text:
How to offer a reviewer to be co-author?
I currently have a paper submitted to PNAS. We had two rounds of revisions, and following detailed suggestions from one reviewer, we have improved our proposed algorithm a lot: its complexity is now significantly lower, and the idea he suggested makes the overall method more robust in handling noisy signal.
I feel that this reviewer's contribution extend far beyond his original role, so much that I feel it would be ethically honest to have him as a co-author. To be crystal-clear: if he was not a reviewer, but a colleague with whom I had discussed this before submitting the paper, he would clearly be entitled to authorship, no question.
But… he is a reviewer, so I am wondering how (if at all) we should ask him to join as co-author. Right now, I am ready to submit the twice-revised manuscript, and I have no doubt that it will be accepted (second review was “minor revisions”). The options I can see are:

In my cover letter for the revised manuscript, explain the situation to the editor and ask him if he could (with the reviewer's agreement) lift anonymity and allow the authors' list change.
Wait for the manuscript to be formally approved, and only then write to the editor asking for the same thing.
Do nothing, for example because it is frowned upon. This would pain me greatly, because the reviewer really contributed very significantly to the algorithm, and I believe he should be able to claim authorship for this contribution (if he sees it fit).

So, what are accepted practices? How should I handle this matter?

What about contacting the/a handling editor informally and asking?

Your manuscript is not officially accepted, so I think whatever you want to do it is better to wait until official acceptance. In my opinion, thank the referee is enough. There is one issue with asking the editor at this stage: He may think that you are trying to earn favor from the referee.

I don't know the answer, but one comment is if the reviewer does become a coauthor, it will probably be necessary for the paper to be reviewed again by a new reviewer.

@dgraziotin but would it really require submitting to a different venue? I'm not so sure… hence my question

@F'x So what happened? Did you add the reviewer as a co-author? Could you share the outcome please. I am in a similar situation (this is asst. Editor who helped massively )

Seconding other comments and answers: surely no one would be offended if you tried to make such an offer...
However, as already noted, if your offer is made prior to final acceptance, it might be misinterpreted, as your trying to clinch acceptance.
And that possibility surely has to be systematically excluded, so a foresightful editor and/or journal would surely not want to set such a precedent. A journal would not want authors to (be able to) solicit reviewers as co-authors, since this would create a conflict-of-interest situation, and cast doubt on the general validity and impartiality of their refereeing process!
That is, while it would be weird and awkward to publicly state such a policy, I would anticipate that the journal/editor would object as a matter of principle, to putting the reviewer on as a co-author.
Sensible reviewers would also understand this situation, for similar reasons, and in advance would expect no reward beyond "job well done". Even the anonymity of the referee should be maintained, as a matter of principle. Thus, we do often find effusive thanks to "the anonymous referee"...

+1. As long as the contributions of the referee are gratefully acknowledged then I think the imperative is to maintain the integrity of the peer-review system. Acting as a referee is just one of those things where the (academic) rewards are not, and should not be, commensurate with the time and effort put in.

You could add a co-author named anonymous ;-).  On Scopus, Anonymous has 74305 publications!

I'd ask the editor now, assuming the reviewer has clearly stated that the paper should be accepted (at least conditionally on certain changes).  The worst case scenario is that the editor will suggest waiting, and even if that happens I don't think the editor will be upset or offended.
On the other hand, if the reviewer has made critical comments and hasn't specifically stated in the comments to authors whether the paper should be accepted, then I would wait until the conclusion of the reviewing process, just to avoid looking like you are trying to bias the outcome.
This doesn't sound like a plausible issue in your case, but I've experienced it once as a reviewer.  I made a lot of critical but apparently useful comments on a paper, and the authors offered coauthorship when they submitted a major revision.  I don't think they meant this to be manipulative, but I wondered whether one effect would be to remove a critic from the reviewing pool for their paper (in which case I might be replaced with someone more favorable).

I agree with the other comments saying either to ask after acceptance or never.  I would NOT ask while it is under consideration.

I also have an experience of being asked to become a co-author by the authors of one paper I refereed. It wasn't a journal of the PNAS caliber, but it's a good specialized journal.
I don't know exactly when the authors asked the editor, but he asked me if it was ok to disclose my identity to the authors because they told the editor that they wanted to include me as a co-author. It seems that the editor was fine with accepting the manuscript (maybe with another round of external review with another fresh referee). But I suggested submitting a revised version as a joint-work to a different journal, and we did so in the end.
In any case, I'm not sure if the reviewer is expecting such a request. As a reviewer, if I can't recommend publication, I always try to improve the manuscript I am reviewing as much as possible within a reasonable timeframe and, if possible, make it potentially acceptable for the journal. This may include proving a stronger theorem than the main result given in the manuscript, repairing critical errors in a proof, and so on.
From my experience, this practice doesn't seem extremely uncommon in design theory (which is my expertise), and I have also benefitted greatly from excellent referees. So, I don't expect anything from the authors, and I do the same when reviewing manuscripts in different fields (although it's practically impossible in some fields I work in because editors want reviewers to carefully read a paper in a very short period of time).
But if you do want to include your reviewer as a co-author, I tend to think that you might want to ask the editor that after a final editorial decision is made for the reasons stated in other answers. And you shouldn't be surprised if the reviewer declines the offer. Probably he or she isn't expecting it; the referee most likely just got excited while reading your great results and a bit "carried away." Such an offer would be helpful if the reviewer is a student or postdoc on the job market, or is trying to get tenured though.

It seems to me that you could reasonably tell the editor now that (1) you think the reviewer's contributions warrant co-authorship, but (2) you realize that offering co-authorship to the reviewer before the review process is complete would improperly interfere with that process, and (3) you therefore ask the editor to wait until the review process is complete and only then forward your offer of co-authorship to the reviewer.


text:
How young is typically “young”?
I was reading about a “young researcher award” recently being attributed in my field to a colleague who is 40 years old (and has had a permanent research position for 12 years now). It may be viewed as borderline ridiculous, so I must ask: in this context, how young is typically “young”? For the purpose of this special projects/grants/awards, how do research and funding organizations define “young”?

Here are some awards presented to people aged 35 and below:

The Young Scientist Awards of the Singapore National Academy of Science
The Young Scientist of the Year Award of the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility
The Young Scientist Award of the Council of Scientific & Industrial Research
The WMO Research Award for Young Scientists of the World Meteorological Organization
The Young Scientist Award of the European Powder Diffraction Conference

There are many more; just use a search engine to search for the terms "young scientist" award 35.
A similar list of awards can be found with a search for "young scientist" award 40.

The Fields medal also has an age cutoff of 40 (Andrew Wiles being the most recent example of someone who missed the age cutoff for an otherwise sure award).
Grant agencies usually define "young" in terms of "years since Ph.D", or "years in academic position" with the typical cutoff being 6 or so.
Note that while for most things*, 40 might not be considered "young", in many disciplines you might only get your first academic position near that age (especially in biology).
  * politics being the other venue where 40 would be considered young :)

I missed the cut-off too.

"Young" does in fact have many different connotations. For example, in the ERC Starting Grant program, applicants can have been out of graduate school for as many as twelve years before applying as a "Starter" (or "Consolidator"). So technically, they're still "young," according to that program, but not what we would normally think of as "young."
But, in general, "young" can refer in terms of age (in which case I've normally seen the cutoff be about 35 or so), or in terms of relative experience in the field (typically five years, although it can be shorter or longer, depending on the field or country).

In economics, the most prestigious award outside the nobel prize is probably the John Bates Clark Medal (most winners go on to eventually receive the Nobel too). It is awarded biannually to only one person, so in a sense is even more prestigious than the Nobel (which is awarded annually to typically more than 1); to who is deemed the leading 'young' researcher under 40. So 40 as a cutoff for 'young' doesn't surprise me much, but there are obviously no hard rules.

Sometimes what is still considered "young" also depends on the specific situation of the individual: I've seen exceptions described in the areas of paternity leaves, compulsory military service, or receiving additional clinical training.

The NSF CAREER award (Faculty Early Career Development Program) is a grant for "young" scientists, and requires that winners have the title "assistant professor." This typically means that the person has spent < 6 years in a tenure track academic position. Of course, such a person need not be "young" -- someone who worked 2 years in industry before grad school, spent 6 years doing a PhD, 2 years of postdoc, and then spent 5 years as an assistant professor might win one of these awards and be nearly 40.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Planning nondegree classes
I am thinking of registering for nondegree classes at a local university to give an impression to future admission comitee that my GPA does not really reflect me. But I have some concerns. How should I choose which courses to take.
If some internationally known professor gives an introductory course e.g. Introduction to Algorithms and if another internationally unknown one offers advanced graduate course, which one should I choose first ? Consider the future recommendation letters to United States schools I would expect from them.

Take the graduate-level class and do an independent study project with the well-known professor.

The reputation of the faculty member helps somewhat, but is nowhere near as useful as the quality of the recommendation letter. A letter from a famous person who doesn't really know you outside of the classroom (or doesn't know you at all) isn't nearly as helpful as an in-depth evaluation from someone you know well, and who knows you well.
However, I find the notion that you would taking an introductory course versus an advanced elective somewhat concerning. In general, if you are looking to buttress a graduate-school application, evidence that you can handle graduate-level work in the field matters far more than having a Big Name write you a weak letter.

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


text:
Improving my PhD application for math programs
This past year I was accepted into two mid range phd programs in mathematics without funding. Here's what my profile looked like:
Domestic White Male
Unknown state school in the midwest
Majors: Mathematics and Philosophy
GPA: 3.93
GRE:
Q: 168 (97)
V: 167 (97)
W: 5.0 (92)
M: not taken
Interests: Analysis, Medical Imaging/Modeling, Mathematical Physics
Major Coursework:
Complex Analysis, Discrete Structures, Applied Math (survey course mostly in Fourier methods and PDEs), Mathematical Statistics.
Recommendations:
One from a top applied mathematician who was very late in sending them out, one from a professor from the previous year who is well regarded but has not had much contact with me and one from a young professor who was fresh out of post doc.
Other:
I'm 30 years old. Some former work experience as a co-op student in engineering at a national lab, dean's list, normal stuff like that. I had only completed two semesters at my current school, though. About 6 years ago I was an engineering student at a different institution with poor grades and I did not finish my degree. Also mid to high level (lots of national, some international competition) as an athletic coach working with kids, teens and adults. Some international experience as an athlete as well. I also speak basic German.
Here's how my profile has changed:
Current GPA: 3.94 (.01 difference! However, this does mean 6 more As and 1 more A- to counterbalance my poor record from the early-mid 2000s.)
GRE Subject Score: 660 (52)
Additional Coursework: Formal Logic, Real Analysis, Advanced Linear Algebra, Intro to Abstract Algebra. This summer I am doing a course in number theory and an independent study in Galois theory.
Recommendations: I am going to give the late professor a much longer lead time this time around. He has said that he wants to help me but is always extremely busy. I will also be asking (and almost certainly receiving) a rec from the professor I am doing my independent study with.
Interests in pure math have shifted away from analysis, more into algebra. In applied, medical applications (organ/system modeling and imaging more than bioinformatics) have taken the lead over mathematical physics.
Other changes: Medalist in school's math competition, math tutor in our honors college and privately. Taking a Spanish immersion course so I can list basic spanish on there as well.
I'll be taking the GRE subject again in October and am using saylor.org and MIT's opencourseware to review older subjects. I graduate in August and will be working for a year. I'm thinking about applying to teach at a high school or community college for that time. I also plan on taking one or two graduate courses per semester.
I plan on applying all over the place (>15 apps) compared to the 8 from last time. I would prefer to go to the west coast. Can anyone let me know if the mid level UCs (Irvine, Santa Barbara, Davis) are reasonable with what I've got now, especially since when I worked at that national lab I was technically a UC employee? Any other recommendations on schools or anything I can do over the next year to boost this?
One other thing: I have no REUs, but is a good independent study with a strong recommendation from it a decent substitute?
Thanks for taking the time to read my post.

In reading through your comments, I couldn't help but get the feeling that you are "all over the map" when it comes to what you're looking to do in graduate school. If this is similar to the way that your personal statement read to the committee, it could help to explain some of the challenges you faced in applying to graduate schools.
For instance, after reading what you have written, I can't tell if you're looking to do algebra or bioinformatics—or if you're in an "I'm happy with either" situation. If it's the latter, this can make it harder for a committee to accept you: algebra readers might think they'll admit you, only to have you wander off into applied math, and vice versa. You may find it better to concentrate on one area—or, better yet, show how the different topics you're interested in are actually related to one another.
Another potential issue is the quality of your letters of recommendation. Is there anyone who can help you to evaluate your letters for you? Some colleges have career offices or academic counselors who can comment on the suitability of your letters for different kinds of programs (academic, industrial, etc.), although they probably won't "rank" them for you. If you had a very late letter, it's a good question as to how helpful it would have been, even if  it was from a big name (or perhaps that should be "in spite of" it being from a big name).  By this, I mean that the letter would only have value if it actually discusses your talents and skills in a meaningful way. A pro forma letter isn't all that helpful, particularly if you are from an "unknown" program. (This latter can also make your job tougher, since your school might not have  a track record at many graduate schools).
Finally, it also sounds like you have a rather untraditional academic history. This needs to be explained clearly somewhere on your application, in a way that shows thattaking you into a graduate program now would not be a risk. (Not doing this could again feed into the notion that you're flittering around from one thing to the next—which is not a good impression for an admissions committee to have of you.)

Thanks for the reply; I do feel that I've been flitting from place to place as I get exposed to different topics in math.  Complex analysis was vastly interesting to me, until I got into abstract algebra.  I was also fairly sure that I wanted to stay in pure math until I took that applied survey course, which showed me that applied math at higher levels can be amazing.  I have addressed my academic history in my personal statement and I'm not very worried about that since I've had multiple professors look it over, but I will try to focus more over the summer and decide where I want to be.

I will also see if my school has anything that can help me review potential letters of recommendation.

Hmm. Quick question: did the people you show your statement of purpose to say "it was fine," or did they provide useful feedback? (Just trying to understand what's going on—there's nothing with respect to GPA or test scores that seems to be a problem.) On the other hand, this also leads me to believe that the problem is most likely in your letters of recommendation.

The aforementioned approval came after several sets of revisions with those people (and others.)  Plenty of specific feedback was given but prompted changes made before sending them out.  However, none of the people involved were math PhDs (the closest one was a stats professor); I realize as I write this how silly I was to not ask the people in my department to look over my statements.  I have since been told that when applying to strong math departments I should treat the personal statements like research proposals I will not necessarily be expected to finish.

Is it possible that my previous academic experience (with quite poor grades, but so long ago) or the fact that I had not yet taken the GRE subject test were things that held me back?  Also, is a 660 something that's likely to be a red flag or is it reasonable?

I come from engineering, where GRE subject tests don't matter, so I'm not sure how much it matters in math admissions. Not having the GRE in a subject-test-standard field may very well have been a problem, but a "median" score (52nd percentile, regardless of scaled score) might not be so helpful, either. I think the previous work is not nearly as important, particularly if it was separated from your current work, and especially if it was in a different discipline.


text:
What qualities makes someone a strong applicant for an editorial position in math books in a publishing company?
I'm in the process of applying for an editorial position in Mathematics Books, where the key responsibilities are as follows:
*Evaluate book proposals and manage the peer-review process
*Liaise with authors throughout the publication process, including negotiating contractual conditions
*Collaborate with editorial boards to evaluate manuscript submissions
*Coordinate with internal departments such as production, marketing, and sales
*Establish and maintain a network of relationships with academics
*Attend international conferences and visit universities for acquisition
*Achieve annual publishing goals
And the requirements are as follows:
Essential:
*Postgraduate degree in Mathematics or related field
*Excellent written and spoken English
*Strong communication and organizational skills
*Ability to work independently and as part of a team
*Availability to travel to universities and international conferences
*Track record of working to deadlines and delivering results
Desirable:
*PhD in Mathematics or related field
*International experience (study or work abroad)
*Working knowledge of LaTeX
Now I've done a PhD in math with published papers, traveled for conferences and worked internationally, and also have decent knowledge of LaTeX. However, I'm sure almost all the applicants will have these, so these perhaps won't be the deciding criteria. Hence I wonder what other qualities a good editor will have to possess? For example, I reviewed a paper for a journal published under this company, should including that have a positive effect? Anything else, or any other experience that'll make someone a good applicant for this position? I'm trying to write a letter of motivation and I'm trying to go through my experience and relate them to those of a good editor, hence this question.
Thanks in advance!

I've looked at your SE profile. You seem to have had a varied and interesting mathematical career, which should be a plus. You seem to have checked the necessary skills boxes.
If I were looking at your application I would want to know why this particular job was what you wanted to do next. Your CV doesn't suggest that trajectory. I think you should use your cover letter to show why you want to be an editor, not just that your experience will make you a better one.
Good luck,
That letter is also the place where you show that you can write well yourself.

Thank you - that's indeed a great point, I'll certainly tailor my cover letter accordingly, thank you!

Teamwork, working with different kinds of people, ability to overcome difficulties and get things done (this does not include mathematics research), initiative, any kinds of experiences outside academic mathematics. See the list of skills and qualities in the ad.
Reviewing a paper is a good experience, but whether the journal is published by this publisher or not makes no difference.

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


text:
Points to focus on while making a video of an online teaching demonstration for a university teaching position application
I've applied for a mathematics teaching position at a university, and as part of the application process, I'm supposed to submit a video of my teaching. The exact guideline says:
"Select a small piece of content and produce a short video (not more than 5 minutes) of the sort that you would upload to Moodle if you were teaching this module remotely this term. This video does not have to be completely self-contained but can be a snapshot of what you would do for 5 minutes of a long lecture."
I'm supposed to share a link to this video with the recruitment team.
This question is about how to make this video optimal without spending any money on video editing. In my case, I'll state a theorem. Here are some tricks I think that may work in making a better video, assuming that the students are watching me in real time:

Instead of writing a whole theorem by hand, take a screenshot of the theorem from a book, and then paste it onto the virtual board, and then explain the theorem. This'll save time.
Since the video would only last 5 minutes, I think it's best to go over examples and counter examples and geometric demonstration (wherever applicable) instead of a proof, since proofs often take long. This'll make the students get a "feel" for the theorem.
Perhaps an auto generated subtitle (although not sure how to add it to my video, suggestions appreciated).
Remembering the introduction part very well and and pretty much saying it in the beginning, instead of thinking on the spot, which is fine in a classroom setting, but may not be good in a video, just in case the applicant murmurs or pauses to think etc.
It goes without saying, but not rushing.

Any other pointers? Or please do feel free to correct the above points.
Thank you in advance!

Maybe post on math educators for a more targeted audience response?

You need to script it and do it multiple times, you definitely should not be thinking on the spot for this.   Math is a very specific discipline with different approaches.  You might want to see if the department has said anything about active learning or its focus.  Also make sure you understand the student audience ... but the problem with teaching demos is that the real audience is the faculty.  I'd write a short intro and follow up that frame the video in a larger lesson.

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


text:
How should I respond to a former student from my old institution asking for a reference?
I moved universities about a year ago. In my old institution I had a large number of students, so I did not know most of them personally or remember how they performed.
Sometimes I get emails from former students asking me for reference letters. I find it difficult to know how to respond; usually I will recognise the name, and hence I can say that they did attend the university and did study the relevant programme. But I can't say anything about how well they did, and in most cases I don't remember anything about eg whether they were punctual, or enthusiastic, or engaged, etc.
Usually I point this out and say that I can do a bare-bones letter if they like, but that they would be better asking one of my former colleagues.
How should I respond to these requests?

Be honest with them that you didn't have sufficient interaction with them to be able to write a sufficiently positive letter to help them and that any letter would honestly just be generic. Recommend that they get letters from people who knew them and their work well enough to write an honest and sincerely positive letter.
Anything you could honestly write on their behalf wouldn't help them much. Saying "they did well in my class" is a give-away.
But, the note to them to choose a better source is the most important part. They may not all be aware of how letters are used. (Note: US perspective)

They may be asking you because you are well-known (I have no idea if you are) In that case point out to them that a strong recommendation from somebody unknown is likely to carry more weight than a generic letter from you.

There are plenty of circumstances where a fairly generic letter saying “Firstname Lastname was in the top 20% of my abstract algebra students” is still valuable to the student.  Most obviously: if an employer or graduate-studies institution has a hard requirement of n letters (not uncommon with n=3) and the student has < n instructors that really know them well (not uncommon with n =3, even for good students).

Given that reference letters are often a requirement, even a generic letter is probably enough for some students. I would let the student decide if they want the generic letter, if they're not able to find any other references. (And presumably, they're contacting you because they couldn't.)

Honesty is the best policy. I'm an industry adjunct who works across interdisciplinary boundaries. My memory is good for events and details, but bad on names. So I'm often lost when someone approaches me for a reference.
I tell them I want to help, but given my role don't retain good records and am regretfully not good with names. I ask them to send me a copy of their grade transcript, copies of papers they submitted in my course, and remind me of momentous interactions. Generally, they either ask someone else (probably when they realize that if they got a B, can't find their paper, and did nothing momentous in class they're not going to get a quality reference from me). Or they do remind me of something that makes it all flood back. I make a point of then writing warmly back to make it clear it triggered real memories, and when I write the letter if they were good students I can refer to something prompted by rereading their writing.
I did have one student exaggerate their brilliance in their "reminder". As I said, I actually remember details (just not names) well, so I knew they were exaggerating, and regretfully declined since I "couldn't really remember that". And I did have someone try to fake a higher grade in the grade transcript (something prompted me to check!), which was really dumb. So checking is good if it doesn't feel right.

I have been in identical shoes in the last couple of years. I worked in a university for over seven years. During my experience, I surely met a good number of students, and a few of them are easy to remember for life, mainly because they were serious about their studies, were punctual and discussed quite a bit of research with me. There are this other bunch who used to come to the lectures but were not so easy to remember. Some of them keep emailing me now about the reference letters. No matter how I try to convince them (either by being honest by saying that I could only write a generic letter as others point out in their answers or by plainly saying "No", they still persist). One thing to remember is that they often need three letters of reference, so they keep pushing for a letter from us. One "rude" thing is to just ignore such an email, but then it is just "rude" and "unprofessional". So I tell them very clearly that I will just write a generic one that the universities might never count and if they are okay with it, I just say ok. Surprisingly, most of them are okay with that.

“Surprisingly, most of them are okay with that.” — This seems understandable enough. Some universities/employers do have a hard formal requirement of three letters (often enforced by an automatic system), and many decent students only genuinely get to know one or two instructors. So they need one or two more letters — however generic — to fulfil the formal requirement, and get their application (including their other non-generic letters) considered by a human.

Ah, I see. I didn't know about the automatic system. I was under the impression that universities do read all three letters. @PLL

I tend to give such students a brief description of what I'd be able to write, and ask them if that's good enough for their purposes.
Oddly enough, this happened exactly this way about two weeks ago.  I got a very last-minute request from a student who wasn't a great exam taker in one of my classes, and got a B, but did very well in a different team-based course. I told the requester the best statement I could make about his classroom skills was a confidence that the student could pass a graduate curriculum, that I could go stronger in other areas, and I would be unable to use the phrase "without reservation".
I fully expected the student to say "no thanks", but he said "that will be great, thanks".  I submitted the recommendation, and was notified by the student three days later that they were accepted.
Yeah, this may have been a very special case.
It was clearly a late application, and it's conceivable that everything was all arranged for this student, and the application was simply a formality for this student, and all else was well in hand.  The point is that there's no way I could know this stuff.  I didn't particularly want to know this stuff --- but the student is most certainly aware of their own situation.  So, where I landed is to tell the student what the best I could write about them was, and let the student make the choice.

The best thing to do is to tell the student that you are not a good referee for them because of the (entirely legitimate) reasons you give, and as a result you can only provide a generic reference.
You should advise them it would be wiser for them to ask some else, but I would personally agree to proceed if they insist knowing that some students might be very much hard pressed to ask someone else.  The good students will recognize your situation.

Excellent replies here but a tiny warning: If you you do write a reference for someone you really can't remember and they they get the position but turn out to be, shall we say not quite up to scratch, then you have the problem of your name being associated with their failure. Not a happy position for either of you to be in. Just be honest with your ex-students and wish them luck with their endeavours.


text:
Will it hurt my chances if I separate the research and teaching experience in my full academic CV?
I'm applying for an assistant professor position to a certain university/institute in Netherlands, and I'm thinking of separating my research (academic/industrial) and teaching (academic) experiences in my CV, because of the following reasons:

I've taught for over 1200 hours in EU and the US, and I want to reserve a section in my CV highlighting that in great detail, thinking that it might make a positive impression if I detail my teaching experience by specifying subjects, teaching methods and number of hours etc.

The teaching (currently I've a teaching only position in a university in EU and I also taught during my PhD) is/has been done separately from the research in academia and industry, at different times.*

But I'm wondering if it'll hurt my chances because

The selection committee may not get a clear chronological idea of my work experience (although a 5 minute scrutiny would easily tell them that).

It's perhaps not in the usual practice.

So I'm weighing the pros vs cons here. Do you think it'll hurt my chances if I separate the research and teaching experience in my CV as separate work experience as "Work experience (research)" and "Work experience (teaching)"?

Why not just sections "Research" and "Teaching"?

@Buffy That's a good idea, thank you, but I'm just thinking that if the CV falls in the hands of a recruiter for the university who is not a faculty member, then (s)he will screen through the CV for some key words, and will look for "Work Experience".

@ScienceMan surely this is easily resolved by having a section near the beginning listing the positions you have held (i.e. "Work Experience"—in my CV I call this "Appointments"), and then separate sections later on which detail your teaching (courses taught, etc.) and research experience (papers published, talks given, etc.) separately. These sections will be chronological. Note that you should not include your teaching methods in your CV: it is not the appropriate place to talk about this, at least in the areas of academia I am familiar with.

@BenedictEastaugh, this is more an answer than a comment.


text:
Is it okay to link relevant research, instead of citing them, in a two page only research statement?
I'm preparing a research statement for a permanent position in math, but the number of pages have a strict constraint of two. So it seems I'm unable to fit in the bibliographic references in the research statement. Assuming that the the two pages do count the bibliographic references (correct me if I'm wrong!), I'm linking relevant research, instead of citing them using the

\href{}{}

command in LaTeX: so for example, I'm writing this in my LaTeX:

\href{website}{this result is proved}

Thus, when the reader clicks on "this result is proved", s/he will be automatically directed to the "website", that has the article in question.
Is this okay, or will it be taken as an unusual practice? It's difficult to fit in the research in only two pages, but I can't see how I can also fit in the bibliographic references in the same.

Note that any web reference needs to be dated. If you simply link to a site and the site is modified you have no control over the result.

I don't click on random links incorporated in application materials...

Hyperlinks can enhance traditional references, but they can’t substitute for them.  Which is more useful to a reader: “We aim to generalise [Lurie 2011 DAG VII, Thm 3.20]…” or “We aim to generalise this theorem…”

@AnonymousM I have applied for plenty of things that have a strict page max; fit whatever you want in there but that's the limit

Since your research statement is not meant to be public, perhaps it is enough to write that "person X solved problem Y" etc. without giving proper references.

A piece of advice: make sure that you have an active web presence, that all of your papers are on the arXiv, that anyone searching for your work on the internet will have a trivially easy time of it.

If the problem is caused because a list of references has too many lines (plus LaTeX's algorithms for spacing/heading sizes) then you could try an inline reference, in the style that @PLL has suggested - this often manages to save a line or two compared with the orthodox list of references. I have had to do this sometimes for grant applications just to meet the page limit. Even something like "this is a result of Groechenig and Leinert (JAMS, 2004)", with the (JAMS, 2004) being a hyperlink to the DOI, is preferable to \href{link}{this result}

Usually the page limit includes the bibliography in a research statement or proposal (except if explicitly stated otherwise). Keep in mind that people, especially if they want to focus on something for longer than 20 minutes, still like to print things before they read it! So a link will not necessarily work for your reviewer.
It is not unusual to link things in a proposal, but rather as an extra feature instead of the only way to access the reference. You do not know, if you referee even has access to your original PDF!

What I have seen and done myself in the past is the use of footnotes for references. Footnotes are usually allowed with smaller typeface (even down to 8pt for example in MSCA applications) and can thus save you a lot of space. You should always provide a form of citation in the text if you are referencing work.

Another useful technique is to use inline citations — rare in maths, but very established in the humanities — and keep them concise.  “Thm. 2.12 of  Derived Algebraic Geometry VII (Lurie, 2011)” is reader-friendly, unambiguous, and usually takes up less space than even a footnote.

If there's a tight page limit for a posted ad, my personal assumption would be that there are a lot of anticipated applicants, and that applications are very likely to go through some sort of initial screening and sorting process.  If this is the case, you shouldn't expect the person/people doing this sorting to link out of your document.  There is a fair chance your link will go unclicked.

But it's fair to say they won't follow up written citations either.

@user253751 Correct, but at least the reader would know the reference.

No, you cannot use links to references because:

the style doesn't follow the norms of standard academic citations.
those references will not work on printed out materials.

If you do not know whether the bibliography counts as part of the page limit, contact the place you are applying to!. We can only speculate and that's not really helpful when it comes to applying for faculty positions. The stakes are high, so you have to make sure you understand any and all formatting requirements! And if they are not specified you must contact them to clarify.


text:
Is this the official Marie Curie postdoc fellowship applicant guide?
I'm a new Mare Cure fellowship applicant and I'm getting overwhelmed by the information  online and trying to find the quickest way to understand what I need to know and do as an applicant so that I get to the stage of building the actual proposal. In this regard, I'm just checking with you to see if the following guide is official and is something that every applicant should read first: https://rea.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-04/Guide%20for%20applicants_MSCA%20PF%202023.pdf?
Thank you in advance!

Is there anything in particular about the document that makes you suspect that it is a highly elaborate hoax uploaded to the official website of the European Research Executive Agency by malicious hackers, rather than what it claims to be on the first page, namely a "guide [that] aims to support potential applicants to the PF 2023 call"?

@AdamPřenosil Thank you, and sorry for asking the obvious - I'll start reading this guide now :)


text:
As a currently unaffiliated author, what option should I choose for submission with Journal of Multivariate Analysis?
I'm currently unaffiliated (but soon will be). I'm submitting a manuscript at the Journal of Multivariate Analysis (JMVA), and it shows me these two options:

I think the first option is out of the question, as I'll have to pay for it, so I'm thinking of choosing the second one. Am I right in doing so?
Also, I've never seen this paying option before for paper submission, why am I seeing it here?
Thanks in advance!

There are descriptions for both options in the screenshots. Is there something you want to know that's not described there?

@Allure Thanks - I didn't understand whether I'd be able to post the paper on ArXiV or ResearchGate or Google Scholar. They're non-commercial, so is the answer a yes? TIA!

Are you sure it's a non-commercial journal? To find out their sharing policies as well you'd have to check the website. In this case the journal is published by Elsevier, and Elsevier's sharing policies are here: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/sharing. So the answer is yes, you can put your preprint on the arXiv.

If you google "Gold Open Access" or ask Wikipedia, you will see what it means. Basically the author (or their grant) pays for the article, rather than subscribers.
For an individual without support it is, as you've guessed, not a viable option. But for well funded research groups it is something to consider. The subscription model means that the publisher absorbs a bit of risk that subscriptions will be sufficient to cover the cost and profit of publishing.
There may still be some fees to publish (page charges), so it isn't always entirely free to authors, but some journals will waive such fees for those without funds to cover them, including individuals. It is something to explore if you are asked to pay.

Also, I've never seen this paying option before for paper submission, why am I seeing it here?

I don't see good reasons to ask this question before peer review. Actually, to me it seems like a red flag, because it suggests that the editorial decision may depend on whether you are paying those two grand or not.

Note that some OA publishers also use a form of open peer review. In that case, they may need to know prior to review. It is one of the controversies around OA, actually. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_peer_review

@Buffy I believe you are referring to journals in which peer review happens after publication, and hence all submissions are accepted and the publication fee is due before peer review; is that correct? I did not consider that setup, as the wording in those screenshots made it clear that it is not the case here.

I don't know the actual situation. There seem to be a lot of options. But payments should only be "due" after it is clear that the article will be published, no matter the complications of the system.

@Buffy not true for all journals.

Hmmm. Guess I've been living in a sheltered world. They claim, at least, that it doesn't go toward profits (claim!!).

@Buffy the screenshots do say that the payment is "only applicable if article accepted"


text:
Given my experience, how do I get back to academic research collaboration?
I've a teaching position in an engineering college in France since September 2021, and in a few years' time I'd like to get either a research-only or a mixed research and teaching position. With that in mind, I'm trying to get some research done in the fields of statistical/theoretical machine learning, although my ideal research domain is in the intersection of differential geometry and statistics, e.g. manifold learning, dimensional reduction, aspects of medical imaging or computer vision where one needs to do statistics/ML on manifolds etc, and my PhD was in pure math (in 2013).
Problem I'm facing: The problem I'm facing is that I'm in no way connected to the research part of the academia, so I don't get to travel to conferences. Also, my doctoral supervisor is a pure mathematician, and it's different from what I do now. My postdoc supervisor doesn't reply to my emails. I can't go to conferences, because I can't afford to pay hundreds of Euros to go there - normally these fees are covered by the research lab one is part of. I had a failed time in industry lasting for four years, and this made me totally isolated from academic research, that I truly love and want to get into.
Steps taken: I've reached out to several researchers in France telling them that I'd like to voluntarily be part of a project (without any position or payment), but never got a reply. I guess the reason is that they don't know me, so they don't feel like sharing the credits of a potential research article with a stranger. My postdoc supervisor ignored my emails. I've presented my work in an online seminar in a research group in front of a few people, that got decent feedback, but nothing enough to move things ahead - e.g. they had a postdoc position available, but they chose someone they knew although they considered my profile very good - something I'm tired of hearing and yet ultimately getting defeated by the candidates already known to the lab people.
Question: I understand that I'll have to streamline my research and get myself published if I'd like to get a research position someday. But given the above, what can I do to get my research started again that actually is in the interest of one of the research labs? I'm doing some research on my own, but I'm afraid that this won't be enough to get me where I want to go. Any leads will be appreciated with sincere appreciation!
Thank you very much!!

I'd like to voluntarily be part of a project (without any position or payment)
Although reasonable offer if made from a student, from a skilled person, offering that is something doing mroe harm than good.

a failed time in industry lasting for four years if you worked for 4 years, it does not look like failed time.

Reading your question in the most abstract and objective way, the problem you are facing is how to get into already existing collaborations/networks.
It's difficult. You are realizing that somehow people have already their networks.
Put yourself in their shoes. You have running projects, with allocated funds, with people and roles already estabilished from before the funds even arrived. It is extremely unlikely they will be able to find space for a skilled person, because skilled person need to be taken onboard before the beginning, otherwise it will be difficult to find them during the project.
What you are doing, i.e. a skilled person offering free work is basically too unlikely to be true, so people are not ready to take you onboard because they never thought it is possible, nor they have a way to fit you in already tight designed project/collaborations.
However, what you can do is to try to get funds for yourself (and someone else). That way, you will start to have more positive feedbacks, because everyone in science would like to have more funds.
Start exploring the active calls for proposals. Start designing the project you would like to lead. Start asking support to write a proposal.

A skilled person willing to work for free for some limited amount of time is not too uncommon, but it still is a major headache to manage. Collaborating on a paper or two without having grant funding just to be able to have reasonable chances of success later is not unheard of, either (does not apply to OP's situation directly, but somewhat aligns with your suggestions). Then, of course, there are arguments about the ethicality of this "work for free" approach - as in, competing on value in a way that undermines labor protection.

@Lodinn I agree, I think OP's specific case is "safe" with respect to labor protection, in a way that I cannot quantify apart from saying "OP has a job, OP is a peer among peers, OP would be absolutely free to not do what he would like to do" which is different than "a PhD student can work on the thesis in the free time" or starting a research knowing that  "this research will need the help of a very skilled person, but we do not allocate a real budget for it because we know we can get this job done for free".

This advice is a bit different from that of EarlGrey and from some comments. The most important message I have is that if you want to join an existing collaboration then you have to have something to add and to make it clear what that is. That requires, usually, some knowledge of the specifics of the other project. And it may require some time to establish trust.
If you are adequately supported financially already, there is no need to say you don't need compensation, but just indicate that you seek a professional relationship. This is typical among peers in fields I know. People join up for the sharing of ideas and the advancement of scholarship. You give and you get, but it needn't be money.
If you want to join a group, first enquire of them about what it is that they do, if you can't learn it otherwise and see how you would fit. Focus on what skills you have that complement the skills they already possess and communicate them. But the communication might need to be over time, with a gradual acceptance of you and what you have to offer.
But, the key to moving from where you are to where you want to be is collaboration, preferably peer level collaboration, as you recognize, I think.
It may cost you something in money, however, as it might be necessary to make an in person visit over several days. Or even, several visits.

Some teaching colleges provide funds for professional development. If yours does or if you can get small travel/conference grants it would be a good way to meet people. I've worked at several not-primarily-research institutions that provided such funds. See what you can find.


text:
Recruitment process for higher education in Spain, equivalent to university lecturers, assistant and associate professors
I'd like to know the recruitment process for the appointments of lecturer, assistant and associate professors in Spain. Just to give you an idea, I'm writing down the equivament details in the American and French systems below.
In the US, there are lecturers that're appointed mostly for teaching and then there are tenure track assistant professors and once they get tenured, they're called associate professors.
In France, there are permanent half-teaching, half-research positions called maître des conférences (MCF), although from my understanding these positions are becoming more contractual in nature (please correct me, I'm happy to be wrong!). Then there are prestigious CNRS positions called charge des recherche, that're purely research positions,and the same by INRIA, which is a government organization for applied research.
I know that in Germany, there are postdoc < group leader < W3 professors (if I'm not mistaken, I don't know too much, so I don't want to spread misinformation at all!)
But I've no idea about the Spanish recruitment at the university level. What are the equivalent of lecturers, assistant and associate professors? What are they called? How are they recruited? Are there websites (in English ideally, but can be Spanish/Catalan/Basque...) that I can read up to understand the system better?
Thank you in advance!

Spanish higher education system: hyper bureaucracy, incredibly inefficient and suffocating any type of scientific excellence. e.g. after completing a tenure track it takes 2 years to get the permanent position as you have to undergo so many acreditaciónes where you have to hand-in the same paper trail over and over again. (I am not Spanish but I spent 3 years there - never again)

There is a very comprehensive description of academic positions and recruitment process in Spanish Universities in this website (in Spanish): https://es.abcdef.wiki/wiki/Academic_ranks_in_Spain
I also recommend to look at the statistics presented here (also in Spanish): https://www.epdata.es/datos/profesores-investigadores-resto-personal-docente-universidad-espana-datos-estadisticas/412
Below,I summarized the key points with focus on your questions:
After the establishment of LOU 2001 ('Ley Orgánica de Universidades Rangos académicos en España' – Organic Law of Universities for academic ranking in Spain) and its update in 2007, the application process for academic positions has been largely simplified.
Firstly, candidates need a positive evaluation of their teaching and research antecedents granted by the ANECA ('Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación Rangos académicos en España' – National Agency of Evaluation of quality and accreditation of academic ranking in Spain). Once ANECA grants the certification, candidates are allowed to apply for positions advertised by Universities.
LOU 2001 established the permanent positions of Professor (‘Catedrático de Universidad’ in Spanish, a higher level of professorship that is requested for certain positions such as University Chancellor) and Associate Professor full time (‘Profesor titular’ in Spanish), which are both considered as public service official (‘funcionario en servicio público’ in Spanish).
LOU 2001 also listed non-permanent positions (which are not public service positions) of Lecturer (‘Profesor Contratado Doctor’ in Spanish), Associate professor with partial time (this position allows professional work aside such as in the industry, hospital or media), Assistant-without PhD (PhD student that assist in teaching and is under supervision) and Assistant professor (once the Assistant completes the PhD). Additionally, there are other positions such as Visitor/Invited professor, Emeritus Professor, Private university Professor.

You might want to say a few words about how one obtains (or at least applies for) the required certification from ANECA.


text:
As a reviewer, how much raw data or code should you request?
The topic of reproducible research is attracting quite some press these days, yet much remains to be done. In this spirit, I am asking what can be a reviewer's role in this — I'll explain fully below.
Like many people, I would like to see academic research moving toward a more “open data” model, especially because the principle of reproducibility of research is central to the scientific method. However, I know that at least in my field (theoretical chemistry), the usual standards are pretty lax. I'll give two examples:

If you develop your own simulation/modeling code, you do not have to make it public in order to publish your results.
If you use an existing modeling code (available for free or commercial), you do not need to include your full/raw input files with your publication.

When I peer-reviewed papers for publication in the past, I typically did not ask for this, because (a) maybe my standards are not other people's standards, and (b) the role of the reviewer is more to advise on the quality of the science and analysis of the results.
But, over time, I'm not really satisfied with this approach any more. So: as a reviewer, how much information do you think is reasonable to request from the authors? Should you follow the customs and unwritten standards of your field, or is it okay to push it toward the direction you'd like to see it go? And how much can you push?

Scientific software does not compute

To follow from StasK's comment, a lot of code written by academics requires significant knowledge of the subject and the code's architecture to use. It is poorly documented and needs careful use to get realistic results. Until we can trust someone else to use it, then we won't release it for fear of bad results damaging our reputation.

Not an answer, but this article might be of interest: http://www.climateknowledge.org/figures/Rood_Climate_Change_AOSS480_Documents/Model_validation/Post_Computational_Science_Demands_PhysToday_2005.pdf

There is another hidden issue to watch out for. Many people have some sort of analytics set up for their website, so if you download their code they will see in their log a connection from $YOUR_IP and $YOUR_UNIVERSITY. This may reveal your identity as a reviewer. Maybe the best course of action is asking the editor to download the code and send it to you.

@Moriarty you should check out the top ten reasons not to share your code (and why you should anyway) on a recent SIAM news. It makes a very convincing rebuttal of your point.

If there are other reasons to reject the paper, then it's certainly unnecessary to request code/data.  If the paper looks like something that might be accepted, then you should ask yourself:

Can I certify the correctness and significance of this work, to the necessary degree, with the information that is available?

Of course, the key is the phrase to the necessary degree.  To make things more concrete, you might consider:

Would I feel comfortable if the whole world knew that I refereed and recommended acceptance of this paper?

If the answer is no, I don't have enough confidence in the results without seeing the raw data/code, then you should ask for it.  You're really doing the authors a favor here -- giving them the chance to convince you by providing additional evidence.
I would be very polite and make the request through the editor.  If the code and data are not forthcoming, you should probably say in your recommendation something like

I find the results in this paper compelling if they are correct, but I cannot recommend it for publication without verifying the data/code that underlies those results.

Of course, the degree to which a referee is expected to verify the correctness of results varies greatly between fields.  But you can always choose a personal standard higher than what's usual in your field.  Just realize that good refereeing takes a significant time investment.

Here are my two cents.
Yes, if there is code, you should ask for it (if possible). If you get it, then test it. Bear in mind if the authors don't have usable code, they probably aren't going to give it to you, but it doesn't hurt to try.
If the authors have provided code, the authors will probably be delighted if you test it. Most of the time people don't bother. They'd probably be seriously thrilled if you provide useful feedback and suggestions for improvements. This practically never happens. Personally, if an academic reviewer was to provide useful feedback on some code I had written, I'd think I was dreaming.
In particular, if you can't reproduce the results using the code, then I suggest documenting your reproduction difficulties in the review. I believe that such a failure is not considered a dealbreaker in academic research, because the ideas are the most important thing. However, it is still nice for everyone when this is possible.


text:
What to write at "Activité en matière d'administration et autres responsabilités" while applying for 'qualification' for MCF position in France
I'm applying for an MCF (Maître des Conférences) position in France in math, where my PhD is from the US. MCF's are equivalently to tenured assistant professor in France. For interested readers, you can also refer to another earlier question of mine that could give you a glimpse into the French academic system.
Now, before applying for MCF, an important and required step is to pass the qualification process, which is where they go through your research and CV to make sure you're indeed eligible for the MCF.
Now, in the qualification application process (see the attached image), I see that there's a place  where I'm supposed to fill up my administrative responsibilities - right where it says "Activité en matière d'administration et autres responsabilités".
This is where I'm getting a bit concerned. I think the only distantly relevant things I've done are the following:
*(1) I've strictly informally reviewed the math part of a paper on behalf of one of my former postdoc advisors, but nothing was official. I even forgot the name of the paper but can look it up.
(2) I gave informal coaching to some aspiring data scientists on the mistakes people make while switching from theoretical machine learning to industrial data scientist position, but it was all informal, as there's no proof that this ever happened - nowhere on internet is a trace of that event.*
I'm just not sure if this will be valid at all, or this will be enough? Are they going to fact check this part to see if I really did this type of admin tasks? It's not my intention to lie, but it's a required place to fill in, and I'm in a dilemma as to what to write here exactly, given my lack of experience? How strongly my application for qualification going to be judged based on this part alone?

First, if you have done nothing relevant, then it is fine to leave the field blank (or rather, write something like "néant" to make explicit that you left the field blank on purpose).
"Administrative and other duties" covers a lot of things. This includes, but is not limited to:

Organizational duties: a conference, a seminar, a workshop...
Committee duties: if you were a member of some university/department committee that sits regularly.
Editorial duties: being part of an editorial board, being asked to referee papers.
Management duties: being a department's (co)chair/cochair, or (co)director of some lab, or rector of some university, etc.

You will have to see what things from your CV apply. At your stage of the career - applying for qualification to MCF - it's normal not to have much to write here. Bear in mind that the process for people asking to be qualified for a senior position (professor) is the same, and there would typically be much more to write in that box.
As for your specific items:

Refereeing a paper for a journal can be considered as an "other duty". But honestly, it's part of the job and expected from everyone. It doesn't count for much, but it avoids leaving the field completely blank, I guess.
That sounds more like a pedagogical duty. But was this something organized, with scheduled sessions and everything? Or did you just have a chat with aspiring scientists in a corridor somewhere? In the first case, I would consider listing it under "pedagogical duties" along with your other duties. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother.

Finally, I would like to note that for the qualification for an MCF position, this box is not important. Only very junior people apply for that, and they typically have little to write there. What matters much more is 1 that you have a PhD in the correct discipline, 2 that you have demonstrated a little ability to teach. Having had administrative duties is nice, I guess, but not a discriminating criterion. I see that you are working in a mathematical field. The qualification rate in the group "Math and CS" is over 70%. People who don't get the qualification are those who don't have a PhD, or don't have a PhD in math/CS and haven't proved that they can actually research and teach math/CS. (And should have applied for the qualification in another section.)

Thanks a lot for your comment. I'll answer the question that you raised in your answer itself:

I've had students (one was a software developer and another was a lawyer), both of whom tried actively to switch to a data scientist position from their respective position. So not only I privately tutored them the math for data science, parts of the sessions were reserved to discuss the ins and outs of the fields, the market saturation, the topics they'd need to learn and in which order, and my own past experience as a data scientist. So does this count at all as 'other duty'?

Also, another follow up but related question: I've a PhD in pure math (differential geometry and topology), but my most recent research has been in applied math for machine learning/computational neuroimaging. I said most recent, because I had a career setback between 2017-2021 when I tried to enter industry, but that's another story.
So my question is: can I apply to both of the sections 25 (math) and 26 (applied math), given that my PhD and postdoctoral research are different? Can I apply for qualifications for both?

@ScienceMan Something 100% informal like you had, don't bother. If you did supervise undergrads in your lab and arranged some lab meetings and well, generally helped running the lab daily, it might be worth mention. As a general rule, you don't get credit for something you can't provide some sort of papers for: these things surely help to build interpersonal relationships but look almost pitiful on a CV/application. "I served as a member of conference committee..." or "As part of my duties as a TA I did..." are valid; if you can't directly link it to a position you had - don't bother.

@ScienceMan Lodinn is right, honestly, I wouldn't bother including the info about the tutoring in that case. You don't need to pad your CV for the qualification. As for which section you should apply to, there is no point in applying for both. If your postdoc research is in applied math, and you plan to look for jobs in applied math, then you should ask for qualification in section 26. Once you have the qualification in any section you can apply for any MCF position (even in history or biology if you want).

@Lodinn thank you - so I think I'll just write nothing/néant there. Oh I didn't know that qualification in one section would automatically make me qualify for other sections as well - I thought qualification for each section is different!
The reason I was hesitating about this part is that: my current research activities relates to the applied math in machine learning or signal/image processing, but these MCF's are often associated to signal processing groups and thus have to teach very CS related stuff (e.c. C++ programming, or database etc.) and I'm unable to teach that (continued below).

@N.I. (continued from above) I can teach all the math stuff like complex analysis, differential geometry, topology etc. and even some statistics stuff like regression etc but not CS stuff. So I was wondering if I apply for applied math, only applied math departments/groups like signal/image processing would interview me, and thus wouldn't consider my application the moment they'd know of my inability to teach the basic stuff that every MCF there teaches. But if at the qualification level, passing applied math allows me to apply for pure math or other positions, then it's good indeed!

@ScienceMan Check this FAQ: https://www.galaxie.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/ensup/cand_FAQ_GALAXIE.htm specifically, item 18. But note that applying for the qualification from two sections gives you a lesser risk of being rejected. The application is exactly the same.

@N.I. Thank you - I'll check the details there. Just another quick question though: I see that we need to send the French translation of the summary of the papers/articles. I wonder if they have to be certified translations (I've translated my degree and the report that says there were no defense report by using a traducteur assermenté (certified translator) but I'm not sure about the paper summaries, so I ask. Also, by summary, did they mean abstract of the papers only, or more than that?

@ScienceMan No need for a certified translation. Yes, "résumé" means abstract.

@N.I. Thanks! Another quick question if it's okay with you: I see that Galaxie asks for "Rapport de soutenance". Now the university in the US where I did my PhD didn't provide me with a Rapport de soutenance, and upon my request, they wrote a letter that validates this fact, which I then translated using a certified transaltor. Is this document enough to transmit in the place where they're asking for Rapport de soutenance? I wrote the CNU people but didn't get a reply in this regard..

If you don't have a rapport de soutenance then I don't think you have to include it - lots of countries don't have one.


text:
On obtaining references from people who don't know me in person but have cited my work
I'll be applying for a few academic positions (both postdoc and permanent positions in Western Europe.) I've done my PhD in pure math (from the US) and subsequent postdocs mainly in use of machine learning in medical imaging and also partly in statistical machine learning (all were in Western Europe.)
I wrote to my PhD advisor regarding the above, who is familiar with my doctoral (pure math) work but isn't familiar with my recent work. While he'll still send the recommendations, he advised me that I should contact people who cited my work and ask them to see if they can write a recommendation.
I don't doubt my advisor's opinion, and I've deep respect for him as a mathematician, but the only thing that I'm asking myself is that if the above strategy will work outside pure math. While I was applying for pure math postdocs back in the day, it did work. But will it work for applied areas like medical imaging or statistical machine learning?
Thank you in advance!

Personally, I'd worry about this strategy for use for a permanent position. A bit less for another postdoc. Your papers speak for themselves without reinforcement by a letter writer except in, perhaps, exceptional cases.
I think the purpose of a letter of recommendation is to go beyond the product you produce and speak about your total fitness for a position. Someone who doesn't know you at all can hardly help you with that.
I'd guess that letters from postdoc PIs, for example, would be better, since you have worked with them.
Someone you know from conference contacts and who has used your work might also be (just) ok, since they can say something about you as a person. Even letters from someone like your old advisor who doesn't know your current work can fill in some blanks about what it would be like to work with you and how diligent you are in various necessary things.
Use the whole application to fill out a whole picture. If you overemphasize one part you will be neglecting other important parts.
If it were just your advisor and, say, two others who don't know you personally and haven't worked with you, then I'd really advise against it. One such letter might be ok if, for example, you've actually communicated with them in the past.

Thank you Buffy - pretty valid points indeed and it seconds my concern. I'll surely take necessary steps to take recommendations from, people who know me better.


text:
How to bring up to a future postdoc employer, the point of not asking for recommendation for a specific postdoc employer?
I'm applying for a postdoc position at a French university, and the employer, who's a professor, requested me, in an informal email exchange, to state the name and email of a specific former employer from whom she could ask for a recommendation. Now when I was working in that former postdoc position, it was not productive for both, things didn't go well, and I'm ready to take part (but not all) of responsibility for it. I've a bitter feeling about that postdoc advisor for reasons that're not relevant to this question.
My question to you is: how do I tell my potential postdoctoral employer that I don't want her to seek a recommendation from that position? Here's what I drafted so far:
"If it can be avoided, I'd rather not have my mentor at position *** write a recommendation for me, as I often felt our professional relationship could be improved as we disagreed on many approaches in the project and there were also personality mismatch - while I do take part of the responsibility for it, I'm unable to take all of it. "
after which I finished the draft of this informal email with:
"If you're okay with the above response, I'll go ahead and send you a formal application." And my CV does mention another postdoctoral employer who could write recommendations for me, which I stated earlier in the same draft email.
What do you think of the above response? And practically speaking , is it okay to tell her that I don't want her to request recommendation from this and that post? For me: I tend to feel it's okay as long as there're some other capable people who can write recommendations - everybody has an unfavorable period in life, and that could happen in a postdoc, but that alone doesn't define me as a researcher.

It would be unprofessional to describe your previous employer in anything but positive terms when you are a job applicant.  If you cannot describe them positively, do not describe them at all.  You are showing the future employer how you will describe them in the future.
You could try suggesting an alternate reference, without saying why.
Ask yourself, why would the potential employer make an unusual request for a specific reference if this was not a critical factor in their hiring decision?  Your efforts might be better directed towards a different employer.

Thanks for your answer. I understand your point about saying positive things about my previous employer and suggesting an alternate reference. Will do that! However, what if the potential employer asks me why I don't want her to seek a recommendation from that specific one? What will I answer?
As for the unusual request you mentioned in your answer, she's asking for two references, both from universities in France, where this potential new position is in as well. I'm guessing she'd feel more comfortable to see the reference from people from French universities.

Just say "I would prefer to use X as a reference.  X is an outstanding expert in ..."

Of course employers do not really need to ask you for permission before asking people about you.  It's just a custom.

Thanks, I'll modify my email accordingly. It may be a custom, but I feel it's a biased one for the previous postdoc mentor and has an inbuilt sense of hierarchy: a collaboration is a two-way street: if one has to judge how it was, then both parties involved in the collaboration should be able to express themselves about the other one. Since I'm the one asking for a new job, I should not be the only one in the position of being judged and not be able to say anything about the person judging me. How would someone know that a person is not giving a bad reference because of personal vendetta?


text:
Getting into PhD programme when having not the best grades due to personal issues
I have studied Physics (Diploma) and since 3 years I work as a Software Engineer.
But I am starting to miss the high degree of intellectual challenge. So I am thinking to go back to academia. Unfortunately my Diploma grade was B (German 2), likewise the grade of my in-depth elective Theoretical Particle Physics. I think I could have done better, but my mother died of cancer during my Diploma thesis and this didn't leave much focus and time for me. Plus I started working on a Web App in the last 2 months of my studies. Other grades were better, my Math elective (Functional Analysis) was A+, likewise Theoretical Physics. My undergraduate studies' grades were mixed, between A+ and B-.
My thesis also does not look so well. Because of a lack of time it has orthographic errors, discussion of results is too short and the source code snippets in it look ugly. Once I applied for a job through a head hunter and after they saw my thesis they completely lost interest in me as a candidate.
So question: how hard is it in such a situation to apply for a PhD Programme and is it a good idea at all? What would be a good strategy when applying? I am interested in Mathematics, Theoretical Physics, Mathematical Physics or Computer Science.

Why the downvote? I tried to keep the question as reusable by others as possible. In fact, trying to find information about such a problem on the web, I found absolutely nothing...

If you're serious about getting into a grad school, then you need to take the initiative. In your situation, just sending off applications is unlikely to be enough. What you need to do is to get someone on the inside of an institution to want to work with you. So -- contact individual professors and let them know that you are interested in working with them. This means you need to figure out who they are, what they work on, and, when you contact them, you need to make it about why you can be of help in their research area. It's a lot of work, but the process will probably be good for you as well, narrowing down what it is you really are interested in, what your abilities are, and what kind of work you want to do. Good luck!

Thanks, this sounds good.  Actually this also avoid the already mentioned problem of avoiding that I would get engaged into something I am not interested in.

In Germany even some renowned research institutes mention in the job offers that people with at least grade B should be encouraged to apply for a position. So I don't see here a major problem for you. No one looks on your pre-diploma grades, this is now different with the bachelor AND master degree. But you have to make a presentation of your diploma work for the job interview. I don't know what speaks against adding results that you worked out after that thesis to make the work more impressive, as you didn't have as much time as other students with a scholarship or rich parents and were forced to work besides your diploma work, especially as the diploma needs 12 months in germany. If they want you to send them your diplom pdf, than of course you have to look for another group.
The major problem I see is that you wrote your thesis now 3 years ago, and 2-2.5 years is also a deadline I saw several times in such german PhD job offers, as after some time you simply loose knowledge.
Nonetheless you should try it, write a few dozen applications and look how much invitations for a job interview you get and in what fields, but be clear what your motivation is. Your question does sound to me like you a bored and desperated in your current job, that is not the best reason for a Prof. to hire you, you should show interest in a specific topic, related to your diploma work would make your motivation to do a PhD more credible to me.

Actually I am seeking something more mathematical, before I started my current job I though it would involve at least some non-trivial Mathematics. (Having seen R&D papers on their website.) Being much more well-informed about the industry now, I found out such jobs are really rare. Of those rare jobs most require a PhD

Anyway... Hiding the original thesis seems dodgy to me, I think I won't be very comfortable with this

@user6302 I didn't tell you to hide it, mostly they want you to make a presentation and anyway have no time to read your thesis, so it's more about how you sell the results you produced in that presentation.

Ok ok, I get your point


text:
APA format - hyperlinking the citation rather than providing a separate URL
I'm at my page length maximum for my APA-style references section. Beyond using Bitly to shorten URLs, can I simply hyperlink my entire citation rather than wasting space with a following URL?
Example:
Terrell, Tracy. (1977). A Natural Approach to Second Language Acquisition and Learning. The Modern Language Journal. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1977.tb05147.x
Becomes:
Terrell, Tracy. (1977). A Natural Approach to Second Language Acquisition and Learning. The Modern Language Journal.
If so, which part of the reference can I hyperlink?

In a strict reading of the relevant passage in the APA Manual, hyperlinking the reference without providing the DOI/URL as a readable string seems not possible. (At least using a URL shortener is okay to APA.)
If your paper is intended for a journal or conference, you should ask the editors whether they grant you a little excess in word count.
If your paper for a university course, simply do as you wish and tell your professor about your approach and why you did that.
In such a case, I would prefer to hyperlink only the title of the cited publication (again, there are no official guidelines, so perhaps one can deviate according to one's own taste).
However, just for the record, an Elsevier journal (not APA style) actually hyperlinks the whole reference:

By the way, note that if your cited reference has a DOI, you should link to the DOI and not to the URL. In your example, the DOI Is http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1977.tb05147.x - - see the APA Manual (linked above):

Include a DOI for all works that have a DOI, regardless of whether you used the online version or the print version.
If a print work does not have a DOI, do not include any DOI or URL in the reference.
If an online work has both a DOI and a URL, include only the DOI.


text:
Should I paraphrase or quotes definitions?
In the literature review when I have many definitions from the literature can I paraphrase them or do I have to put them in quotes as they are?

Somehow related question http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5471/transitive-copying-plagiarism

What is your academic field? In mathematics and theoretical computer science, definitions are (almost) never put in quotes.

In business, both ways are common.

If you use another source's definitions verbatim, then they must be placed in quotes; otherwise that's plagiarism. However, it should be pointed out that general facts and definitions—one that would be reasonably obvious to anyone who has, for instance, an undergraduate background in your field—need not be cited, so long as you are not literally quoting someone else. For instance, saying "Newton's second law states F = m × a" does not require a citation; saying

The second law states that the net force on an object is equal to the rate of change (that is, the derivative) of its linear momentum p in an inertial reference frame [Wikipedia].

requires a citation to Wikipedia.

For example: if Author A say"Earth is ver nice place to leave in and interact with people" and I said Author A declared that living in earth is a good way to interact with people. Then this cosidered plagiarism?

No, it is a misinterpretation of the original statement.

Let me add a bit to the answer of Aeismail.
If something is "common knowledge" then it doesn't need to be cited and can be paraphrased. But if you do "quote" a source literally, then it must be cited, even if it is common knowledge.
But even if something isn't common knowledge then it can be paraphrased, but must be cited to avoid plagiarism. Paraphrasing is sometimes needed, in fact, to avoid copyright issues, independent of plagiarism.
And note that "quoting" doesn't necessarily imply "quote marks" which are only one way to indicate that something is a literal copy of someone else's words. There are other conventions that might be used. The answer of Aeismail shows one such convention, in fact.


text:
Scoring GRE analytical writing practice essays
I took the GRE and my analytical writing score wasn't what I hoped for. During the exam, I thought my answer was good. Having read about argumentation and practiced writing, I wonder if there is a reputable service that will score essays and give feedback?

Have you visited www.ets.org? I think they have excellent strategy on how to prepare.

You've got a few options:

See if your school has a GRE preparation course (you may have to pay for this) or other writing tutorials.
As Tirath said, look at ets.org for strategies.
If you're still in undergraduate school and have at least another semester, enroll in a writing class. The practice you get from the class should improve your overall ability.
Look online for test preparation courses. These can be expensive, but sometimes they have "guaranteed results," and you can probably figure out the best ones by looking at reviews.
Advertise on Craigslist (or similar) for a tutor. If you are in a college town, you may find someone willing to tutor you relatively cheaply.
Look online for GRE writing samples, and read as many as you can.
Practice writing every day. The more you practice, the better you'll get (and read as much as you can, too).

Keep in mind that while you always should strive for high scores, your field of study will partially dictate how important the writing score is. If you're going for a history PhD, you'll need a high score, but for a science degree this tends to be less important (for admissions--being able to write is important for any PhD!).

Check on the rules for the GRE.  You may be able to only retake the writing portion, or they may "blend" the top scores from each section, so you could take it a 2nd time and only focus on the writing portion (check me on this).

Ets offers a service to rate your essays. They charge approximately $10/essay and they rate the essays as in the actual examination. You could check the service by logging in your GRE account.

How about joining a MooC by UC, Berkely on eDX :
"College Writing 2.1x is an introduction to academic writing for English Language Learners, focusing on essay development, grammatical correctness, and self-editing."
Link - https://www.edx.org/course/berkeley/colwri2-1x/college-writing-2-1x-principles/1194 or http://online.berkeley.edu/news/introducing-latest-mooc-college-writing-21x-principles-written-english
Its a 5 week course and requires 5-6Hours/week effort. The course will be taught by Maggie Sokolik. And will be starting from November 8, 2013. So enrol now soon.
And one more, English Composition by Cousera :
English Composition Part 1 - https://www.coursera.org/course/composition#!
And then you can move on to part 2 ;-)

What I wound up doing is hiring a tutor through WyzAnt. I found someone with experience in this area, and wrote a few essays based on sample prompts from GRE study books. I emailed them to him, he estimated a score for each of them and made comments. We went through a second round of the same. My score did improve the second time I took the GRE.


text:
What can we do to increase student engagement?
My University has recently started recording lectures and posting them online. We have also, in the past few years, noticed a considerable drop in lecture attendance across the whole Physics and Astronomy department (even in courses that are not recorded).
I expect that the advent of recorded lectures is a significant contributor to this. However in the tutorial classes as well as lectures, it wasn't uncommon for attendance in the course I was TA for this semester to be below 50%. Myself and the lecturers are at a loss.
I am not necessarily against offering pittance marks for attendance, however I think that it is rather poor practice as it does little to encourage students to become genuinely interested in the material. Encouraging students to discuss science among themselves and become emotionally invested in the topic is the best way to get them out of bed and attending classes.
Does anyone have any "success stories" to share where they have significantly increased the level of student engagement in their course(s)?

Maybe you shouldn't equate attendance and engagement? Drop in attendance in itself is not a problem, I would say… as long as the students learn the skills that you want to teach them, they can do that in the best way for them. Get students engaged not so much in the lectures, but in other activities: projects, group projects, practicals, case studies, etc.

Notice I did not ask how I can increase attendance. I am merely noting that the decreased attendance has resulted in decreased student engagement. Getting that engagement back is the priority - if better attendance results then that is a bonus. No point having bums on seats if they're just on Facebook all lesson!

My school has a mandatory attendance policy (which I know several members here disagree with) but because of that policy I have had to face with engagement in a different way that you. Still, I hope this answer will help.
Without engagement I find myself in large classes (sometimes >100) and classroom management gets to be a real challenge (for me and the other students). So, after trying a few different things I've found that challenging the students almost like a game show seems to be useful.
For example, in one module, I will give them scenarios (one at a time) to analyze (with multiple choice answers where each requires them to come up with their own reasons why that is the right answer). The scenario is short enough to fit on one slide and while the students are encouraged to read before class, they can still participate even if they did not do the work. This is particularly helpful to me since the ones who do not do the homework tend to be the hardest to control and, therefore, are the most disruptive to the learning environment. They tend to find it a challenge to see who can 'guess' right.
On top of this, I try to inject a little humor while walking around the room asking for analyses which tends to add a little entertainment aspect to the whole event.
For another module, I assess through an extremely difficult test which is quite common to fail unless extensive research is done. In this case, I alternate lecturer sessions (where I do most of the talking) and discussion sessions (where students do most of the talking). Engagement is not quite as strong with this module but I'm still honing it.
On a somewhat related note, you might check into this article on discovery based learning. I found it quite interesting.

I think the definitive answer is not within our grasp. There are interesting studies that indicate that improved quality of lectures is one of few possibilities to improve attendance (e.g., Univ. of Wollongong Online Research). The causes of absenteeism can be related to many factors including demographic factors such as
age, paid employment (e.g., Australian Journal of Teacher Education, Accounting Education, South African Journal of Ecomonics). It appears that the reasons for the attention drop has to be found in changes of student conditions, both in terms of academic experience and conditions relating to life in general. In other words, the world is changing and that demands adaptation from the university system. A study in Engineering Education (also in the aforementioned study in Accounting Education) provides indications that attendance and accessibility to teachers out of class hours correlate. The study also conclude that class performance and attendance are highly correlated. This means that academic performance is a selling point for attendance. The role of incentive schemes in achieving higher attendance may, however, not be a key to success as exemplified by a study in the Australian Economic Papers so the means to improve attendance requires more attention.
So whereas I do not have any good examples of how improvements can be made, there are studies that point at both causes and effects, positive and negative, which should be considered when trying to improve attendance. Some aspects lie with improving lectures but some concern understanding the changes occurring outside the university and adapting to these.