text:
My research area has very few research positions, would it still be possible for me to stay in academia?
I am a PhD student in mathematics.  I felt quite lucky that I got into this program.  My research is also going ok, and I got some confirmation from my advisor that I should be able to graduate in a year or two if I keep up with my work.  So things were mostly good.  But a recent conversation with my advisor completely changed my view about my situation.
We just finished one of our projects and naturally got to the question of when I should graduate.  Then We start to discuss my plans after graduation.  He asked me whether I want to find a job in industry or stay in academia.  I said I want to remain in academia, find a postdoc, then a tenure-track position, etc.  He then told me that there are very few places that have postdocs in my area, and indicated maybe I should look for schools that majorly focus on teaching.
I was very shocked.  I always wanted to stay in academia and thought about going to good research schools.  In fact we talked about this when I first asked to be his student.  But for some reason, he kept asking me the same question every once in a while.
I went home and start search on mathjobs.org for positions in my area, which I probably should have done three years ago.  There were almost nothing.  There are two postdoc positions, both are from not very well-known schools, I don't quite have interests in applying to either one of them.
I am quite lost.  On one hand, I wish I knew this much earlier on.  I wish my advisor would have told me before he helped me pick this area.  I also should've done some research on that myself.  Now I just have so much regrets in my heart.
On the other hand, I think it's time to be realistic and rethink my plans.  I wonder if it is still be possible for me to get a postdoc (possibly in one of the two places) and later go to a top-ranking school for tenure-track positions?  If a school don't have anyone in your area, would they hire you as a tenure-track AP?  I am not quite fond of teaching, I can bear it if it's part of my job being a researcher, but I would not want to do this as my sole job.
If that is not possible, what kind of job can a math PhD get?  I had some experience in industry before as well, but I don't quite like that job.  Are there research-type positions in companies that would appreciate a math major?  If so, what kind of knowledge/skills should I pick up now?

"I always wanted to stay in academia and thought about going to good research schools.": I don't know what is the situation in your country, but in mine staying in academia is the exception rather than the rule. I'd say that about 90% of the PhD students eventually end up in industry. So when one starts their PhD the first thing that many of us say to their students is: we cannot guarantee that you will be able to stay in academia, probably you won't.

My supervisor used to refer to academia as a pyramid scheme. One tenure-track professor has multiple PhD students. By design, it's not possible for all PhD students (nor the majority, for that matter) to go on to academia.

When you say you "area", how narrowly are you considering this? I mean, obviously you will not have an easy time finding a postdoc position looking for someone who does precisely what you have been doing as part of your PhD, but surely there will be positions that brush up against it?

@TobiasKildetoft I am not just talking about my thesis problem.  It's actually the whole field that doesn't have many postdoc positions...

@initial_D -- that seems almost unlikely. Can you say what your field is?

If it's any consolation -- yours is not the only field where students are given shockingly poor career guidance.  You are right, career guidance should be given throughout your studies.  If you end up doing any type of teaching, I hope you will make a point of having regular conversations with your students about possible future career directions.

If you're in the USA, or willing to move there, depending on your research area, it may be reasonable to look for jobs at the various National Laboratories. Those are essentially full-time research positions, provided that your work is in an area of general interest to their applied programs.

@WolfgangBangerth There were very few postdoctoral options in my area when I obtained my PhD -- I got lucky in that one of the places in the world still doing that subject had a friendlier grant system than the country I got my PhD in.

To the OP: it sounds like your best shot, if you prefer not to go for a mostly-teaching-based position, is to look for postdoctoral options in adjacent areas. That's where the networking and discussions with researchers in neighbouring topics, which a PhD supervisor should encourage their student to do, can be valuable. Maybe no one does exactly your area, but can you send a job application which gives the readers the belief that you could work with them?

There may not be many postdoc positions in your area specifically, but many universities hire with no restrictions on the research area (further, many mathematicians want to branch out and hire postdocs whose areas are adjacent, rather than identical, to their own). So I'm not sure what you mean by having only two positions.

A guy makes an interesting point http://www.proandkon.com/484/of-doing-a-phd?show=486#a486

You might get some benefit from the answers to this question: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/365005/how-do-i-sell-out-with-abstract-algebra/371633#371633

I wonder if it is still be possible for me to get a postdoc (possibly in one of the two places) and later go to a top-ranking school for tenure-track positions?

Yes, this is possible. But, unless you are making definitive progress on famous open problems which are well-known to everyone in your field.... then it is very unlikely and you should not count on it. (And perhaps even if you are.)
Most academic jobs involve both research and teaching. For example, I work at a research university with a Ph.D. program and a 2-2 teaching load. I definitely have time for research, but teaching is a big component of the job, and if I didn't enjoy teaching I would not want to do this job. (Moreover, if I wasn't good at teaching, then the hiring committee probably would have picked up on this and not offered me the job in the first place. Most people who are good at teaching, enjoy it.)
I think you are wise to investigate your other options. I've known people who decided not to pursue (or continue with) academic careers, and for the most part they were able to find good jobs. Software companies like to hire mathematicians, and you might learn programming if you don't know it already. Some mathematicians successfully go into finance (and make boatloads of money doing it.) Actuarial work is another possibility. In any case, these sorts of jobs don't generally just "happen"; you have to proactively think about what you do like and look for opportunities.
Good luck to you!

Basically, as you are no doubt realizing, you cannot simply pick a "good research school" where you would like to work - you need to make them want to pick you (and they need to have an open position). This pretty much requires an outstanding publication record. And demonstrated ability to raise money. It is frequently sweetened if you can show credible teaching skills.  Very few recent graduates fit this description: as with any career it requires long hours and years of work to get to the top.
That said, here are a few thoughts about an academic career:
1) If you are good, it does not matter what academic institution you are at.
2) There is a whole subculture of itinerant research professors who begin at a lesser-known school (say Podunk Teaching University) as their first job, then eventually attempt to leverage this into a position at a better school. Some are successful at this. Of course, this strategy also requires that you be good, which you will need to demonstrate by publishing regularly.
3) If you are lucky enough to be offered a position at Podunk, it is very likely that you will meet a large number of the faculty there who themselves are quite good, despite its lack of reputation. People on the same career trajectory as you, for instance.
All in all, no matter whether you choose industry or academia, you will need to put in the hours if you want to make a name for yourself.  There really is no shortcut to the top for most of us - just hard work and stubbornness. And citation counts.

"If you are good, it does not matter what academic institution you are at." While I agree with this, it might require some time to be good at something which extends the 3-4 year time for the PhD. For example, we use to joke that in today job market, we have high doubt that even today's well known physicists would find a Postdoc  job based on the publication history(in the past, some of the very good physicists today have graduated with one or two publications, or even none). However, I will not mention the names, these informations are easily found on web).

First of all, you are way ahead of the most. Don't despair. PhD journey sucks you into a narrow tunnel and you spend years chasing that narrow goal without looking around too much. Now it's about over and you started looking around. You got much smarter. The world seems more complex and different. You look five years older, have less hair, etc... shock! Look around more, gather info, check out different career paths from your new point of view. Stay open minded. A lot of things you were so sure of will clearly seem wrong now. That's perfectly normal. That's why you spent all that time studying.
Second, develop economic intuition about the work you can do now. Will those few publications you produce as a math researcher in academia create a value for society of ~$100,000 per year? Can you create more value teaching larger classes in a less prestigious school and having more research freedom? Can you spend a few month transitioning into an adjacent field where there is a great demand for mathematicians?
And finally, if you don't like teaching, as you mentioned, don't go into teaching! Your dislike towards it will snowball into a boulder of misery over time. Even if you manage to put up with it, is it really worth it? There are probably hundreds of career paths available to you where you will get to do what you want and enjoy life.

"You look five years older": Oh, well, some after a 5-year PhD look 10 years older.

You don’t like teaching, and you don’t like working in industry. You just want to write math research papers. Perhaps you should ask yourself a few hard questions like:
(1) What value would my papers provide to the world at large?
(2) What would motivate someone to pay me to write papers?
Generally, you’ll have to do something that’s potentially useful to society in order for society to pay you. That seems fair, to me. It might be worth funding a few exceptionally talented individuals to do whatever they want, but the numbers will be small. Are you one of that small group of exceptionally talented people?
People say that abstract pure mathematics sometimes finds uses decades after it was first developed. This is true, but the odds are extremely small, and they’re getting smaller every year as pure mathematics becomes ever more abstract and further removed from reality.
You might say that you don’t care whether or not your work is useful. You could argue that mathematics is beautiful, and you enjoy it. I’d agree with that view. But this is a reason for doing mathematics, not a reason for funding it.
Unless you’re independently wealthy, you may have to do some work that you don’t particularly like in order to pay the bills. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I think it’s reality.

I saw this reply a few years later, but I still want to add my comment.  I think it is unnecessarily harsh and not helpful.  I never said I do not want to do any work and expect to get paid.  My interests were relevant to my decisions, and that's why I stated them.  And according to your view about funding, math research is just hopeless.  Most of the stuff we do were considered not useful, and no one should try and be a math PhD.

TL;DR: Stop worrying and keep trying.
There is a saying "don't worry about things you can't change or have no control over", which I think can be applied to your case very well. You will graduate in a year or two, you already commit to the current research area, and can't change it. So worrying about it will not help you anything. Instead you should focus on producing the best PhD thesis possible, as ask for the best LoR from your advisor.
People do not always do postdoc in the same field as PhD. Actually, I heard some advices that you need to do postdoc in an area different from the one in PhD. So you may not need to worry about the current research area.
Being a teaching professor might not be as bad as you think. Next to my office is the lab of an associate teaching professor. I don't know what she teaches, and how many hours does she need to teach. But she has more than 10 PhD students in that lab to do research, she also has more than 100 papers with nearly 6000 citations. She currently has more than 1 million $ of research grant. This is much better than many (research?) professors.

I'm only a postdoc, so I don't know clearly about titles of professors. But in my university, teaching professors and research professors are at a lower level than professors without teaching/research prefix.

Suggesting not to worry is terrible advice, as it hides the dust under the carpet. Submitting the best PhD thesis you can come up with is by no means sufficient to landing future academic positions; postponing the issue upon completion of the thesis will most likely make you end up with no paths to take. One must definitely think about what to do next throughout the PhD to avoid dangerous surprises.

This is potentially very bad advice. What happens if you spend 2 years exclusively focusing on getting a job and then fail? Or even worse, you get a postdoc and postpone your ultimately joblessness another several years? OP has a chance to decide if they want to take this risk or learn other skills that will open up more job opportunities in the next few years instead of putting his or her eggs all in one basket.

How do you feel about applied mathematics?  Possibly you could thrive in a research institute, such as Scripps, Woods Hole, the many physics institutes, medical research centers?
I suggest you repost a question, giving specifics about your area of math specialization.

I suggest you repost a question, giving specifics about your area of math specialization. – Please don’t. Questions shopping for an academic field are not a good fit for this site and will be closed.

Both choices (stay on target for a  tenure-track position, or move on to an industry position) will require significant research on your part.
Find 3 people at schools you respect that have recently gotten a  tenure-track position.  Ask them their story. Look for how long, what they needed, how they went about it.  This is much better indicator of how likely it is that you can get this position than looking for current job openings.
For an industry job -  What about math excites you? Could you continue your math in the evenings/weekends?  Great if you can do it. Is there a job that would excite you?  See if can find people to talk with that have been doing it for some years.
 If do not have anything that triggers your passion, talk with math alumni that went into industry about 5 years ago.  Their stories may showcase possibilities for you.
While having the intense math focus is great, you will need to start working on other skill sets while finishing your degree.  Public speaking and problem solving are two prime candidates.  Familiarity with email as used in business is almost mandatory for an industry position.  Making a realistic five year plan is huge.
Last one, if you can do it, find a good mentor. There is a huge difference between an advisor and a mentor.

Although it didn't strictly answer the question, this answer offer an overview on the possibilities offered by the industry. There exists some positions in industry which are related strictly to mathematics. To be honest, anyone can learn a programming language in a couple of weeks(Java, C, C++, Php, C#,...). Mathematics, on the other hand requires years of work, which not always get into top publications. Nowadays, from my experience there are few positions in industry which requires mathematics, and someone which has a background in mathematics and also is very good at programming is hunted by the companies in industry - mostly, the companies which are performing business in aeronautics and space. I give a few examples: GMV Innovating Solutions, Thales, Deimos, Assystem. I know of these because I was offered a position into some of these companies, which I refused. The basic programming language required is Matlab and/or Mathematica.

Thanks a lot for your answer, I will look into these places!

While I agree with the sentiment that there are plenty of strong uses for a maths (for example in finance, modelling, big data, etc) you are completely wrong that anyone can learn a programming language in a couple of weeks...or at least not if they actually want to get anything significant done with it. There's a reason senior developers have years of experience...

I second @TimB's point. After a few weeks of learning to program, you will be about as good as an undergraduate math student after one semester is at mathematics. You might get a job, but you will not be able to compete with those who have been programming for years and are in fact good at it.

@WolfgangBangerth, Tim B. Of couse not, you are completely right. I wanted to focus that learning programming is easier in general than learning theory.

@MikeyMike -- I disagree with that as well. You will be able to shoehorn something together, but to be a good and productive software designer and author, you have to understand computing theory, programming languages, etc as well.

@WolfgangBangerth Nowadays, software developers in general(from a company perspective) don't use advanced mathematical calculus, except from a few aerospace/technical companies. I have done a BSc in Applied Physics, most of my peers work in software development, without any usage of mathematics(some of them even don't remember what a gradient or rotor is, but works as senior developers). In general in computing theory is more easy to produce publishable papers than in theoretical areas such as theoretical physics/mathematics.

@MikeyMike -- I'm going to disagree with this as well. I don't think that it is easier to publish in computing theory than in maths. Of course software developers typically don't use much math or physics; but the good ones use software design theory, software patterns, understand programming language design, etc. None of which a typical math or physics graduate will know.


text:
What to do with teachers who think their subject is "extra special" and gives students too heavy a load?
I've had my fair share of teachers who give so much more load than the previous teachers of the same subject. A whole extra project, much more papers, or exercises, etc.
The bigger problem is that there comes a time where in a single semester, several of the teachers think this way, and MOST of them give an extra project/exercise EACH, on top of the current curriculum projects.
This strains the students too much.
How should a student approach these types of situations?

Easily. Does the required homework, pass the courses with good grades and moves on.

How do you deal with a boss which asks you to work more than other bosses? What if he gives you a project with a tight deadline?

@NickS That comparison doesn't work. In a workplace situation, one typically only has one immediate boss. It's up to them to manage the competing demands on their group's time from different customers and different parts of the company.

@DavidRicherby Sadly, this isn't at all what it is like in companies. (Almost) nobody is in one project only nowadays, and almost nobody has exactly one boss.

@xLeitix Yet it seems that many job-seekers and employees strongly prefer having one boss to many. That some companies have bloated and inefficient management structures does not mean that well-managed companies don't exist (or should be ignored).

@djechlin That sounds like more like a caricature of a boss than an actual, effective boss. You'd think a person in charge of a project would want to hear about difficulties encountered by elements of the project, so he can address them, instead of sitting at his table and wondering why it hasn't shipped when he expected it to ship.

This is just what you should be expecting from your postgraduate degree. Each module is special. It should push you further than any undergraduate module would.
You are also now assumed to be a grown-up, and to learn how to manage your own workload, and to balance competing demands on your time and energy. Part of what a Masters or Doctorate course does, is to teach you research skills, and project management. These are (at least, in the courses I've been involved with), an important part of the process.
If you are having trouble balancing your workload, talk to your personal tutor, the graduate tutor or whoever else it is who's been assigned to you by the department to manage these cross-module issues.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Percentage of the world population with subscription journal access?
Many scientists are under the impression that the majority of interested readers for their work have subscription journal access. I find this unlikely as a very small percentage of the global population has subscription journal access. To help illustrate the suicidal impact subscription publishing has on one's research, it would be helpful to have some estimates of the percent of individuals denied access to subscription works.
While such an estimate comes with many caveats, does anyone know of statistics or resources that could help answer this question? For example, how many people are affiliated with organizations that purchase institutional access? Even if the metrics are for a single journal, that could be a helpful starting point.
Note: this question was originally posted to the OpenCon Community Discussion Listserv.

This a great question and one I want to get hard data on too. I've often wondered why librarians don't openly publish lists of journals (and the age-range of accessibility e.g. 1990<->2015) they do / don't have subscriptions for at each higher education institution. It would be really interesting and I don't think it would be difficult to do. This seems like something librarians could definitely be in a position to answer.

This argument seems to be based on an independence fallacy.  "The majority of interested readers have access" is by no means inconsistent with "a very small percentage of the global population has access", since in many cases, interested readers are far more likely to be researchers affiliated with universities - they're not randomly sampled from the world population.  Put more bluntly, why should I care about billions of people without access, if none of them actually want to read my paper?

@rmounce: That information can usually be found in the library's public catalog, though maybe not all in one convenient place.

@NateEldredge, denying outsiders access to the primary inputs of science ensures they stay uninterested. I'm interested in the percent of the global population that is deprived of the opportunity to do science because of article unavailability.

Perfect question! If anyone can provide such stats this would be amazing. :)
I would make the question a bit more specific. Let's assume I'm an author who wants to publish an article and have to choose between a particular toll-access journal and an Open Access one. We want to know what's the potential audience of both journals, measured by the number of scholars who can access the article, without differentiating between disciplines (for simplicity) and without considering non-scholars (they're hard to measure). The main question is how these two numbers relate to each other: the toll-access audience is 90%? 50%? 5%? ... of the OA audience? I suspect the value is closer to 5-10% for most journals, because there are something like 30,000 journals out there and most of them are not very presitigious and subscribed only by a fraction of institutions, esp. in developing countries. Being able to quote such a percentage value would make a powerful argument for OA.
So, one half of the answer is simple: potential audience for any OA journal is in the range of 7-9 million - that's an estimated global number of researchers, according to the STM Report 2015.
The other part of the question is more difficult: for a particular journal, say, Nature, what's the number of scholars who can access it through institutional subscriptions, and what fraction of 7-9M it is? Or, how many institutions subscribe to a given journal? -- I don't know the answers, but I think it should be possible to come up with some estimates by analysing subscription lists of different institutions and coupling these data with counts of researchers at each institution - if not globally than at least for a particular country. For US institutions SPARC may have some data, I guess?

This doesn't answer the question.

True, but I was asked by the author of the question to put it here. This answer first was sent to an OA mailing list.

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


text:
How can I get my papers published formally?
I have posted majority of my academic work from MA program on Academia.edu. This past week I had the time to look into the  Analytics section and I have tons of followers, readers, downloads, student citing my work etc. Enough readers that I think I should try to get my work published.
How do I get my work published formally? Who should I try to reach out to? My informally published work is getting a lot of traffic.
Any suggestions on how to do that?

Choose a target journal. A good first step is to see where the papers you cite are published.Some other suggestions are here and here. If you don't have a budget for publishing, look for one that has no author fees. Avoid predatory and low-quality journals; see how to judge the quality of a journal.
Visit the target journal's website, and read about the scope of the journal and their instructions for authors. Read some papers in the latest issue of their journal. Make sure your paper is on topic, and is comparable to other recent papers in the journal in scope, writing quality, and rigor. If it's not a good fit, go back to step 1.
Edit your paper to follow the instructions for authors from step 2 (formatting, length, anonymizing if the journal does double-blind review.)
Submit the paper to the journal for review, following the instructions on the journal's website.
Watch your paper go through the journal workflow.


text:
Methodology for estimating costs of a master’s program before seeking official approval for the program
Do you happen to know any methodology for estimating the cost of a master’s program at university level before proposing and asking for approval of that program and cost by the state or the university authorities?

Do you mean the cost for a student taking the program, the cost for the university to run the program, or something else?


text:
Can I submit my paper to arXiv with a header that says "Under review at X" when it isn't?
Previously I submitted my paper in MS Word format to arXiv.  Now after almost two years, I decided to submit an updated version in LaTeX format.
To create the LaTeX version of the document, I downloaded a template from here that added a line at the top of each page saying:

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2016

Do I have to remove that notice, or is it OK to leave it as is?

(Off-topic: The balance upvote for the answer / upvote for the question is really surprising.... How could an answer be so good if the question is so terrible? I don't get it.)

Was your paper ever even remotely related to that conference?

(@Clément As much as it's not "proper" I imagine it's a lot of "you shouldn't need to ask this, I doubt it will help anybody in future", and then "but since you did - this is definitively the correct thing do to")

@pipe: I guess it was.

Remove it.  It is not appropriate to mislead people as to the submission or publication status of your paper.  You should also remove any other reference to the conference appearing in the paper (e.g. a logo).
Additionally, you'll have to upload your LaTeX source to arXiv in order to have it posted, including the conference style file, so you should make sure its copyright allows this.
(Even if you really had submitted the paper to that conference, you typically wouldn't acknowledge this in the preprint.  The reason is simple: if the paper isn't actually published in that conference, people will be able to infer that it must have been rejected, and this is something you'd probably rather were not publicly known.)
Update: Here is a question from someone who used a template that included the name of Journal X when submitting to Journal Y, and had the paper rejected on suspicion of double submission.  While I think that Journal Y was out of line in doing this, it does illustrate that these sort of misunderstandings can have serious consequences.

Thank you very much. If I remove that part, there wont be anything left to indicate ICLR. its just a simple latex format. here is the example template which I used : https://github.com/wk910930/paper-template/tree/master/ICLR/iclr_2016
and I also added some new packages as well. the shape of the tables are also changed. do you think this is enough knowing that there will be no indication of ICLR to mislead anyone?

I'm glad I asked this before doing anything. by the way, to make things more clear for myself and possibly other newbies as well, does under review mean that the paper is accepted ?
the reason I'm asking is that initially I thought , anyone can submit to any conference, and get reviewed, and then get rejected or accepted. so if a paper is under review, it doesn't mean anything. Is my assumption correct ?

@Breeze Nope, under review means just that: It's under review. It doesnt mean nothing.
Still, you can't pretend it is, if it's not.

@Breeze: Another possible source of trouble is if the paper had been accepted in another conference before 2016, or if you actually submitted it to a different conference at the same time.  Then people would suspect you of  double submission which is considered highly unethical, and this could lead to a lot of problems for you.

Thank you very much. No I have not participated in any conferences yet, that's why I have zero knowledge concerning this kind of stuff.
Actually I was looking for a simple laTex template that I could use to convert my previous work to Latex. Both as a practice and also have my paper look a bit more professional (MS word seem to be frowned upon in academic world and people refuse to trust papers that use MS word!) So I searched for templates. Some were very complex and others like NIPS and this ICLR templates were very simple. I never intended on misleading anyone. God Bless you guys :)

ICLR 2016 had an interesting reviewing process where all submitted papers and their reviews are public and allowed anybody to comment on it.  So, you can't really hide that your paper was submitted there and rejected.

@Breeze There are a lot of simple LaTeX templates out there. Some of them, like the one you found are made for specific conferences or journals or so on; others are general-purpose. So you just need to find a good general one. [tex.SE] (perhaps in the chat room) would be a reasonable place to ask for help with that.

@DavidZ: Thank you very much. Actually this answer and all the comments I got was very helpful to me. Thanks everyone :)

@waldol1: Obviously, that was not my intention at all. if it were I wouldn't be asking here. I "thought" having the under review term would not give any merit to work(anyone could submit and get reviewed, so up till then I thought it would not be a big deal), unlike the term "Accepted as a conference paper at xxx" which says otherwise. but I got skeptical and asked to make sure if this is right or not. Thanks to dear God and you guys I got my answer before getting myself into trouble.

Generally speaking, academia places a high value on honesty. You know it's not true and therefore you shouldn't say it.  Whether or not it gives any "merit" is irrelevant.  Just don't lie.

@NateEldredge Though I agree with the general point of your comment about the high value of honesty, I think "irrelevant" might be too strong. Lying is bad, but lying to claim undeserved "merit" is even worse.


text:
Can you contribute to Public Loan Forgiveness (US) while pursuing a funded Masters/PhD?
I think I can, if I'm understanding the rules right, but I was wondering if anyone had done this/could give advice.
I recently completed a JD. My dream in college was always to get a PhD in literature, but for several reasons, some good some bad, I chose to go for the JD instead (it isn't completely unrelated to my literature interests, so it isn't a total wash). I am working in the public sector after graduation, and will be paying down my JD loans using Public Loan Forgiveness, so when I sat down and thought about it I realized I might not have to abandon my PhD dream after all. After a year or two breather from school, I'd like to go back and start working towards a PhD, because if law school and working in the legal field has convinced me of one thing it is that literature (and hopefully a professorship) are where I will be truly happy.
As an overview of PLF: after 120 monthly payments made on my loans while working in the public sector (10 years) the government would forgive my federal loans (which make up 90% of my loans). I can pay income-based repayment while working towards PLF as well. I will never be able to pay my loans off on a gov salary otherwise, but 10 years and then they are forgiven is actually a pretty sweet deal.
Basically to qualify for PLF I have to be employed in a public sector job--generally government or a nonprofit--working full time, or two public sector jobs that combined mean at least 30 hours/wk. As most TA or RA positions for funded programs (MA or PhD) seem to be about 20 hours a week, doing 10 hours a week in another public position would, if I'm right, qualify me for public loan forgiveness. Probably I'd look at doing 10-15 hours of legal aid through a nonprofit or government agency to keep my legal skills up.
Has anyone done PLF while finishing a PhD? Is this dream possible, or am I crazy? I don't mind not making a lot of money--I never have, and am not making much $$ now. But I really want to go back to literature. I'm just hoping the JD won't have killed that dream for me. :/

Working 20 hours per week as a TA or RA, being a full time graduate student and also working another job for 10 or more hours per week would be extremely difficult.

Note that many funded programs pay you through some combination of assistantship and fellowship. When you're funded by a fellowship, you might not be considered an employee, and then you wouldn't be eligible

@user37208 it's not specific to public universities. If a TA/RA job is considered employment for purposes of this program, then private non-profit universities (i.e. almost all universities) are also eligible employers.

@BrianBorchers: And, as I recently learned in another question, in some cases having another job might actually be forbidden.  http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/69600/fee-discounts-for-full-time-phd-students-is-this-discriminatory/69603#comment170121_69603

@ff524: I found this official FAQ which says that it doesn't matter what your job is - what matters is who your employer is (Q30).  And both public (Q27) and private (Q28) universities qualify.  So a TA or RA would appear to be acceptable.  The problem, though, is reaching 30 hours per week.

@Nate I think it depends whether graduate student TAs and RAs are considered employees, though. (That's still kind of an open question.) That same FAQ says that you are only eligible if you are considered an employee.

My understanding is that you can only participate in PSLF when you are required to make a payment; as at least a half-time graduate student, regardless of your employment at the time, you are not required to make a payment, so you cannot participate.
Source: https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/forgiveness-cancellation/public-service#qualifying-payment
Student aid reps at your institution might be a better source for clarification on this; perhaps you can declare yourself not a student for the purpose of your undergraduate/JD loans, and begin making payments? However this would also prevent you from using your student status to limit interest accrual on some of your loans.
If you have friends in tax/financial law this might be a good time to call in a favor on a 5-minute consultation.

Came across this post as I was researching the same question (4 years later).  My understanding is the same as yours: as long as you get up to 30 hours between two qualifying employers, you are eligible.
Per the PSLF FAQs page, you are eligible "as long as the combined number of hours you work for each employer equals at least 30 hours per week. Each employer must be a qualifying employer for the employment to be included in determining whether you are employed on a full-time basis. For example, if you worked for one qualifying employer for 10 hours per week and you concurrently worked for a second qualifying employer for 20 hours per week, this would meet the 30 hours per week requirement."
Regarding whether the university is an employer (per the same FAQs page): "If a qualifying employer hired you, pays you, and sends you a Form W-2 (Wage and Tax Statement) at the end of each tax year, you are employed by the qualifying employer."  I think this means an assistantship would qualify, but a fellowship (which usually provides a 1099, not W2) would not.
Can I ask - did you end up pursuing this option, and have you gotten confirmation that your payments qualify?

Oh, and regarding a previous answer given, it's true that you "can make qualifying monthly payments only during periods when you’re required to make a payment."  However, that just means your loans can't be in, e.g., in-school forbearance.  The same page provides: "If you want to make qualifying payments, but you’re in a deferment or forbearance, contact your federal student loan servicer to waive the deferment or forbearance."  I've confirmed elsewhere that's possible, so as long you take your loans out of forbearance while in your PhD program, you should be able to make qualifying payments.

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


text:
Is using the description of an award as-is in a CV considered plagiarism?
When applying to graduate programs, most universities ask for a CV. If one has to provide the description of awards they received in their CV, will it be considered plagiarism if they use the official descriptions of the awards verbatim?
[The descriptions are just one sentence long, and rephrasing them too much tends to alter their meaning. The descriptions of these awards on the websites of the institutes granting them have been worded very carefully, which makes them seem to be the best way to convey the corresponding award's purpose.]
Edit: Would it be safer to include a footnote that says that these are the official descriptions, verbatim?

It is the official description of the award. It is not plagiarism.

No, you don't need the footnote. There is no issue here.

I propose just putting quotes around the copied text, which will surely in this context be interpreted as indicating that the quoted text is taken from the award's source.

Another easy solution is to put the official description of your awards (or a chunk of the description) in quotes. I've seen this on academic CVs.

@HuckBennett can you please link those CVs here?

@GregMartin is it OK to quote text without specifying the source?

Definitely not.
Plagiarism is the use, in an academic, creative or intellectual context, of someone else's ideas or distinctive language, without proper attribution.  It follows from this that in some forms of writing it is not possible to plagiarize: for instance, you cannot plagiarize in a lease or customer service agreement or in wedding thank you cards.
A CV is an academic document, but it is not the kind of academic document having a blanket premise of originality in regard to its writing.  For instance, the formatting of a CV is usually taken from someone else's template...and that's completely okay because no one is expecting your CV to be formatted in a new, original way -- on the contrary, the formatting of a CV should largely conform to agreed upon academic cultural norms.
There is some small amount of room for "creative writing" in a CV, but it does not lie in the description of awards you've won.  Anyone reading your CV would expect that you have attempted to describe the awards in a very standard way.  If that means copying the official text of the awards: no problem at all.

Readers might like to learn about Roth Greeting Cards v. United Card Co., Hartford House Ltd v. Hallmark Cards, and various other cases.

Copyright infringement is not the same as plagiarism. You can plagiarise without infringing copyright and you can infringe copyright without plagiarizing.

I'd go a bit further, and actively encourage using the official description because even when subtly modifying the language you stand the risk of significantly misrepresenting the award.  No one could argue that you're misrepresenting the award if you reproduce its wording.

I agree, but I would add that the description should be in quotation marks.  The name of the award is sufficient to indicate the author of the quote.

Plagiarism is presenting someone else's novel work as your own. On a CV, you are not producing novel work, so novelty is not an issue. The only way to plagiarise a CV would be to copy someone else's CV's CONTENT and pretend it was your own personal history, when it wasn't. Even copying someone else's CV entry would be OK if you did exactly the same thing, but not their entire history, since presumably your own history would be different. Even there, this would more likely get called "fraud" then "plagiarism".

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


text:
Is it proper to discuss unrelated subjects during class to increase interactivity?
It is common that students may experience monotony if the instructor continuously teaches. And there are many ways to grab attention.
I am particularly interested in knowing whether it is a proper step from the instructor side to moderate short debates (5 mins, 10 mins, etc.,), especially on (probably ongoing) politics, movies, religion.
The question is about the domains that are aliens to either of the three topics.
If no, what is the reason for it?

Well, it depends on what the lecture is about. If it is about quantum mechanics, it is probably less adequate than if it is about history or politics. In general, however, religion and politics are private matters and trying to force the students to express their views on those topics can backfire easily.

@wimi thanks. I updated.

Do you mean topics on politics, movies, religion related to the topic of the course (i.e. how does the general population think about the course topic, how is it presented in movies, what are the regulations etc.)? If so, this could be really valuable - far more than just stating facts. Or are you talking about "small talk"?

@user111388 not related to the acual teaching domain. Since most of the students respond to those topics, I want to moderate random debates like: Why are you people supporting party X and what is your opinion on the custom X or religion Y etc.,

Why not hold group discussions on issues related to the subject matter of the course?

@henning--reinstateMonica I accept those ways are good. But, many students are not sensitive enough to them for long classes (say 2 hrs). I observe that even silent students also get interact with class on discussions related to the three topics mentioned above.

There are lots of ways to get students to interact that are not debates on popular topics. At the very least you could do some exercises as think, pair, share activities. Or you could try selecting a set of articles or knowledge domains and using a jigsaw approach.

One think that comes to mind is that you give your enemies something"hard" they can complain about "This person wastes time by doing this and that for 10 minutes." Compare the other question about the incompetent Python instructor. Here people react by saying "but maybe this is his ways to make people learn and think and whatever". To me, having had a lot of bad teachers (but also good ones), it seems plausible that a complaint about the incompetent guy would be dismissed similarly, while a more factual complaint about "the guy who wastes time" not so much.

No. Distracting the students with other subjects than the one being taught is not a solution to the problem but a way around it. Of course it is different if the discussions are on the topic being taught: that is a great way to teach!
The problem of "boring classes" is not the subject or the students. The problem is the teacher, who should learn (often by experience) how to keep the students interested. It is possible to interest students in any and all subjects, as long as the teacher is engaging, explains why the subject is useful, provides interesting real-world examples (if appropriate), explains the subject at a level appropriate for the group, is able to answer questions, etcetera.
Secondly, many students will be annoyed by the constant interruptions and irrelevant off-topic discussions, and they will also notice that the teacher is trying to hide his lack of teaching skills behind "entertainment", alienating them further and possibly even leading to them complaining about ineffectiveness of their classes.
Thirdly, an important part of studying is learning to learn and to concentrate. You would not be doing the students a favour by distracting them. (But do not misunderstand this: a light-hearted remark or funny joke is perfectly fine and even helpful to relieve some tension and stress, but that was not what you were asking about)

I suggest that if you want to bring up other subjects than the subject matter of the course, then you, in particular, avoid religion and politics. People can be too involved with their own beliefs to consider the beliefs of others as having any validity whatever. It is a minefield that, once you step in, is very dangerous.
But if you want to break the ice or change the mood a bit, you could bring up other professional level topics that the students should be aware of if they want to become practitioners. In a math course, discuss the importance of developing skill in writing, say. Or the need to develop enough interpersonal skills that they can work in collaborative environments.
Of course, in a political science class it might be worth dealing with current events, but I don't think that is what you intend with this question.
And, don't let any side topics distract from the main thread. Things can be "interesting" and useful but not controversial or lead to confrontation. Do the main job and only use distraction when the need is really there.
And, for something topic related, though mostly in face-to-face situations, asking students to work in pairs for five minutes to formulate a question for you can be a useful way to take a break. Some students hesitate to ask a question, not realizing that others have the same question. Pairing for a few moments can help resolve that.

In some galaxy far away, in a time long ago, some clown correctly observed people fall asleep rather than pay attention if lectured to for a long time. And other clowns, with pedagogical expertise of sorts, observed that human beings generally learn better by being engaged rather than by being passive. And those clowns resolved to Fix The Problem.
Unfortunately, especially in the business/private sector, and amplified by sensitivity to not put students (oops, learners...) on the spot by demonstrating their incomplete understanding if forced to engage in actual subject matter discussion, the horrendous concept of "energizers" and "icebreakers" emerged. This is the practice of interrupting boring lecturing by making people do something completely unrelated, generally dumb, interactively. I guess it is preferable to just droning on altogether, but it is a weak subsitute for actually teaching well, interactively and engagingly. It's principal advantage is that it needs minimal preparation, and minimal thought by the instructor to include, since it's generally off the shelf.
Since no clueless idea goes unimproved, this idea of "energizers" is now being recycled in other settings, including academia, by sometimes deliberately planning inane, off-topic interactive interruptions to the flow. It reminds me of tales of concert pianists making markings in their music where exactly they plan to make a dramatic flourish with their hands.
Removing tongue from cheek, of course there is value in a) allowing breaks, b) building relationships though idle, possibly unrelated unforced banter, c) breaking up the monotony of one person speaking, d) humanizing the instructor and students with occasional breaks from the script and deviations off-topic, e) looking for partially on-topic and partially-off-topic analogs and examples "from real life". But all that's another story.


text:
Decision and PhD. Take a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity or pursue a life dream
Young male student soon to receive an Engineering Degree unsure about the next steps to follow. Undecided whether to go for a PhD directly or do a Master studies first (if he goes for the Master, he will first have to do a thesis work anyway). Has to decide between a PhD position to which he has promising chances to get a scholarship funded by a top company in the world, or apply for a prestigious scholarship for a Master's degree to which he stands good chances and that could probably lead to study in a top US university. His goal is to study at a top university and do research at the highest level. Seeks advice from experienced or knowledgeable advisors and academics about what to do next.

I studied about 12+ hours a day, 340 to 350 days a year, for 5 consecutive years. Does this include class time? Honestly, I'd prefer you go for the Fulbright, if nothing else other than to take a break from studying so much.

One thing jumps out at me most - the idea that if you apply to one position you are obligated to accept it, even if you get other competing offers. While this is true in trying to get a single article published, for instance, that is the only place I've ever in my life seen such a thing, so I would immediately pound on this part of the problem because it might utterly free up your mind to apply to both (and more) and let the chips fall where they may. In applying for Phds, post-docs, internships, jobs, running for presidential nomination, and scholarships, you are allowed to not accept.

@BrianDHall Good point! I'll definitely check that out and update as I get an answer.

@PALEN None of us are Terence Tao. People do become PhDs in their late 50s. Academia and degrees are not a race.

I'm just guessing this UK MS funded PhD is the one at Warwick.  If so, then No it is not top, but is much better than "middling" and would certainly give you excellent opportunities to pursue research at the highest level and build a research career.

@Compass Totally agreed. If you do it as a race, you're doing it for the wrong reasons. But if you're putting a lot of time because you love what you do, it isn't wasted time, is it? So, why not? However, the mentioned rythm is unsustainable and from now on I'd like to dedicate time to other things (e.g. social ones) as well.

@Compass: there's nothing wrong with studying that much; it works for some people, at least for me.

@user1997744 12 hours of study a day for 350 days a year for 5 years is a lot of studying. That's 4200 hours a year. A full-time employee works approximately 2000 hours a year.

It seems like you're choosing between

A (nearly) guaranteed PhD offer at a middling university.
A fully funded master's program that you may or may not be accepted to, but may offer you the opportunity to jump to a better PhD program if you get the Fulbright scholarship and perform well in your master's.

Some factors you may consider are

If you take the master's offer you will spend a lot of time preparing for a PhD.  You will need to perform extra well for two years to secure your letters of recommendation, and it will look bad if you don't accomplish anything significant during that time.  In the end you might not get into your school of choice, and then you will have worked very hard for no visible gain.  How confident are you that you can (1) get the scholarship, and (2) perform consistently well once you're actually there?

A master's degree will give you more background in computer science, and you will learn more about theoretical CS than "it involves both programming and mathematics."  A lot of things involve both programming and mathematics, and getting more experience (in coursework and research) will let you better evaluate your options before jumping into a long commitment.  Most theoretical CS students I know entered their PhD program knowing they wanted to study "approximation algorithms," "cryptography," etc, not just "theoretical CS" or "some field that involves both programming and math."
It's also kind of a red flag that you're undecided between a PhD and a master's, and I think before you go for a PhD you should have a stronger opinion on this.  If you are uncertain about your career and your research area you will be at a significant disadvantage compared to your classmates who aren't.

If your first choice is the PhD offer, you can easily apply to both and turn down the Master's offer, but if your first choice is the Master's offer, it would be awkward to apply to both and turn down the PhD offer.

About point 1, I'm not afraid of doing a master and not be successful enough to be accepted for a Phd. That'll mean I may not be suited for it.
I took a course in theoretical CS and know more than that "it involves both programming and mathematics" and also know and LIKE the research project I've been offered. But yeah, I also like many other CS topics - though one can't know it all! How does one determine whether to take a PhD topic or not?
I'd like to know why would it be awkward. Can you please elaborate?

You should ask yourself what is your dream destination, and make decisions that will lead you to the destination. Is studying at a US University a destination or point in a journey?
If I read your post correctly you are already accepted to UK. So, on one hand you have the opportunity to go in UK, or on the other hand possibly be accepted for Fulbright which will maybe get you to US. What is the alternative if Fulbright/US do not pan out?
Last note, never underestimate the value of a good advisor, even from a lesser University. Attending the best school with an adviser who will not advocate for you, limits your options later on. Again, what you choose depends what your destination is.

I'm not already accepted to the UK university. For me what is more important is a place where I can excel. For example, if you go to Stanford, you don't have to worry about anything other than working hard - you have resources and outstanding academic help, also know that by the prestige of the university, your work will be taken into account. Also, I believe the US lifestyle fits me better.


text:
Do I call my supervisor “dean” or “professor”?
My supervisor is the dean of an engineering department at my university. Should I address him as Dean Smith or Professor Smith? Personally, dean sounds a little clunky for me talking to my faculty supervisor but I’ve been using it so far, and he hasn’t really mentioned anything about it.
Is it normal to address someone as dean or should I start using professor instead?
Also, I don’t know if he’s the type to care about such things.

ask him, but keep in mind that it might change depending on the context/people around/"hat he is wearing".

What's wrong with his first name? "Hi, Bob!" is a lot less clunky than "Hi, Dean Smith!" (unless of course his first name is Dean...)

We're not close enough yet for me to use his first name.

It looks quite awkward for a student to address his supervisor as "dean".

What country is this in?

This is in the US.

If you are a grad student in the US you are close enough for first names.

I just called my supervisor 'sir' for the duration of my project. We got on really well and probably could have been on a first name basis, but I was never explicitly told what to call him so I erred on the side of caution. He never mentioned it, it wasn't weird at all, and the project went great.

I'm in undergrad. We've never met in person, which is why I'm thinking we're not on first name basis yet.

You use the title that is appropriate for your interaction:

Prof Smith - anything related to his or her role as an educator or researcher
Dean Smith (or Provost Smith, etc) - anything related to his or her role as an administrator

Many times when people become deans, deanlets, or provosts, they stop teaching and actively conducting research - which makes it easy to refer to them in their administrative role only.

If you don't want to ask him directly (the easy solution), you could always ask other students what they do.  In general, I would stick to "Professor Smith."  People don't have be called by their full titles (I would never want or expect to be called "Associate Professor Webster").

In my experience there is no context at all where you would address or refer to someone as Dean Smith because they are a dean. 'Dean' is a job-title (like 'accountant'), whereas 'Professor' is (also) a person-title (like Mr.).
Personally I'd say if you're not yet close enough to your supervisor to call them by their first name, it's time you got to know your supervisor better. After all, http://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1296

This is wrong or at best institution and rank specific.  As a professor, I do use formal titles when talking to senior administrators at my R1. Partly this is to remind them of their administrative responsibilities and to avoid false chumminess.

@RoboKaren I would refer to someone as 'the Dean'. Or potentially address them as 'Dean', but never as 'Dean Smith'.

"Dear Dean Smith: I am writing as a the Chair of Widget Studies. I must protest your recent decision as our divisional dean to not allocate another FTE to our department. We must make more widgets. Signed, Robo Karen, Chair, Widget Studies; Professor of Widget Studies"

I will also when speaking at university-wide faculty meetings, use formal titles (Dean Smith; Provost Doe) especially and particularly when referring to (aka protesting) policies implemented by those individuals.  So it's not just written correspondence but oral locution: "Fellow faculty, Dean Smith's regrettable decision to cut FTEs from the entire widget and gadget division has caused irreparable harm to our great university. Dean Smith, would you care to explain what your rationale was for this?"

Please note that I'm a professor (just not of widget studies, oh I wish I were though). As a graduate student, you'd only really interact with a Dean-as-Dean in very restricted cases (filing a grievance; protesting university-wide policy; escalation of a complaint; etc). If you modify your answer to clarify that you mean "[almost] no context ... as a student" then I think you're pretty close to accurate.

One of your comments on the question is vital:
I'm in [sic] undergrad. We've never met in person, which is why I'm thinking we're not on first name basis yet. (Emphasis mine)
I would refer to him as Professor Smith as I agree Dean Smith sounds clunky. Once you build a relationship with him, this nay change to a first name basis but you don't appear to be to that stage yet.

And when I say you're a "sick undergrad" I mean it in the colloquial "awesome" sense ;)


text:
In what language do scientists communicate with each other in European research institutions?
I was just wondering out of curiosity. Nothing relating to my own circumstances.
In what language do scientists in facilities like the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (whose campuses are there in Barcelona, Rome, Heidelberg etc...) communicate?
Do scientists communicate in German in the Heidelberg laboratory, or in Spanish in the Barcelona lab? I am assuming so because obviously the majority of the scientists in Heidelberg laboratory will be German and the majority in Barcelona will be Spanish and the majority in Rome will be Italians.
Is this true?

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

In the Barcelona lab, they might even have to decide between Spanish and Catalan.

Related: https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/20474/how-can-i-get-my-colleagues-to-speak-a-language-i-understand

Your question is based on two false assumptions. 1. The majority of people in EMBL Heidelberg are not German, somewhat more than 50% are international, and the same holds true for major research institutions throughout Western Europe. 2. There is no unique solution for all of Europe or even for a single institution, it varies even between teams within the same leader's group.

Major European Research institutions are highly international.

From my perspective of working in multiple European universities in different countries:
In a "closed" conversation setting, it will exclusively depend on the people involved in the conversation. The prime requirement is to use a language that every participant understands and speaks. A secondary concern is to use a language that people are particularly comfortable in. As a result, a meeting of two German researchers and a German student in a Swedish university will usually be held in German.
In an "open" conversation setting, people usually prefer to use a language that will allow other people to understand and join the conversation (usually English). Exceptions happen and might be considered as rude by some.

I used to believe that English is the lingua franca of Europe in all places. Do European scientists have a good command of english in general?

I have never seen this sort of appreciable coordination before. I mean it is incredible that before a conversation, people observe who speaks what and decide what language to employ. I am impressed but shocked too. Is this really the norm in Europe?

There is a lot of variety between different researchers (and the country of origin seems to be a relevant variable). Some seem to struggle more to get pronunciation and grammar right. But in most fields, since all noteworthy scientific literature and presentations are in English, a basic competency in English can be assumed.

Not only before the conversation -- people will also switch during the conversation if people enter or leave the room, yes. That's indeed the default behavior I observe.

Is there no language requirement imposed before admitting a student/researcher? If you go to the UK, no university will accept if you don't provide your English language test results. Why such requirements are not there in other EU countries when it is in the UK (pre-Brexit)? I will observe others' opinions before deciding which one is the best answer (currently yours is a good one).

I have never heard of colleagues being asked about English language test results; normally, your application documents and associated publications would be considered as evidence for your language skills. An issue when applying for jobs in countries with other languages might be teaching: Often, teaching at various levels (only undergrad or both undergrad and grad) will be given in the local language.

No I meant english test results when you go to the uk

@JosephJohnson Ah OK - in this case, the language-test requirements will not come from the university (I think), but possibly from the visa office.

You might be right.

@JosephJohnson Usually the language one speaks/knows is assumed by name and/or country of origin as well as work position. Many people are fluent in several languages too, their mother tongue, English and sometimes some other languages. To many changing the language they speak is not a hard decision, it is done to communicate with someone else and understand each other... Sorry to chime in, but I'm surprised by your shock, to me as a bilingual, and understanding 4 languages (which English is not even the second best language), it seems normal.

I understand multilingualism isn't uncommon. I am from Asia and I can speak 4 languages (including English) myself, just because one or the other was spoken around me since my childhood.

@JosephJohnson speaking purely about academia in the UK, universities do require proficiency in English (and won't sponsor a student visa for students they wouldn't admit), and any group teaching, seminars, and university business will be in English, but it's fairly common that if everyone in a group speaks another language better, they'll work in that language (at the institute where I did my PhD, it wasn't uncommon to overhear conversations in Russian). Pan-european research institutes will likely have more complex linguistic issues than single institutes in mono-lingual cities.

This answer is probably a bit idealistic. Even though people will try to use a language that everybody understands, human nature means that they will often switch back to a more comfortable language as soon as they can, especially if there is a mix. I'm not in academia, but in international corporate settings, even though I speak French and English fluently, it has happened to me more than once to revert from English to French because I knew the primary person I was talking to understood French better than English, even though there were people not understanding French (and vice-versa).

@jcaron I don't know if my answer is idealistic, as it mirrors the experiences I actually made. But I do think that your experiences are valid and relevant as well. Possibly my experiences are biased towards the very open and welcoming cultures in the departments I've seen (which doesn't include a department at a French university, for example).

@JosephJohnson There is a difference between students and researchers in the UK. UK universities do not require researchers to provide the results of a language test. They do for students.

@JosephJohnson It's pretty normal all over the world.  Most places in most countries have at least a few languages floating around.  Everyone usually knows who speaks what based on who they are or where they come from.  I've even seen people have conversations in multiple languages, where each speaker speaks their native language (in cases where everyone understands both but is more comfortable expressing in one or the other).  English is definitely lingua-franca and most scientific conferences in Europe are held in English.  Most European scientists are quite fluent in English, I would say.

It's not unusal for me to use 3 languages in the same conversation (following the rhythm of people joining and leaving) , and it happens often enough that I use 4. At first it was very weird, but now it just feels natural.

@jcaron This is probably very different between institutes. I work at a German research institute with a lot of people form other countries.  The default language here is English and it is actually not uncommon that Germans keep speaking English with each other even if no non-Germans are present.  I somehow feel that at work, my brain is in "English mode" so it is somehow easier to just stick with that language.

@luator Your example seems compatible with my answer - English is then the language you're most comfortable in in this situation ;-) For some of my colleagues, the preference in that case seems to be switching between English and German without any clear system.

@luator, lighthouse: Another factor is whether specialist vocabulary is more accessible to the speaker in a particular language. Someone whose native language is Czech but who speaks Hungarian fluently and learned some discipline in Hungarian might prefer to discuss that discipline in Hungarian.

I am in Norway in mathematics. I use...

Norwegian with the Scandinavians and Germans/Austrians. The people from Scandinavia also do this.
Finnish with the Finn(s)
English with the others.
The Germans/Austrians speak German with each other. I have also heard a bit of French, I think, and certainly a bit of Spanish from other foreigners.
Essentially, people speak the native language of some participant in the discussion when possible, and default to English otherwise.

Official announcements are almost always in Norwegian and often in English.
The situation was similar in Denmark: Danish was used with the people who could understand it (had been there for long or spoke a compatible language) and English otherwise.
Note that the non-academic people, especially older ones, might not be fluent in English.

What would happen if a monolingual english speaker were to replace you? What would happen to him?

People would speak in English to them. They might not understand all internal messages. But there are many people, especially postdocs and Phd students, who don't know Norwegian.

I can imagine that the Dutch would pick up Norwegian fast too.

I assume (and hope :) ) that you would still speak English with Germans who do not understand Norwegian.

@CarstenS although all Norwegians (except some old people in the country) have no problem whatsoever speaking English – typically better than Germans – they do prefer to use Norwegian in Norway if not explicitly asked to use English. (Unlike Germans in German institutes, who are much more likely switch to English as soon anybody's around they're not sure is proficient in German.)

@CarstenS Germans who don't know Norwegian drop into the "others" category. They do pick up the language fast, though. (I am not a Norwegian.)

@Tommi, I noticed that you seem to be native to a non-Germanic Scandinavian language :) If I lived in a Scandinavian country with a Germanic language then I definitely would want to learn it, but if I stayed there for only a semester or two then I am not sure how far I would get with that. (Friends who move to Stockholm to study were very quick at it, but of course they were younger.)

In  Denmark most university courses must be taught in English, to enable foreign students to participate in the courses. This is sometimes a problem, since some professors are really bad at English.

I'm doing a postdoc in Europe, and my fellowship has me traveling around a lot. Also note that I do physics, not MCB, though I don't think there would be much difference.
My experience is that English is the official language of science, and all seminars, journal clubs, and talks (except outreach) are in English. Socializing will depend on the group. Also the language you hear the most at work has more to do with the nationalities represented in your group, not the local language. I heard a lot of Italian when I was visiting Switzerland.

In fact, I heard it say that "bad English is the official language of science" - and often observed that native English speakers will have the most problems understanding others in a mixed nationality group.

Just a minor comment, Italian is an official language in Switzerland, so hearing it should not be at all surprising if you are in the right canton.

Hah, true, but I was in Zurich, so the local language was Swiss German

@penelope IME, that also holds the other way around: it's sometimes harder to understand a native speaker of English, due to any combination of their rapidity of speech, extended vocabulary (pertaining to words outside the jargon), and regional accent.

@Oliphaunt-reinstateMonica That is quite common, actually. At least for me as a listener who did their postdoc in the UK.

@penelope There is also the matter that there are many different dialects of English (which even ought to be considered as languages on their own, some argue) and that English in a different dialect from the one you speak natively can be hard to distinguish from bad English.

My experience is from the 1990's at a Dutch institute, so a bit dated perhaps. There were a number of people at the instutute from non-Dutch speaking countries, from across Europe, Asia, and the US (including me). And, the Dutch generally learned a variety of languages in school (the only Dutch people I met who did not speak any English at all were the nice couple in the downstairs apartment who personally experienced the liberation of Amsterdam in WW2).
All science was done in English, both to include all the visitors but, more importantly, they published in English language journals since they had the broadest reach. Almost all the Dutch science courses were taught in English, using English language textbooks. (It was really funny to hear Dutch trying to discuss science in Dutch - every other word was a technical English term). But, all the conversation at coffee or tea was in Dutch, unless there was a non-Dutch person involved. Ultimately, that was why I learned Dutch so they would not have to switch because of me.

Adding to the explanation of why Dutch people are indeed among the best English speakers in Europe: Like in Scandinavian people, people are exposed to the English language from young age, since movies and television programs are usually not dubbed.

@lighthousekeeper - indeed, all the TV at the time was in the original language with Dutch subtitles if needed (well, on Dutch stations - the BBC did not add Dutch subtitles). One of my friends said he was really motivated to learn English well because he liked All in the Family, and noticed that the Dutch subtitles often diverged from the English, neutering many of the good jokes. Added in, most students took Dutch, German, French, and English courses in school.

@Jon Custer: Children's TV is dubbed, of course, and quite well, too - I prefer the Dutch Bert & Ernie and Fairly Oddparents to the American originals.

@reinierpost - I suppose I didn't watch much children's TV (although, of course, that would have been good for learning Dutch).

Europe is a big place, with 50 countries, 10 million km², and almost 750 million inhabitants.  What applies at an international research institute in Netherlands, Belgium, or Germany will not apply to a regional institute in Russia.  There is no single answer that applies to all European institutions.
In much of central and western Europe, science groups are typically international and communication between scientists is often in English.  This is not universally true: at the German weather service for example, all internal communication, including between scientists, happens in German, including with foreign scientists working at DWD (but with foreign visiting scientists they will speak English).  I'm told it's the same at the French weather service.  But even this is not universal, as I've seen some groups that try to accommodate for non-German speaking scientists.  Elsewhere, there are scientists and engineers in Russia who understand (almost) no English at all (I don't have statistics on how common this is, but anecdotally it's not exceptional, based on experiences by a colleague who went to a spectroscopy conference in Russia).
In the end, any general answer will be too general to be useful.  One way to find out for a specific institute or group is to look for vacancy notes, which may or may not include language requirements.  For example: the Swedish weather service publishes scientists vacancy notes in (both Swedish and) English and include an encouragement to learn Swedish if hired.  The German and French ones mostly advertise them in German or French respectively only and include a requirement for a moderate command of the language (usually CEFR B1 or B2, but I've seen everything from optional A2 to required C2).  It's safe to assume that if they require to know the language of the country at B2 level, that communication normally happens in the language of the country.

Elsewhere, there are plenty of scientists in Russia who don't understand any English. Do you mean conversationally, or at all? I'd be quite surprised if it were the latter, because not having access to the vast body of English-language science literature seems like it would be a massive handicap.

@dandan78 Anecdotally, my impression is almost not at all. A colleague went to a scientific meeting on spectroscopy in St. Petersburg which was supposed to be international, but in reality almost all was presented in Russian.  After the colleague gave his presentation (in English), a Russian scientist approached him and in very poor English told him he didn't understand anything he had said, but that the plots looked interesting.  I agree that it's a massive handicap to lack access to English language science literature yet it appears that this does happen.

I'm British, and spent 12 months as a placement student at CERN from 1995 to 1996.  I believe that everyone had to have a reasonable competency in either English or French.  They were then taught the other.  I was already very good at French, hence I was placed in the top class for French, in which we spoke almost exclusively in French, learning some quite complex grammar. My fellow British student spoke no French, was placed in the bottom class, and after 12 months could get by.  Some of his classmates, one Austrian in particular had no interest in learning French, and spent most lessons doodling high energy physics stuff.
My office consisted of three Spaniards and me.  Our immediate manager was a French-speaking Belgian.  His manager was Swedish.  His manager was British (and was an old boy of the local rival school to me in Coventry, by huge coincidence).  Thus, most conversation amongst us was in English.
In the final week of my time there, the Belgian explained something to the Spaniards and a visiting Parisian in French, then came to explain it to me in English.  I told him I already heard.  This was the first time he realised I was pretty much fluent in French, and swore/laughed for a while, when he realised that he'd never once thought to ask.
In the staff restaurants, most nationalities mixed a lot, and spoke either English or French, depending on the make-up of the group, with the preference tending towards English.  The Spanish didn't mix so much, not for any other reason than keeping different working hours (MUCH longer lunch etc).  Likewise for socialising outside of work.  My "gang" was mostly British, Dutch, Belgian, French, Spanish, Austrian and German, and we mostly spoke English if addressing the whole group, but obviously the French and Belgians spoke to each other in French, and the Germans/Austrians used German.
For meetings and technical discussions, it was almost 100% English, unless it was known that everyone present was happier with another language.

I work in an international research institution in a German speaking country. The standard language on campus is English and all communication, meetings, events etc. are either in English or in English and German simultaneously. Private conversation usually depends on the languages shared by the people in the conversation, as pointed out by lighthouse keeper. With some people I even speak English in private even though we share other languages because, in my experience, once you get used to using a certain language with a person, that language sticks.

I've only been to such institutes, mainly ESRF, as a visitor, but English was the practical working language, used for a lot of conversations, and everything official  (the latter in addition to French).  Training was delivered in English. Almost every conversation seemed to have people of many nationalities, and took place in English.  This was both for true work matters, and going to lunch with the group I was visiting, but it wasn't a courtesy to me specifically - other groups did the same.  The only I times I spoke French on the site were getting food in the canteen, and a brief conversation in the bike parking with someone who turned out to be German anyway.

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
Asking for status of faculty position search during coronavirus pandemic
I applied for a faculty position and did a video interview. It was supposed that they let me know if I have been selected for campus or not. In the middle of the interview with other candidates, this COVID-19 happened and I am not sure what strategy they will take as the target university has canceled all in-person classes and shifted to an online model.
Would it be appropriate to ask the committee about the status of the search?
What factors would affect the university's response in such a case?

Its possible the university has suspended all big expenditures or long term commitments to blunt the shock of Covid-19.  In this case, the position you applied for will be in limbo because the financial position and strategic direction of the university will have changed significantly.  Good luck to us all.

I think most universities are in fire-fighting mode at the moment, scrambling to respond to the changing circumstances. In all likelihood, the faculty search is low on peoples' immediate priority list. Unless there is a pressing need for information now (e.g. a competing offer), I suggest waiting a couple of weeks until (hopefully!) things have calmed down a bit before asking for an update.

@avid: Before this unfortunate virus, they were supposed to finish all video interviews last week and move to the next phase. So, I think they should be done with all the interviews last week or two weeks ago.

@sam Still, people are preoccupied with the immediate challenges of responding to the virus. You aren't likely to win yourself any friends by appearing not to recognise this. I think it is self-evident that there are going to be no campus visits in the near future.

@avid: Yes, that is true. I just noticed that the SC has decided to do a video interview instead of on-campus type. Do you think if they consider more candidates in this case since the video interviews should be faster?!

In this situation you should send a carefully worded and kind email to the chair of the department asking how the pandemic is going to affect the timing of the search.  Make it clear that you understand that this may not be their main priority now.  There’s no way for anyone outside their search committee to know what’s happening, it’ll be different at different schools.

I was thinking of those so, but I am not sure how that email should be! Because I don't want to make the wrong impression that I send them such an email in the middle of this chaos.

Which is why I would probably wait. Moreover, what other answer would you expect than "we don't know yet, and have no way of predicting when we do know".

@MaartenBuis: the point is that I am not sure if I am among the final candidates for a campus interview. They, at least, can say "Yes, you have been selected, but we are finding a way to deal with this new situation"

At my university the stopped all search committees. So it is very well possible they don't even know that.

At which step? Because we did the video interview

@MaartenBuis: I talked with the search committee. It seems they have canceled the in-person interviews and now are conducting them virtually (online)! I believe it is hard to decide on a candidate only based on an online interview for a faculty position. But they are doing this. However, I am not sure if they should/can consider more candidates since it is online.

That is up to them. I would not do so. All committee members have more than enough to do, so you don't want to add to their workload. Especially when the benefits of doing so are questionable.

@MaartenBuis: I agree, but, at the same time, I am not sure if video interviews are a good alternative instead of on-campus interviews, especially about faculty position as they should have that person for a long time in their department. It makes sense to do so for industrial jobs, but for academic does not look reasonable. The whole idea of campus interview is a live presentation (not probably reading from your notes in video interview) and interactions with other faculty.

What is the alternative? The only one I see is to completely stop the hiring process. Departments don't want to do that because positions that are not filled are the easiest way for management to save money.

It’s certainly appropriate to ask. Virus or not, the world will move on from this crisis, hopefully in a timeframe of a few months, you will still need a job, and the university will still need faculty to teach classes and do research. Students will still need to be educated. Higher education can be affected by economic recession, put probably less so than many other sectors of the economy. So don’t panic.
So yes, it’s fine to send them an email and politely inquire about the status of the search. Keep in mind that it’s possible they are scrambling to figure out how to keep instruction going and dealing with other urgent matters around the current crisis unrelated to faculty hiring. So the most likely response you’ll get is they are still figuring things out and don’t have any news.

"Higher education can be affected by economic recession, put probably less so than many other sectors of the economy."  I fear press coverage of universities closing and disruptions to high school completion will reduce traditional-age enrollment more than it will increase enrollment by older people who are laid off.

Would it be appropriate to ask the committee about the status of the search?

It's pointless, but not inappropriate.

What factors would affect the university's response in such a case?

Either they invited someone else to campus, or they don't know what is happening next.

I am not sure what strategy they will take as the target university has canceled all in-person classes and shifted to an online model.

Some universities are doing online campus visits.  Some searches will be canceled entirely (this happens even when there is no disaster).

Some people believe that asking pointless questions is in fact inappropriate...!

How is online campus visiting conducted? Because the whole idea of such interviews is seeing the interactions, which is hard to judge through online interviews. Can they select the finalists and ask HR to extend the deadline so that they can invite the candidate in summer or fall?

@sam "How is online campus visiting conducted?" Most universities will be making it up as they go along.


text:
How to seek an academic mentor?
I am a junior academic who is seeking an academic mentor to shape my career and have a stronger impact on the student and research community. What would be the best way to go about seeking a mentor?
Thanks!

What kind of junior are you? Did you just start your Bachelors, are you a recently appointed faculty member,...?


text:
Year abroad in a country with low coursework standards: Am I sabotaging my future career?
I am an Economics student, with an interest in Statistics and Data analysis. I recently started my graduate studies, attending a M.Sc. in Economic and Social Sciences at Bocconi University (Milan). The program offers the chance to spend a year at the Graduate School of Economics of Keio University (Tokyo), obtaining a Double Degree (i.e., a Master's Degree in Economics from both universities).
Last year (at the end of my Bachelor), I attended an exchange semester in Korea and I loved the experience. I was challenged by courses that I liked (mainly in Statistics) and enjoyed the exchange student life in East-Asia, with all that comes with it. After coming back to Italy, I am dreaming of moving to Asia for a longer period of time. I am currently studying Chinese and, if I have the chance, I would love to at least spend part of my future career in this part of the world. So I decided to apply for the Double Degree mentioned above.
Now, here comes my dilemma. Talking with my classmates (including those who studied at Keio in previous years), I have heard that attending a year in Japan would not be recommended for someone who wants to pursue a Ph.D. afterwards. The reason is, in short, that Japanese classes are easy compared to the school I currently attend. Apparently, Japanese students have an easy life during their uni years, and so spending a whole year there would disadvantage me when applying for a Ph.D. program in the future.
Although I am not sure about how I want to continue my studies, I also don't want to sabotage any potential application to a good Ph.D. program. Also because, I suppose, my area of specialization (namely, Statistics and Machine Learning) would require such a program for better future career prospects. I have thought of ways in which I could "keep up" with my classmates, e.g. self-studying anything that I would "miss out on" by going to Japan (making use of the good amount of free time I would have there). But would this convince an admission board?
Finally, this choice clashes with personal life as well, since my girlfriend lives in Korea and, by staying in Japan for a year, we would be able to see each other more frequently (we have talked about this). I feel like I am required to make a choice between my personal future goals (i.e. living in Asia) and my career ambitions (i.e. keeping doors open for the future).
I would like to know the advice of more experienced people on this.

I suspect a lot of the discussion is going to focus on your premise that Japanese classes are easy. While I don't want this question to become even longer, you may want to give some more detail about why you believe this to be the case.

You wrote that you went to Korea and liked it a lot, learn Chinese and consider going to Japan. These are 3 very distinct countries with different cultures, languages and academic systems. They probably differ more from each other than say Italy, Poland and Sweden. Don't lump them all together and assume your experience in one will carry over to the others.


text:
How to mention "failed" final year thesis in SOP?
I am an undergraduate intending to apply to an American graduate program. In my SOP, I decided to write one paragraph about my final year thesis. However, the truth is that I failed to propose something new in my final year thesis. The only positive things, I believe, is that I have found related papers quickly without any guidance.
I hope to talk positively about this experience. Is it positive to mention that "I have found papers quickly?" And how to mention such a "failed" final year thesis in SOP?

More background information:
Field: graph theory
My supervisor was busy and he did not spend much time discussing the topic with me or teaching me about it. I have a problem understanding papers that are somewhat concise. At last, I had no choice but to change my topic. He only described the topic, did not give any references to read. I found the references by myself, which were exactly what he wished me to read. The time is limited and hence I do not propose many new things in my final year thesis.

What field are you in? I would say that the ability to find the right references is very basic and a minimum requirement for graduate students. However, I would not expect that someone proposes something really new in a bachelor's thesis.

It is in graph theory.

I am not so sure that your final year thesis has actually 'failed'. It is not actually expected that many students will propose something truly new in their bachelor's thesis. The purpose is to teach you how to research a topic and write about your research. In this case, the fact that your supervisor did not give you much guidance or direction may actually be seen as positive, since you have succeeded in finding the relevant papers on your own, and have (I presume) written a decent paper about your research.
You are now heading into a phase where you will be expected to go beyond a literature search and propose "something new". Finding the relevant references is a basic skill required of any researcher. So is being able to work independently (that is, without someone always telling you what to do and where to focus your research). Your current supervisor's supervisory style has forced you to do this--point out this fact in your SOP! Take credit for having initiative and independence, and do not see your final year thesis as failed. It may not be outstanding, but it has served the purpose well.

failed means only propose very trivial things in thesis.

@J.A.F In an academic context, failed often has a very precise meaning which is different than just a lack of success in finding something new/amazing.

At undergraduate level usually it is expected that student has basic understandings of intended field. Your SoP must state that what kind of motivation you got from your thesis/studies and how it is influencing your decision to select future field of research. Sometime you may select a topic (due to to lack of guidance and experience) which is not suitable to you. If this the case and you want to change your major research area be honest and explain why you want to change and why you are selecting new area of research.


text:
Is a Master 2 Research (Europe) a University or Postgraduate Degree?
I am currently applying for post-docs and for one of them, I should provide the "category" or degree/educational establishment where I have the choice between:
University degree
Postgraduate
PhD

My question is: what is the right category of a Master 2 Research (in Europe) ?
Is it a University degree or a Postgraduate degree ?

I would consider that a postgraduate degree, as it's a degree obtained after you achieved your bachelor's degree.

While I would recommend you to confirm, normally a 'university degree' is an undergraduate degree.
A postgraduate could be a postgraduate certificate, postgraduate diploma, or a postgraduate degree (which is a master degree)
I think you know what a PhD is.
In short, as master is a postgraduate (the middle of your three choices).
It seems a little strange because normally post-docs are post (after) doctorate (PhD).

Thanks. In fact, this is not strange because it asks for details on the last degree (PhD) but also previous ones (Master's).