highly interesting start-up companies where working is so much fun and everyone so enthusiastic and full of ideas [like in academia] - they tend to fail (not because fun in work or enthusiasm is inherently wrong - but they are high risk enterprises - or e.g. the founders may move on to a different job, and the thing is silently closed down).
OTOH, I know people who got themselves technical positions in academia in order to have long term contracts and reliable working hours.
I took a different route and a now somewhere between industry and research (feel free to contact me if you'd like to know more)

In the end you'll need to find out for yourself what your priorities are and how much career and what else you are willing to trade in for job security.

* Personally, I have left academic positions because of conditions - not the length of fixed-term contracts, though. And I found the official length of the contract far less important than how the respective institution (supervisor) deals with the fact that they can offer only fixed term contracts.

This is interesting advice about how to handle and evaluate academic fixed term positions, but at best indirectly answers the question (by calling into question its premise).

@henning: I took the second question from OP's comments below the question. But yes, essentially my point is: while the question "how many people educated to what level does academia provide [per year]?" would easily be answerable, the question of brain drain from academia to industry - which I take to mean unwanted losses - is essentially unanswerable because there's no black-and-white for the reasons why people move from academia to industry (and maybe back).

@Roland: "There are the same expectations in academia." OP started from the finding that academia expects them to move on frequently. My point is: that's not unusual in industry, neither. So going from academia to industry may not help that much with finding a permanent home. Commuting 200 km or moving is just equally bad whether the position is in industry or academia, IMHO.