text:
Do short surveys belong in conference papers? Or just survey journals?
I was just wondering if a short survey on the literature belongs on a conference paper (10 pages max). Is it an option to submit the short survey (focuses specifically on an area) to a conference and later on the fully developed survey (focuses on all aspects) to a survey journal? Or would it be more prudent to extend it fully (30+ pages) so it belongs on a survey journal paper. The short survey would be on the limitations of a technique frequently used in cloud computing. The extended version would include a more thorough description, taxonomy, use cases, limitations, etc. The landscape in the field changes very quickly, hence my question of whether it belongs in a conference.
More specifically, the conference does not mention that they don't accept surveys. Here's what the conference says:

IEEE CLOUD is a flagship conference focusing on innovative cloud
computing across all "as a service" categories, including modeling,
developing, publishing, monitoring, managing, delivering
Everything-as-a-Service (XaaS) in the context of various types of
cloud environments. IEEE CLOUD invites original papers addressing
all aspects of cloud computing technology i.e., infrastructure,
applications, management and security solved using technologies of Big
Data, Artificial Intelligence, High Performance computing, Distributed
computing etc.

Thanks for your advice!

I've never read a good survey paper that is published in a conference.

I would focus on the following sentence:

IEEE CLOUD invites original papers addressing all aspects of cloud computing technology [...]

To my understanding, this excludes survey/review papers because they are no original papers.

See also: What are the differences between these kinds of articles: original, review, letter, and short communication?

As @Tripartio explained in his comments, my understanding is not necessarily the same as intended by the description of possible conference contributions. Attitudes may vary to what is understood as original research, see for example: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/8/e029704

I disagree. A newly written survey or literature review is most certainly an original paper. A non-original paper is one that has already been published elsewhere.

@Tripartio, no, I think you are wrong, see for example 1) https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/authorandreviewertutorials/writing-a-journal-manuscript/types-of-journal-articles/10285504, 2) https://tacomacc.libguides.com/c.php?g=373158&p=2522936, 3) https://westcoastuniversitylibrary.libanswers.com/research/faq/295830. These are just three random internet sources, there are plenty more stating the same. Anyway, asking the conference chair to be 100 % sure is a good suggestion.

Thanks for the links. You are challenging me to be more rigorous in my comment (and I mean this in the most positive way). So, I would adjust my comment to say that there is a difference in terminology when referring to "original paper". Some editors consider literature reviews or surveys to be "original reserch", others do not. Here is an article that specifically researched this question: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/8/e029704. Note: "Fifty-two (80%) editors considered systematic reviews [SRs] original research, either for any type of SR (65%) or only for SRs with a meta-analysis (15%)"

In any case, this is obviously a controversial point where people legitimately differ in terminology. So note that I did not downvote this answer, even though I choose to use the term "original" to include surveys and reviews.

@Tripartio, interesting. I will make an edit.

You should email the conference chair (or preferably the track chair, if you have identified a specific conference track for submission) and ask them directly. That is the only way to answer your question. One conference might accept survey articles in one track, and another conference might not accept them for a similarly-themed track. The same goes with a journal. Not all journals accept survey or literature review articles. Unfortunately, the conference or journal description is not always sufficiently clear on this point because most researchers, even senior researchers, who do not right survey articles do not typically think of this special genre when they develop their conference or journal descriptions. So, email the chair (or journal editor) directly and they should clarify you.


text:
I passed my PhD with no corrections but feel I don't deserve it
I had a wonderful experience on my PhD study which was an AHRC funded PhD at an elite university in the UK. I loved my topic and the whole world of academia. I was extremely ambitious and threw myself into everything I could as well as my thesis, publishing journal articles,editing books, organising large conferences etc as well as working on my thesis. It was qualitative research in social sciences and a topic very close to my heart. MY working practices were somewhat unusual (very unmethodical and quite disorganised and chaotic) but somehow the final produce was deemed to be excellent. Sometimes I wouldn't work for weeks very much, and then write thousands of words in a day. I would often take notes and then not go back to them, they were on my computer somewhere but I would sit down to wrote a chapter and then just kind of remember which texts to go back to and use them (so I had kind of internalised the information I suppose). I analysed the transcripts but very inductively - reading over and over to grasp the main themes and then focusing on them.
During the PhD process I was dealing with a number of difficult personal issues and there were a number of difficult issues with other academics (one was with a difficult editor, one another academic betrayed my trust and abused her power), although my relationship with my supervisor was excellent.
I submitted my thesis and had a huge mental breakdown - horrific that devastated my entire life. brought up lots of personal issues I never even knew I was struggling so much with. I eventually passed my PhD with no corrections at the viva. However, I have this terrible belief that I did something wrong in my thesis and 'cheated' somehow, that I didn't do it properly. It feels beyond the usual imposter syndrome which I am sure I did have.
I have just secured an post-doc but it is hard to go back to my work when I believe there is something wrong in there. That I cut corners, or didn't analyse the data right or something. The university are adamant there is nothing wrong with my work.
Because my working practices were so strange and a lot was held in my head and worked on in my head it is hard to retrace my steps to 'check' everything.
Has anybody else ever experienced believing you did something wrong somehow and don't deserve your qualification?

When you say "it is hard to go back to my work," do you mean you are going to revisit your PhD work and develop it or make it into a book? Or do you mean it is hard to go back to research work in general

It sounds like you are like to be in control, and stress out about every little detail.  The upside is that you produce nice and polished work.  The downside: you feel that there are some i's and t's that have not been dotted/crossed.    Maybe you should see someone to give you the tools to overcome this compulsive behavior.

See this Q&A.

The way you describe your research process sounds pretty similar to any research process in the real world.

This really sounds like an issue to discuss with a professional psychologist.  YOu've had massive stress and a breakdown.  The internet is definitely not the place to get advice on this.  It will take time to restore your self confidence.

gib I do need to revisit my PhD work for the new job I have taken.

It is clear that you do good and well respected work; so what does it matter how you produce it? We all have our own ways and there is no right way. Nevertheless, it would be foolish to attempt an authoritative answer to such a complex question. I agree with @StephenG-HelpUkraine in feeling you should speak to a professional who may help you discover what truly lies at the heart of your disquiet. I doubt that the real answer lies in your PhD work or your postdoc.

Your work was reviewed by many professors who are experts in their
field. You were asked questions in the viva and you gave answers
which were satisfactory for the review committee.
You just feel that there is something wrong but you cannot pin point
it. If you don't know what is wrong, how can you correct it?
You published journal articles which were read, reviewed, analyzed,
referred to by many people in this field. No one has ever complained or
found mistakes in them.

In the light of above points, tell yourself that this was all imposter syndrome and now it is no more.
Carry on with your post-doc and hope for the best.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it a good idea to move universities late into PhD?
I have been enrolled in a PhD program for 3 years now. I have a had a pretty disappointing experience so far: I have had three different supervisors (didn’t get along with the first, the second moved abroad), and have also changed topics multiple times as a result. The department has let me down multiple times in terms of academic support (my supervisor wouldn’t read my drafts, sometimes wouldn’t respond to emails for months when he’s abroad) and I don’t feel like the university has any interest in actually supervising, or teaching, postgrad students. Many here act more like “answering machines”: come to me if you have questions, otherwise I have nothing to say to you. There is no postgrad community to speak of, and I am the only PhD student working in my area. I do have partial results for some of the projects I have worked on over the last few years, but nothing meaningfully complete. More importantly, however, I don’t feel like I have learned (and been taught) what it means to do research yet. If I were to write up my results and turn them into a thesis, I might pass, but I wouldn’t feel able to do (independent) research as a post-doc (which is what I want to do in the future).
Even though I have three years left of funding I am considering quitting. I am very unhappy here, and being at this university has throughly diminished my enthusiasm for the subject I’m working in. I have also developed a certain level of dislike for this university, and the department. I don’t really trust that any of my current supervisors have my best interest in mind. I have to say, I wouldn’t really want to have a degree from this university.
I would love to stay in academia, though. I have hope that, at a different university, in a different environment, I could thrive.
I understand this is a very general question, but basically I am wondering: what are the odds of leaving here and finding a PhD elsewhere? The “sunk cost” is high, and I have already spend three unhappy years here —- I don’t want to turn them into six, unless there’s a very good reason to do so.

How long is the PhD program supposed to last? You say you have been through 3 years already. How much do you have left? The answer won't be the same if you can be finished in six months than if you have to stay 3 more years to complete the PhD.

Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.

@Stef it was meant to be 4, with funding for 3, but given the circumstances the university has given me a fellowship for another tree years.

This depends a lot on which field of study and which country.  In the US, graduate school admission is done via a centralized admission process, and you would have to submit an application just like any undergraduate applying to grad school for the first time.  And after you transfer, you would typically have to re-start the process of taking courses, qualifying exams, finding an advisor and thesis committee, etc. On the other hand, in most of German-speaking Europe, PhD applications are quite informal and more like job applications, so it would be relatively easy to switch, assuming you can find a willing supervisor at the place you want to go to.
The "sunk cost" factor depends heavily on the field.  In some fields (e.g. physics), graduate school consists of doing a series of projects, and your eventual PhD thesis might just involve "stapling" together the papers you have from your time as a PhD student.  In that case, there will not be much of a sunk cost at all.  But in other fields, a PhD might actually involve some sort of main project that takes several years to finish, so in that case switching to a new lab/department/university may indeed be a huge sunk cost.
Finally, in any case, you would have to justify why you want to move, and come up with reasons why you think the problems affecting you at your current institution won't carry over to the new place.  But don't lose hope; it is possible to transfer to a different university as a PhD student.  Many people have done it, and it is not as hard as some might make it out to be.

Thank you for this! I really appreciate it — it means a lot to me. I think in terms of the “sunk cost” factor, I’d be firmly in the former group: I might just be able to “staple” (even though I don’t have many publications); however, I was worried I hadn’t learned what it takes to be a researcher, so even completing the thesis might be , in my view, irrelevant. Is that too harsh?

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


text:
My PhD supervisor doesn't guide my project, and I am concerned about my progress
I am doing a very technical computational STEM PhD, which has been very wide open to me in terms of what direction I take it. I have 2 supervisors. One supervisor has always been very responsive but he only knows the clinical side, the second supervisor is very technical but has never been responsive.
I previously had a supervisor (previous research, now left this) who very closely reviewed my work and constantly pushed me, and I did very well with them. I saw the way they managed their PhD students and they always provided them with continuous feedback, made arrangements for them to work with postdocs to learn skills, and guided the overall progress and structure of their work, i.e. 'next analyse this', try this statistics etc. Their PhD students did extremely well also. I think my previous supervisor did think I should be more independent though. But he was very much a manager of our research.
My current supervisor had the notion of "see what you can do!" and "I don't have time to manage you". It is quite nice to have total freedom, but I feel like I have completely floundered. When I started the PhD I was confident I could progress as a PhD student, which I have somewhat lost and feel mediocre. Although I have learned a lot over the 2 years, and some technical skills which are very marketable, I just don't feel I am anywhere near publishing a first author paper. I would love for my supervisor to guide me more. I wish he had some goal for me, but his focus is mostly elsewhere.
My supervisors had been trying to apply for a large dataset, which I was using a small portion of. That was one of their main focus. That fell through and so did my use of the dataset, so I also don't really have much data for a computational PhD. Recently I heard my supervisor had acquired a small slightly different dataset (different animal, same organ) and given it to a postdoc in another group to analyse. Another group offered to let us analyse their data, but my supervisors turned it down (I presume because they were concerned they would lose control of authorship etc). My supervisor gives more attention to a collaborator PhD student who he doesn't supervise, who he says is "very talented".
I had been trying to make the best of the situation, and find ways to publish. Part of me feels that maybe if I was just better I would be able to publish. But I also think that it's pretty unwieldy challenge for a PhD student to have minimal data + minimal direction. Though the working environment is honestly very nice, pleasant. I feel like I can probably produce something that passes as a PhD, but I am struggling to conceptualise + implement research papers myself. Any thoughts? FYI other people also comment that my supervisor is quite minimal in involvement etc.
tl;dr wish I was getting more specific direction in PhD project, any advise?

Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.


text:
Should I explain abbreviations after table of abbreviations in research paper?
I have table of abbreviations at the end of the introduction section. Should explain an abbrevation if it was explained in that table, at other sections of the paper.

I answered a very similar question here, so I shan't repeat all of it. Briefly, however, I think that it worthwhile to repeat the meaning of abbreviations at the point of their first occurrence in each new chapter ... unless you are certain that the reader could not possibly misunderstand or have forgotten your intended meaning.
Theses are different from journal articles, and the approach to abbreviations should be adapted accordingly.


text:
What does the question: "Any faculty contacts in our department?" mean?
I am applying to some Math REUs this summer and on some applications I have the following question:

Any faculty contacts in our department?

I suppose I just say "no," or "0," because I am applying from an external university and thus do not know any math faculty at the university.
I want to note that my question is not this question, which seems to be asking about graduate school applications.

Actually, it does happen that some undergraduate students have contacts in departments at other universities. (I know of such examples in my department.)
But if you literally never communicated with any faculty in the department running the REU, you should write "No."


text:
IELTS score in which section of my cv?
Where should I put my IELTS score? Under certifications or in the language section where I include my native language and English?
My overall is 8.0, and I scored 9.0 in reading and 8.5 in listening. Do you think I should add the score of each skill or just the overall?
I want to use this CV to find a supervisor for applying for a master's degree.

Yes, the language section would be more appropriate as an IELTS score is not a certification.


text:
Is it OK to only invite one of three co-authors of a previous joint paper to do another joint paper?
I have co-authored one paper with Professor A, PhD student B and PhD student C. B left the best impression on me as the most friendly, productive and hard-working. Now, I want to do a joint paper again. Same as last time, the subject is not in A's area of expertise (nor B's or C's), though it's highly related, but I am hesitant to work with A as he tends to rush and push to publication before getting the paper to perfect (or very near perfect), and he is usually busy so I doubt that he will spend much time on it anyways. C is OK, but probably can't contribute much to the paper. Besides, I think two authors may suffice and be optimal.
Now, A is B's adviser (maybe C's too) and was my undergraduate mentor. I don't want to induce any hard feelings to A and C if they find out they, but not B, are left out of this joint venture. In the end, I did present my draft to A and gave glimpse of it in a presentation where A, B and C were present. Another reason why I choose to work with B who is a PhD student is (this may sound silly) because I think this will actually help her career, as opposed to working with a professor or working alone, as I don't intend to pursue an academic career and am just doing this for fun. Plus, the second author can act as a serious peer reviewer, so this will benefit my paper as well.
How should I do about this?

Yes! It is OK to only invite one of three co-authors of a previous joint paper to do another joint paper.

Replace "paper" with "dinner" and "coauthor" with "guest".  Yes, it is perfectly fine to only invite one of them to dinner, even though all three were guests at your previous dinner.

It is absolutely fine to not work with A and C as long as

all the work and ideas in your paper are yours (and B's).
your preferences on who to work with are based on academic and research skills, Making decisions based on their race, gender, ethnicity, nationality, etc. is discriminatory and hence unacceptable.

I feel it is dishonest to add A and C to the list of authors in your paper just to keep them happy.

It indeed is perfectly fine to collaborate with only B on a specific topic/publication.
What you might want to keep in mind is that, depending on the field you are working in, it might be common to include the supervisor of a PhD student in the list of authors, as long as that supervisor contributed -even little- by advising his PhD student also on this topic. As you wrote "my undergraduate mentor", I assume you are a PhD student yourself. So if you have your own supervisor as last author for example, it could become a problem not to include A in general. I agree with not adding A as an author just to make him happy.
Keeping C out of that paper does not seem to be a problem, as long as you don't use research done by him. But you would want to communicate that to B as well.

I don't consider this too much a relevant, and it obviously quite depends on the culture. I have seen a lot of people being "written on the paper" without doing really much there. I'm sure that it was discussed here before that it is not uncommon for advisors to opt out from being authors of a paper if they only "were available" to the student for questions (about writing style and such), but didn't contribute with any ideas. And as well, they often realize that for the student, having a paper on his own is very valuable and they support it if it is appropriate.

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


text:
How should I thank an interviewer after an interview?
I am in mathematics on the job market.
How should I thank my interviewer?
Does an e-mail suffice, a verbal thanks, or should I mail a handwritten note?
Although I do love writing handwritten notes expressing thanks to my family and friends, I don't want to come off as looking for favors.  I am also not sure what is customary in mathematics.

I don't think you can honestly go wrong with handwritten (so long as you keep the content appropriate).  It's still the gold standard.

@tonysdg It's a bit quaint, no? Do you not think that the receipt of a handwritten note would surprise the interviewer? This surprise could be positive or negative. An email would seem more standard to me, but, then again, I'm not at all well-positioned to answer.

@tonysdg Do you think mailing it is best, or dropping it off in person (if possible)?

My last time searching for jobs, I e-mailed the department head to say thanks, and I actually sent the secretary a handwritten note in the mail because I thought her organization and helpfulness during my interview was exceptional. I actually got offered that job.

@Shane: I'm a bit old-fashioned, perhaps, and I'm probably not old/experienced enough to be saying with any authority that it won't be taken negatively.  But I guess I'd be surprised if it was taken negatively - at worst, I feel that it would be, as you said, quaint and then forgotten.

FelixY.: I'd mail it (for convenience more than anything), but it's probably situational.  And given @Shane's point, I'd wait for a second opinion before making a decision.

The other relevant point is that an email will probably suffice - the handwritten note would just be extra icing on the cake.

@tonysdg I don't have an interview yet, I am just trying to prepare for the next coming months, I am definitely waiting for other responses.

@tonysdg I think I agree with you when you say "...at worst, I feel that it would be, as you said, quaint and then forgotten." Perhaps there's a minimal chance it comes off as a little desperate or suck-uppy, but, in expectation, it probably helps.

Honestly, in this and at least one other question you are worrying about things that no one on the employer's side will care about in the least.  You do not need to send a thank-you letter to any of your interviewers.  If you feel like you made a personal connection with a specific faculty member, you certainly may write an email (or a letter, or whatever...) saying that you enjoyed meeting them / look forward to seeing them again / whatever.  Or not: we won't care either way.
Math departments are not evaluating candidates for their general etiquette. Please remember that:
(i) We are drawing from a worldwide applicant pool, and there is no such thing as worldwide academic etiquette.  We expect that once someone is hired they'll learn the local ropes.
(ii) Mathematicians have a reputation for being a bit eccentric / weird / exhibiting non-standard social behaviors.  Probably this is somewhat exaggerated, but the truth is that math departments are a great haven for those whose professional competence vastly exceeds their social skills.  If you are not too weird, it should not be a problem.  Likability is, obviously, a positive, but we are really not running a popularity contest: the gentleman who was pretty quiet at lunch but gave a nice clear talk and has one more strong paper is going to get hired over the life of the party whose talk was a bit fuzzy and whose CV is not quite as strong.
The above is centered on research departments.  Liberal arts colleges value collegiality more, but they too will make a distinction between someone who is simply socially dexterous versus someone who knows what to do in the very specific, content-related interactions they will have with students.  They will not assume that because someone is well-mannered they will be good with students (or inversely): there are people whom I find painfully awkward who are wonderful with students, and students are surprisingly good at seeing the difference here as well.

we are really not running a popularity contest... although academia doesn't always look that way..

I'd like to second @Shane's point [that it would seem a bit quaint]. Think of it from your interviewer's perspective: If you had a number of people to interview, besides getting your regular work done, you'd probably be happy if any correspondence was conducted through standardized channels. All of the faculty members I've known communicated via e-mail as first and last resorts.

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


text:
How many candidates are usually invited for a campus interview?
I am currently a candidate for a few jobs, and have a few campus interviews.
How many candidates are typically invited for a campus interview?
I am mostly interested in answers for positions for the range of positions, tenure-track, non-tenure track, lecturer positions, and postdocs.

For tenure-track positions my department generally invites 3 candidates for on-site interviews after doing phone screenings. This is what I have seen from a lot of universities in the US.
Other types of positions don't have standard rules. Non-tenure track and adjuct positions are filled as needed, don't involve as rigorous of interviews, and may never be brought on-site. Postdocs are usually hired by the individual PI rather than the department.

I'm in a math department with similar policies.  We typically bring in 3 tenure track candidates for an on-campus interview (after a round of screening interviews by Skype.)  For a one year visiting assistant professor position or even a permanent lecturer position we'd typically hire based on Skype interviews without any on-campus interview unless the candidate happened to be close enough to drive to campus for an interview.

For math tenure track, I've seen 3-6 for 1 position, and maybe 5-8 for 2 positions.


text:
Sign application cover letter with "PhD" or not?
For an application cover letter, is it better to sign it with just my name, or with "Ph.D." after my name?
What I am not sure of is that at the beginning of the letter, I do state when and where I got my PhD from. For reference, I am applying for positions in mathematics.

Everybody who is applying for that job either has a PhD or will have one very soon. Why do you feel the need to draw attention to yours?

@DavidRicherby I don't feel the need to attract attention to my PhD, I was only asking. The confusion comes from the convention in my department that everyone is referred to as "Dr." I got my PhD somewhere where it is very casual, we call the faculty by their first names. I was just not sure what to do. I don't know why you assume I feel like I need to draw attention to it, I was just unsure about what to do, which is why I am asking the question on here.

Although "everyone is referred to as 'Dr.'," how many of those people state that they are a 'Dr.'?

@user2768 They seem to actually say "I am Dr.-"  when introducing themselves to students.

In the U.S. mathematics departments I'm familiar with, writing "Ph.D." after your name would not be disastrous, but it would be a bad idea.  It can look insecure, like you are worried readers will assume you don't have a Ph.D. if you don't remind them frequently, or pompous, like you feel having a Ph.D. is an important distinction that must be emphasized, and I see no upside to balance the risk of appearing insecure or pompous.
To clarify, I don't think merely listing "Ph.D." after your name would undermine an otherwise great application.  Nobody is going to take it that seriously.  However, it can be tricky to get the tone right in academic job applications, and some applicants inadvertently write things that could be read as insecure or pompous.  (Indeed, it's natural to feel insecure, and it's easy to come across as pompous if you try too hard to convince the reader that you'd make a great hire.)  The danger is that the reader might piece together several small things into an overall negative impression, maybe even subconsciously.  From this perspective, it's safest to eliminate issues you can identify, even if they wouldn't be decisive by themselves, just in case they might reinforce other things you're unaware of.
Note that conventions for the post-nominal use of "Ph.D." may vary between countries or even universities, as well as between fields.  This is a matter of culture, and you'll need to figure out what the culture is like where you are applying.

Since I am looking at tenure track cover letters in mathematics anyway, I just opened 12 of them, more or less at random, to gather statistics on this point.  Of these letters:

Nine are signed Firstname Lastname
Two are signed Firstname Lastname PhD.
One is signed Dr. Firstname Lastname

The minority three had at least some of their schooling outside of the US.
Upshot: it is distinctly more common not to sign "PhD", it probably says something about your academic culture, and people play it either way.  I have to disagree with @Anonymous Mathematician's assessment that putting a PhD after your signature would be "a bad idea".  I have read (literally!) hundreds of cover letters over the last month, and I have never noticed up until now who does this and who doesn't.  There are things that appear in cover letters that I find slightly annoying, and this is not one of them.  But since you are asking: probably don't do it.

Anon. Math.'s point is just that adding PhD after your name can't increase your chances but might, in some circumstances, decrease them.

@David: And my point is that I find it doubtful that it would decrease them.  Not the most scintillating point ever, but...

I agree that any effect is likely to be somewhere between minor and negligible.

I disagree with the herd, here.  When writing formal business letters, your signature block generally contains your name, title, and positions.

Source
It is not "bragging" to include Ph.D. on the line that follows your signature, and formality calls for it.  You would not include Ph.D. in your actual signature-- that would look presumptuous.
So far as I know, I can't think of a case where using a formal style in a formal communication would count against you.  I can think of many cases where handling a communication that calls for formality  in an informal way would be inappropriate.
UPDATE (and feel free to revoke upvotes!):  Frankly, the idea that omitting or including your title on a cover letter will have any impact on a search committee is ludicrous.  If that's the factor in your application package that makes the difference between an offer and a no offer, your CV must be pretty good.

This is academia, and the OP is applying for a faculty position. It's, per se, not a formal business situation in the sense that academics are often rather dismissive of formality. If an honorific must be used – and this is just a personal opinion – signing off as "Dr. Jane Smith" sounds much less pompous than "Jane Smith, PhD".

@Moriarty -- I disagree.  A search committee process can be rather formal.  A group of very busy people is assembled to review dozens, if not hundreds, of packages to make a recommendation that directly impacts the future of the department.  Based on the recommendations of that committee, substantial university resources will be moved around.  Next to dressing up in traditional costumes once a year for commencement, search committees are close to as formal as it gets.

I feel I see "Ph.D." included as often as omitted -- no hard numbers to back it up.  It makes little difference to me, but I agree that it is formally correct. It seems that including it might be helpful when hiring for an entry-level tenure-track position, but we're going to check the CV and transcripts anyway. If it's required for the position, I don't see how one can criticize including it. The candidate ought to help the committee see she or he meets the minimum qualifications.

The question is not about writing business letters and "Ph.D" is a qualification, not a position.

@DavidRicherby - Ph.D. is a TITLE, as well as a qualification -- and yes, the question is exactly about writing business letters, no more, no less.  The fact that people don't realize this is why our engineering school now sees fit to require a 2-credit course in professional communication.

The person writing the letter is not representing a business. The recipient of the letter is not a business. It is not a business letter.

I'll pass this right on to our CFO

No. As much as you'd like to have some sort of a "kudos benefit" from having become a Doctor of Philosophy - just don't. They already know you're a Doctor of Philosophy, don't run the risk of sounding like a full-of-themselves Doctor of Philosophy... even if they don't interpret it that way - they might.

Or a "full-of-herself Doctor of Philosophy". As a woman in a male-dominated field, I do feel like I had to correct that.

@FelixY.: You could just edit the answer you know... anyway, edited it myself.

Off topic, but I really like Community's edit.


text:
Is it bad to apply for a job immediately after it was posted?
I am applying for jobs on mathjobs.org, and I regularly refresh the new postings page.
Sometimes I see jobs that I want to apply for right away, but I am not sure if it looks bad.  I am worried about coming across as desperate or I am trying for the shotgun effect.
Does it look bad to apply for a job soon after it was posted?
What I mean by "soon" is the day it was posted or a few days after.

Better sooner than later. Some universities keep "applications open until a suitable candidate is found", but may run out of time to interview everyone...

They are ready to receive applications before they post them, if they were not ready they wouldn't have posted just yet; Go ahead apply as soon as early as you like. They are expecting applications to arrive so why not!

Some hire as soon as they get the right candidate.  Waiting might result in somebody else being hired .

Hahah! This isn't a hot date! Apply you fool!

Bizarre, no it's not at all.

I don't know how mathjob distributes candidates' applications to schools, but I doubt anyone cares. I put all applications I get for my job postings into a folder in no particular order and never look at the order of application. Someone has to be first. Go ahead! Apply away!

Having been on a search committee last year (and another one this year for two tenure track positions) on mathjobs.org, I can tell you that (1) it is possible to figure out when an application was submitted and received and (2) no one on the committee cares in the least when you apply.

Agreed with @Brian Borchers on both counts.  One of the most useful ways to sort applications on MathJobs is by the date they were received, so we can certainly see that.  The idea that we would care that someone applied "too early" is quite strange to me: when we post the job, we are asking for applicants.  As long as your application comes in after the posting (it is not possible for it to come in before...) and by the deadline: absolutely no problem.

If you're applying in less than about an hour, you're doing yourself a disservice, but otherwise you might as well just get on with it.  The chances of the people who make the hiring/shortlisting decision (a) seeing, (b) noticing, and (c) caring that you applied promptly are very slim.
The reason I say you are doing yourself a disservice applying within minutes is simply that you need time to read about the job/employer, check suitability (yes even if you're desperate for a job) and tailor your application.

You should give yourself a few days to prepare the application. If you don't target your application and make up your mind about a meaningful strategy to get an interview you could as well save your time (and the time of the hiring committee) by not applying. So applying on the same day (supposing this position wasn't advertised in a different form) is a bad advice, since it will signalize that you have not spend enough time to prepare properly.
On the other hand, it is a good idea to submit early (say after a few days). There will be several hundreds applications for a single position. So the committee will go over this long list and sort out fiercely in the first round. However, the people in the committee will have a look how the application process started and might notice your application if you have applied early (everybody is a bit curious). Thus, by applying early you might increase the chance that somebody looks more carefully on your application, which in turn might increase your chances to "survive" the first round.
tl;dr Dont submit on the first day, but an early submission might increase the chances to get over the first round.

Does it look bad to apply for a job soon after it was posted?

It depends. If you start applying for jobs in August and September, immediately after jobs begin to be posted, then that might look strange.  In previous years, my department had a position posted quite early, and the earliest applicants were for the most part noticeably weak.
But...

I am applying for jobs on mathjobs.org, and I regularly refresh the new postings page.

You and many, many others. This is very natural and every hiring committee will (or should, anyway) understand it. This time of year, when deadlines for other schools are coming and going and your materials have already been prepared, and it is understood that candidates are very, very eager to find jobs, it is entirely natural to apply right away.  Indeed, my department posted a position in November this year and we received thirty-two applications in the first two days.

@dan1111: In principle I would not care at all, and I hope and am fairly certain that in practice I would not care at all. Certainly everyone on any hiring committee would insist 100% that they don't care. But all human beings are subject to implicit bias -- i.e., allowing irrelevant factors to affect their judgment without realizing it. The questioner asks how to avoid this, and I do believe that there's a very small but nonzero chance that such factors could prove relevant -- even though they shouldn't be.

Let me also add that I really don't think that it matters much at all, or that this is anything which anyone should really worry about.

If it's not like on Freelancer.com(Those guys have a freaking badge that gets awarded to you if you bid for something within two minutes of it being posted), it'd be better to wait till you have read the whole listing before you apply. You're worried about looking like a post-bot, but it doesn't matter, really. There are too many applications to care about trivial things such as this.


text:
A job application asks for a "sample of current scholarship," what is this?
I am filling out a job application, which asks to attach a "sample of current scholarship."
What is this?
I am guessing this means something like a published paper, but as a new PhD graduate, does the thesis count?

"Scholarship" is effectively a synonym for "research".  Send something like:

a published paper
a preprint of an unpublished paper
your thesis, or one or more chapters from it

Your advisor may have advice as to what would be best.


text:
In applications for academic jobs that ask for a "copy of transcript", is a "copy of transcript" an unofficial or official copy?
I am confused in a lot of applications for academic jobs, such as assistant professor, lecturer, instructor, at academic institutions. Many of them ask for a "copy of transcript," but I am unsure about what this means. Does this mean I need to get my official sealed transcript, open it, and copy it, or does it mean I can use the unofficial transcript?

To know for sure, the easiest thing is to email the application contact person for a given job and ask.
My impression is that in many cases, the committee reviewing the transcripts does not really care whether they are official or unofficial, photocopied or not, whatever.  All contain the same information.  If you reach a later stage of the application process, they may require an official transcript to satisfy bureaucratic requirements.
As W88's answer says, every printed version of your transcript is "a copy of your transcript".  "A copy of your transcript" doesn't necessarily mean a photocopy, it just means "a piece of paper with your transcript printed on it".  If you receive a sealed transcript from your school, that is "a copy of your transcript" and you can send it in as-is.

May I ask what you mean when you say official and unofficial?
If it helps, the copies issued from the institution where you graduated are all considered official. The original document you receive is also a copy called the original copy. You can also have multiple original copies.
So when they ask for an official copy of your transcript, as long as it has the signature of your registrar or equivalent, it is official; whether it is the original or the photocopy is a different matter.

An official transcript comes sealed with official signatures. The unofficial transcript is a copy that I can access online without signatures, and since I can print it out, is not sealed.

The lack of clarity in the applications is that some ask for a "copy of a transcript," not worded as "copy of official transcript." Some applications specifically say a "copy of official transcript," or "copy of unofficial transcript," so in these cases, it is clear.

If I were in your place, I would have copies of my official transcript prepared; unofficial copies are always available so it would be a non-issue for me. My next step would be to ask the employers for clarification whether they need an official copy or not. In short, the best course of action may be to just ask the ones who posted the job offerings.

I've often encountered simple photocopies of unofficial transcripts in applications.  If we're sufficiently interested in a candidate to invite them to interview, we'd ask the candidate to have official transcripts (with the university seal, etc.) sent before interviewing on campus or making an offer.


text:
Should I list conferences I attended on my CV?
I am a PhD student in mathematics, and I noticed that on my peers' CV's, they often list conferences they attended. It seems as if they just attended these conferences, they did not help organize, nor did they give a talk.
Should I list conferences I only attended on my CV, or does it look like obvious filler?

I only add conferences that I presented. That being said, it's a pretty short list, but I can remember everything about them in the event someone asks me about it rather than say something canned.

My advisor told to add the list of attended conferences when he was asked about it. The subject is pure mathematics, if that is relevant.

I'm in computer science and I only list published papers. IMHO, being funded to be in a place (possibly sleeping) is not an achievement worthy of mention.

Maybe the customs are different in mathematics, but in computer science I would never consider putting attendance of an ordinary conference on a C.V.  Now, there might be certain exceptional cases where there's some sort of exclusive prestigious invitation-only conference, but that would be a rather unusual case.  Most of the time, the only thing that attending a conference shows is that you had access to enough money to be able to register and show up.  I, at least, would see a list of conferences attended as filler.

I've always had the list of attended conferences in my CV, just because I modeled mine after other math PhD students, but as my list grew, I started to feel like it is just becoming meaningless filler. Thanks for your response.

Right, invitation-only conferences, excellent point. Those may mean something.

It may not be a big achievement just to attend a conference, however participation with the poster and especially oral presentation I think could be mentioned, especially by students who may not have any publications yet.
Conferences should be listed separately, not confusing them with peer reviewed publications that are much more significant achievements. This list must include the header of your poster or presentation, co-authors, not just the name of the conference.
After there are enough published serious works, a list of conferences does not make much sense.

This answers a different question than what was asked.

How do you see it different?

You're primarily addressing conference presentations rather than attendance.

Participation is definitively relevant, there is a huge difference from presenting a poster to an invited talk, but they are in the same or a similar category. IMHO. BTW: in some (many?) areas, conferences (or at least conference papers) are peer reviewed (and are considered the most relevant venues).

@DavidKetcheson I think the first paragraph and last sentence addresses the OP question (maybe the answer requires a bit of reorganizing?). In my field conferences (with poster/oral presentation) are a very good way to demonstrate experience/accomplishments when there is not yet enough publications, so it is a good idea to include them. Later, when other more important accomplishments exists, it is not necessary to include them. Essentially I agree with this post.


text:
When do I let other places I applied to know I have an offer?
I currently have a job offer, but I have had two other campus interviews.  The other search committees often mention that I should update them on my job search.  I am not sure what this means exactly.  Of course, if I know that if I take another offer, that I should let the others know. What I am unclear on is if I have an offer, but no offer yest from the other institutions, should I let them know about this?  Or do I wait until I have an offer from them to say anything?

I am not sure what this means exactly. What makes you not asking them directly?

It's in your interest to inform the other two departments that you have an offer and the date by which you need to respond to that offer.  You can say this without naming the first institution or the salary that you've been offered.
This way, they have a chance to speed up their process and make you a competing offer before the first offer expires.  If you don't tell them, then they'll simply continue with their search process and you might end up being forced to accept the first offer before the other two institutions have completed their search process.

Your other two potential employers are not going to be offended if you tell them about your offer, and they simply won't know if you don't tell them, so this isn't really an issue of etiquette.


text:
Reference request for research on images or colors used in quizzes and exams
For my exams and quizzes, I print them on colored paper, and I usually try to make them aesthetically appealing with the design. I include pictures that are usually relevant to the material they are being tested on.  I sometimes include funny cartoons.
I do this because I think it makes taking quizzes and exams an experience that is a little more relaxing and fun than if I just had plain white paper with no images.  I also enjoy seeing my students chuckle at a funny picture or cartoon.  I teach undergraduate mathematics, and given that many students have math anxiety, I like to try to take the edge off of that.
Has there been any research done on whether or not having colored paper or images on exams and quizzes are beneficial or detrimental?

Beware of color blind students.

@MassimoOrtolano Do you know of any research that suggests colored paper or colored images on exams are detrimental to color blind students?  I am interested in the use of images or cartoons that are not used as part of a problem, i.e. having a colored graph for example, I would not do that on an exam.  Just illustrations that are not necessary to solve the problem.

It seems  that print on yellow, pastel or cream-coloured paper is easier to read for dyslexic students: http://www.altformat.org/index.asp?pid=344. From BDA (British Dyslexia Association) Many dyslexic people are sensitive to the glare of white backgrounds on a page, white board or computer screen. This can make the reading of text much harder.

@FelixY. I don't have any reference, but I know a few people who, being color blind, have difficulties in reading information from colored displays (e.g. instrument displays) or images.

With a quick Google search, I found the following, but I am interested if there is anything more than these, especially with mathematics or studies with images:
"Effect of Paper Color on Students' Physics Exam Performances" by David R. Schmidt, Todd G. Ruskell, and Patrick B. Kohl
https://www.academia.edu/5702205/Effect_of_Paper_Color_on_Students_Physics_Exam_Performances
"The Non-Impact of Paper Color on Exam Performance" by Michael J. Meyer and Jennifer Bagwell:
http://aaajournals.org/doi/abs/10.2308/iace-50142
"Effect of Paper Color and Question Orderon Exam Performance" by Ilanit R. Tal, Katherine G. Akers, and Gordon K. Hodge
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233180281_Effect_of_Paper_Color_and_Question_Order_on_Exam_Performance


text:
Do hiring committees look at a candidate's StackExchange account?
On StackExchange, some people use their real names, while others hide behind a username.
I was wondering, do hiring committees look at a candidate's StackExchange account and consider the candidate's activity on these accounts?
I know committees look at my website, they openly mention this during interviews.  They also ask me about things that they would only know about after seeing my website.  I have yet to connect my real identity with my StackExchange account, because of my reservations about this.

Anything that shows up when you google someone's name is fair game. So I would say yes, of course, this would happen either by design or happenstance.

I would say NO. If you don't link your SE account to your website, its difficult to know the real user behind the fancy user name.

@Coder In fact the OP is asking whether hiring committees would do this had the candidate used their real name.

In that case, if the user is too frequent then Google shall list the results if you search as "User Name stackexchange". But, I think, which recruiter has this much time to google about you on multiple platforms such as SE, Quora etc. @MassimoOrtolano

@Coder You don't need to google across multiple platforms: usually activities in widespread network communities show up in the first pages. If you just google my name without further specification, you'll get that I participate to Academia.SE at the first or second page.

My own experience is that for shortlisted candidate it is usually done (not specifically for SE, but for anything that pops up on Google)

Assuming you don't have a very common name, shared with at least one semi famous actor, djs, photographers, so on.... When googling my name, I get one link only, on the first 5 pages....

I am the chair of my department's hiring committee.  Hiring committees (or at least hiring committee chairs) definitely google for candidates' names and use the results are (a small) part of their deliberation.

"Let's see...oh look, they have an SO account...hmm...woah, look at that rep! They must spend all of their time on the site and none of it doing research!" ;-)

@tonysdg:  Yes, I've sometimes worried people might think that (not that my own rep is really high).  I actually generated most of my math.SE rep during a couple of bouts of flu, when I wasn't up to doing research but didn't want to do no maths whatsoever.

Yes, it can happen, though I expect it is rare.
I was recently asked in a job interview whether I was the Tara B on math.SE.  The interviewer who asked the question is also on math.SE, and we have answered some of the same questions.  I have met him in real life and e-mailed him once to ask for a paper, but I had the impression that he primarily remembered me from stackexchange.  (I did get the job, but I doubt that my SE participation was a significant factor.)
(Incidentally, this also demonstrates that even if you only use part of your name on SE, your account might still be noticed.)

As Dan Romik said, anyone can look up anything on Google, so a StackExchange account would possibly be looked at. But I would say that this will only occur rarely, if at all. And it certainly would not amount to a formal indication of either acceptance or rejection.
On the other hand, a StackExchange presence is part of one's online presence as a scientist and so may effect your overall scientific presence, prior to ones application for a job. But it will not be a significant part of the hiring process had the hiring committee do not know your stackexchange participation in advance.

+1 for the second paragraph.  I have a personal example of the first sentence (see my answer), and I expect that the second sentence would be true in most cases.


text:
Should I put future talks on my CV?
I am a Ph.D. student in mathematics, and I am currently applying for jobs. There are some talks that I will be giving later this month and the next few months. Should I put future, confirmed talks on my CV? If so, how should I denote that it is an upcoming talk?

Always consult with your adviser for the discipline-specific culture. I probably wouldn't put them on, unless they are invited talks.

I think there is, in principle, nothing wrong for you to put these talks on your CV provided (i) they will really happen, and (ii) it is clear that they are in the future -- so put a (future) date next to them.
As a graduate student applying for jobs, you are in the same situation as all of the other graduate students: your CV is still pretty short. It is fair to add facts to it that will happen in the future (though it is, obviously, not ok to embellish by listing talks that you only may give but that may not in fact really happen).

If the talk was accepted for presentation at a conference based on a peer reviewed abstract, then there's somewhat more to it than just a planned presentation.  In that case, I'd state "Accepted for presentation at the 25th X conference."

I don't feel the necessity of the talks to really happen in the future. It is the same as the manuscripts under preparation or papers submitted to conferences or journals.


text:
How to effectively get a post-doc position
The question is really an attempt to ask for help and advice from academic staff members, industrial research staff or anyone who has had personal experience with Post-doc job applications.
Obviously there are lots of websites that list post-doc positions, and some are dedicated just for that. However in reality these positions have a lot of hidden intricacies that might lead you down a path that has been a dead end for a long time. The applicant however learns about this just at the very end of the process.
This is somewhat frustrating since most of the people I know about looking for a postdoc are in the final stages of their PhD and really cannot afford to waste too much time on the wrong thing.
Some ideas that raise my concern into the straightforwardness of a postdoc application are:

Many Post-Doc positions are advertised just for the sake of advertising the position, however sometimes the successful candidate had been chosen already, even before the position was open !
A lot of advise I get is that i should contact the concerned Professor/person directly and not wait for a position to be open, being proactive
Some positions are just out of reach for fresh PhD graduates because other previous post-docs are also applying for the same position and so the competition becomes unfair

I am hoping that this question leads into real world, clear and effective advice for people looking to get a Post-doc position

Pro tip: get your own grant ;)

@Mark this might be somewhat challenging as well, but am sure if you do get a grant then that would make your placement process much easier

Where do you get the idea that most positions are not "for real"? That is pretty much the opposite of my experience, though that might be a difference of fields.

@Mark: That's actually bad advice, since (1) most funding sources won't accept applications from researchers without a PhD; (2) it can take longer to hear about a grant application than to line up a postdoc.

I would recommend both applying for the postdoc positions advertised, and also writing to professors with research groups that you are interested to join.
Applying for a postdoc is similar to any other job application. You are responsible for sending out the applications or reaching out the future employers. A pro-active approach will invariably be beneficial to the applicant.
As an applicant, I would not recommend worrying about the fairness of the jobs advertised. Just apply.

If applicants would not worry for the fairness of the job ads, then who would?


text:
Getting peer review for research without submitting to conference or journal
Is there a way to get your research article peer reviewed without submitting to a conference or journal?
I am imagining something like openreview.net or even some private peer review system since you would most probably publish that article later in a conference/journal.
Note I work in computer science mainly Machine Learning

Do you want to solicit feedback or do you need peer review as a form of scientific approval for your manuscript?

Will you be paying for this peer review?

@henning--reinstateMonica  Just for feedback and could be used to improve quality for future submission

@GEdgar could be and maybe that would create some incentives. In general i was asking if anyone knew of something like this free or paid

Based on your fist comment, there seems to be some confusion about terminology: feedback as such would not be considered as peer review. Peer review is a formalized process that ends with a decision on a manuscript ("accept," "reject", possibly also "revise").

What is wrong with submitting your manuscript to a journal? If they reject it, you've gotten the peer review you wanted. If they accept it, you've gotten a paper out of it. And if they ask for major revisions, you don't actually have to do them, you can withdraw the paper and sit on it (which is what would happen anyway if you got somebody else to review it).

The way most people do this is to call one of their "peers" and ask them to review the paper. This could be a co-worker or someone from a different department or university. If you do not know anyone, talk to someone who does.

This is correct, but the work still won't be regarded as "peer reviewed publication".

That is also correct ;) My answer assumes that the purpose is to get honest feedback, not to be able to list an unpublishable paper as "peer reviewed" on a CV or something like that.

This is usually the way to do it i agree however am asking for some really “objective” review such as the ones you get from high quality conferences and journals. And if such a thing exists through some platform of some sort

@AnarKi There is no reason why your colleagues would not be able to conduct a highly objective review if you ask them to. They review papers all the time.

I usually get a much more detailed feedback from referees in journals and conferences, than from peers I know.

This is a take-off on the answer of Louic.
If you have confidence in your results then there is no need for this. Just submit to an appropriate journal and you will get the feedback you need.
But, for those cases in which you aren't sure...
This is why it is so important for newer researchers to form wide circles of contacts within their field. People who know enough, and are trusted enough, to give feedback on ideas and even read and comment on drafts and work in progress.
One way to do this, if you are at a large-ish institution is to form or join a research seminar devoted to a small set of topics. Papers can be passed around for comment. The coffee lounge is also a good place to do this, though it is probably something online these days.
Making contact with people at conferences (real or virtual) can help you build that circle. You can ask your advisors to be included in their circles. But, for effective research in the modern era, a circle is essential for most people, but especially for those at the start of their career.
But, cold emailing people isn't very likely to be effective. People don't know (or trust) you nor you, them.
And don't neglect to include your own students in your circle(s) as they develop.

Just to add, there's an electronic equivalent of this on some platforms. ResearchGate allows you to request a contact to review your paper. Technically it works both ways - you get a paper peer reviewed and your buddy gets to practice peer reviewing papers.

Give a talk, in your department, at a peer's department, at a workshop (without proceedings).
Share preprints, with colleagues after talks, in public repositories, with fellow researchers whom you cite/respect/collaborate.

A platform specifically designed for this purpose is Peer Community In (PCI):

“Peer Community in” (PCI) is a non-profit scientific organization that aims to create specific communities of researchers reviewing and recommending, for free, unpublished preprints in their field (i.e. unpublished articles deposited on open online archives like arXiv and bioRxiv1).
´

However, note that you need to "publish" your piece as an "unpublished" pre-print first. (Yes, there is a little paradox there, as pre-prints are not considered as "published".)


text:
Is it good to compare universities in motivation letter for student visa?
I'm a computer science student from Iran. I'm applying for student visa to study master in Germany. Germany's embassy requires students to write a motivation letter in visa process.

For the summer semester 2016 I have received admission from TU
  Darmstadt, TU Stuttgart and university of Freiburg. Also I have been
  rejected from TU Dresden. For the reason of course contents, I have
  chosen to study in TU Darmstadt.

I have written above paragraph in my motivation letter. Is this considered negative to write such things (compare universities or list my admission results)?

If you do leave that in (and it seems reasonable to me, but I've never had to apply for a visa) why mention Dresden at all?

@Rup No idea. Just want to be honest with embassy.

If I were you, I would just write why I want to study at TU Darmstadt. Have a look at their web pages, name a few courses you find interesting and a few professors you'd like to study with. I think that may be sufficient.

You should write a motivation letter. I.e., you are interested in studying in Germany because <list of reasons>. In particular, you want to study at TU Darmstadt because <list of classes, orientation of the study, ...>. And you have been accepted there. After graduating, your plans are <...>, which relates to the selected university/study in the following ways <...>.
Put yourself in their shoes. Why is it advantageous for Germany to have you as a student? Are you interested in learn more about the German culture (apart from your studies)? How will you fit into a (presumably quite alien) environment? What is your proficiency in German and in English? (German is obviously needed for day-to-day contact, in and out of your studies; English is the lingua franca of anything related to technology).
Presumably the conditions are that you must return to your home after the study. How will that work out? Will you be able to continue work with colleagues in Germany, maintain contact with classmates?


text:
finalising a postdoc employment contract
I have been offered a 2-year postdoc position in a good Dutch university. What they sent me so far is an email stating that they would like to offer me the position, and whether I would like to take up this position. I then replied with a yes instantly. Does this exchange of emails constitute a formal appointment decision (and acceptance)? I heard from others that it will take some time for them to formulate an employment contract. So what I shall do in the meantime is to wait and not to push them?
Also the PT's preferred start date is 1st February. What does 'start date' mean exactly? Is this the date that I will start getting paid? the date that I actually start working? If this is the case, does a starting date of 1st Feb imply that I should arrive earlier, say, in January to look for accommodation and sort everything out before 1st Feb?
Thanks in advance!

Having done a post-doc in The Netherlands, I think I can answer your questions.

Your "yes" is an acceptance, though probably not legally binding. They will take it in good faith that you have accepted. The contract may arrive in the mail for you to sign, but you may just sign on your first day.
The starting date is the date you will start and get paid from. You will probably need to go to The Netherlands earlier to find accommodation, though you could easily start everything on February 1 without causing any problems. They will understand that in your first few weeks you'll need to vanish to register yourself with the city, to get bank accounts, etc etc.

I would ask them if the have an accommodation service, even if it only provides short term accommodation. Finding accommodation in The Netherlands can be difficult.
In fact, I would simply ask them what their expectations are, essentially sending them the questions you've posted above. Unless it is the first time they've hired a post-doc, these questions will be unsurprising and they should have answers for them. The Dutch are good at dealing with direct questions (and you'll need to get used to receiving them ;-) ).

This answer is correct. It might be good to add that most conditions are arranged in a collective labour agreement. An English version can be found here: http://www.vsnu.nl/cla-universities-en.html.

Thanks for the answers! It has been a week since I am offered the position via email, but I have not received the contract. Is it normal? The institution has not mentioned anything about contract, but they have requested all my documents so that they can arrange visa for me

One week is nothing. When in doubt, just ask them.


text:
Should a teaching statement be posted publicly on the web?
I noticed that some professors and instructors have their teaching statement available on their webpages, and others don't.
I thought teaching statements were used mainly for applying for jobs, so since these professors and instructors have jobs, what is the purpose of having their teaching statement available to the public?
Is there an advantage to posting the teaching statement publicly?

It can be advantageous to post your application materials publicly while you are searching for a job (because it alerts a broader audience to your job search and lets them quickly find out more).  Once your search is over, I see no career advantage to keeping these materials on the web.  I think the main reason to do so is as a service to others.  It's useful for graduate students to see a wide range of research and teaching statements, so that they have a clearer idea of what they typically look like.  This if possible only if some people make theirs available.
There are also several other reasons someone's teaching statement may remain available.  One is that they forgot to take it down, and another is that they feel it provides students with useful information about their approach to teaching.  However, I'd bet that keeping it online as a public service is the most common reason.

People post just about anything on the web to show what they're doing and what they've done. It might just be that. I prefer said statements over selfies anytime...

I think posting a teaching statement that details your own pedagogical goals and insights as well as your teaching experience is an excellent way to:

help students and colleagues get to know you.
challenge yourself to improve and work towards your teaching goals.
challenge yourself to reflect on your teaching.
get feedback on your approaches to teaching and relating to students.

In short, I think there are plenty of real advantages in clearly expressing your teaching philosophy and sharing your views with others that aren't directly related to securing a position or "getting ahead" in terms of career advancement.
Everyone can be cynical once in awhile, especially when they're being put through the wringer by the frustrating and very competitive application process.
However, most people working in academia take pride in their work and a teaching statement is generally a lot more than a bit of puffery for a job application.
In my own experience as an undergraduate student, many of the best instructors I encountered in my coursework had public teaching statements and were very open about how and why they did things in their classes.


text:
What is a teaching prep in terms of teaching load?
I am new to this job search thing, and I keep seeing the teaching load description along with something called "preps," what is this?
For reference, I am a Ph.D. student in mathematics in the U.S. looking for mostly teaching positions.

A "prep" is an individual different course you are teaching.  If you are teaching 2 different sections of the same course the same semester, that counts as only 1 "prep" but counts twice towards your "teaching load".
Given not-too-large class sizes, teaching 4 courses with only 2 preps might be less work than teaching 3 courses with 3 preps, since presumably you don't have to prepare twice to teach the same class twice.

Grading--if you have to do it yourself--scales with the number of students, which generally means with the number of sections so extra section aren't really easy. But they certainly aren't as hard as teaching a distinct course.

Great! Thank you. I couldn't find this defined anywhere, and had a lot of trouble figuring out what it meant from the context.


text:
ResearchGate Requests
I have received full texts requests for my articles, but at that moment I did not carry them so I answered "I don't have a full text I can share", and sent a message to the requesters. Nowadays, I have got the full texts and I want to send them, but those previous requests do not appear anymore.
How can I recover those requests?

ResearchGate is just the worst.  You are talking to an AI that tries to 'trick' you into enriching the site.     I believe you can search for your article's name, and then upon clicking on it, there will be a button for you to upload your article.

@Prof.SantaClaus "x is just the worst. You are talking to an AI that tries to 'trick' you into enriching the site."
valid ∀ x ∈ [Meta, Alpha, Microsoft, Apple, Canonical, ...]

Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.

@Prof.SantaClaus, ResearchGate is helpful site

@EarlGrey Do the entities in the set pretend to be you and send out unsolicited emails to you?

@Mathematics Useful to get spammed.  Indeed!

I think you can track who sent you request. Go to the ResearchGate page, there are 3 box (Update box, Message box and Request box) on the upper right corner of monitor. Click on message box, I hope you can see who sent request in the past

Thank you for your answer, Mathematics. I have searched all the requests and found some since 2016, but specifically, those that I answered with "I didn't have the full texts" do not appear.


text:
Passionate about research in general but open to many fields: is academia for me?
I've completed my PhD, gone into industry, and now considering returning to academia.
I loved doing the research, all stages of the process, from the exploration of ideas to drafting papers - I actually enjoyed writing my PhD thesis, unlike almost every other student I ever met.
However, I think I enjoyed it because it was research, not because I'm passionate about the field itself (let's call it computational X). I'm the kind of person who is easily fascinated by many fields, some related to mine (e.g. computational Y), others not at all. I think that if I had ended up doing research in a different area, I might still have enjoyed academia just as much, all else being the same (e.g. similar experiences with advisor etc.).
Moreover, when I think about academia, what I fantasize about the most is the general features of research, e.g. big picture thinking of project ideas, mentoring students, writing, teaching, attending conferences, and just...being on campus. What I do research in seems to play a secondary role in these fantasies. This makes me wonder whether I'm just being nostalgic about student life and not thinking clearly about whether academia and I are actually a good fit.
The typical response I get when asking for advice on "should I try for academia / faculty positions" is "are you passionate about your field?". But I can't seem to find advice on whether being passionate about research as a career, but only "fairly happy" about the field itself, is a good enough reason to pursue academia. How, and to what degree, should these observations influence whether I leave industry to do a post-doc and/or try for faculty jobs?
(I realize it's possible to find R&D / research-ey jobs in industry, but for the purpose of this question I'd like to skip this possibility, because of possible intellectual property-related restrictions on publishing, constraints on teaching / mentoring, etc.).

You may be underestimating the difficulty of getting a research gig in academia. My impression in the U.S. is that the supply of newly minted Ph.D.s is far far greater than the demand for new professors. It's a growing trend that Universities are hiring fewer full professors and instead hiring more part-time lecturers. Even as a professor, you'd typically be spending quite a bit of your time trying to find money for research rather than doing actual research.

Agreed - the chances of success are low and I will have to consider that point seriously and separately. This, in fact, is partly why I feel I should have a resolution to my question / concern above before expending the time and effort to do a post doc, apply for faculty jobs, etc.

Yes, that is possible. There are people who position themselves more in a "support discipline" and thus get to participate in a wide variety of projects. For example, statisticians get to work on a wide variety of projects. This positioning could be formal, in that it is part of your job title. However, it could also be informal. It is usually know that one person knows everything there is to know about that one topic, but could not add 1 plus 1 if his/her/their life depended on it, while another spezialises in a particular techniques and applies it to a wide range of topics. Most try to find collaborations with people with skills that complement theirs. You can't be only a generalist, but there are skills you can specialize in that allows you to be of value in a wide range of projects.
Other than that, working in academia is also just a job. There will be days that you will hate it and (hopefully more) days you will love it. There will be things about that job you will hate (universities are big bureaucracies...) and other things you will love (A students saying "aaah that is how that works").


text:
Retracting Acceptance Offer to Graduate School
I’ve got a sort of a dilemma in my hands and I was hoping y’all can help me out:
Although I’ve got a quite below average profile, I applied to multiple universities in the States and in Hong Kong for my Biology PhD studies. At the end of January, I received a PhD offer from a quite well-known University in Hong Kong, and I ended up accepting this offer under pressure since they gave me a two-week deadline to make a decision and because most of the universities I applied to in the States had already rejected me, so I assumed that would be my only PhD offer for this cycle. Well, call it a miracle or not, but just a few days ago I received a PhD offer from UT Austin (one of my dream schools), and I am seriously thinking on retracting my acceptance of the Hong Kong admission offer.
I understand that doing so is not a very ethical thing to do, so would you recommend me to do it? Is doing so going to carry any consequences I should be aware of? Also, my prospective PI in Hong Kong is super nice and I really feel bad to tell him that I am not gonna work with him.

Does this answer your question? https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41105/rejecting-a-phd-offer-after-having-accepted-it-advice

Or this: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/183646/university-admission-offer

Congratulations on your offers! You're clearly being too hard on yourself, because UT Austin (and probably the Hong Kong university as well) don't make admissions offers to applicants with "quite below average" profiles. Relevant to your actual question—I assume that you would have mentioned if you literally signed a legal contract of some sort (that's pretty unlikely in my estimation). Side note: you can also email your Hong Kong would-be supervisor, explain the situation personally to him, and say that you'd very much like to be in touch in the future (networking is always good).

Just the regular reminder: Do not retract your acceptance in HK before you actually have all the paperwork ready and signed with UT Austin. Somewhere between offer letters being sent out by mistake (not probable, since it's been a few days already) or the organization of your dream school being a nightmare, you might end up wanting to take the HK offer after all.

This seems less relevant to Academia than, for instance, Employment.
You accepted an offer and now you have another from one of your dream schools, so you're thinking of dropping the first… is that it?
While backing out is not 'very' ethical', what matters is that it's also by no means unethical. Does that work for you?
Which course or programme might most help your career, there being no consequences except - possibly - if you re-apply to the school you dropped?
To what extent should a prospective PI in Hong Kong being 'super nice' dictate your career path?

I don't believe there are any ethical issues and unlikely to be any legal ones. You will disappoint a few people, perhaps, but they haven't provided you things of value yet, so it isn't a question of theft of services in any sense. They almost certainly have one or more backup candidates they can offer the position to.
Send a polite letter, indicating that your opportunities have changed and you have an offer (even) more in accord with your goals. You aren't the first person to send such a letter.
But your chief responsibility at the moment is to yourself and the maximization of your career opportunities. It shouldn't be a problem beyond a bit of disappointment.

Very much this. For what it is worth, I have helped in graduate admissions extensively at one of my institutions -- a very good one internationally and where lots of the applicants are indeed internationally competitive. About a third of candidates offered places turn them down. The better you are, the more likely you are to get into more places elsewhere in the world. Tell them, feel a pang of guilt if you must, and move on with your life. All you're doing is making a small amount of work for an administrator and potentially someone else very happy.

I'd consider having a place held for you, (while possibly declining other prospective students applications) has/had value for the OP.

@LamarLatrell while it does, the school creates this situation by setting such a tight deadline. In my field, there is a sort of arms race of less popular schools setting acceptance deadlines earlier and earlier so they can snatch up candidates before they hear the decision of more desirable schools. In such cases, the school can’t reasonably expect acceptances to be as definitive. Not sure if that applies in the OP’s case though.

I think you need first to realize that some schools insist on early acceptance deadlines precisely so candidates are uncomfortable about changing their minds later on.  There is nothing wrong on your part in changing your mind, simply telling them you recently received a more interesting offer.
What would be incorrect would be to accept a second offer knowing you will refuse the first, but not tell the first institution once you have changed your mind.  What you want to do is to tell Hong Kong as soon as possible so they can reassign the resources (money, space etc) they had reserved for you to another applicant and move on.
It is unlikely you will be the first person to back out of an early acceptance: the people in Hong Kong must expect this will be a by-product of an early acceptance policy.

Since the two universities are from different countries, the "early" deadline in one compared to the other could in general also be because their academic calendars don't fully align.

@GoodDeeds sure... still if university 1 expects an early commitment they should also expect that a lot of individual situations will change in time.

"some schools insist on early acceptance deadlines precisely so candidates are uncomfortable about changing their minds later on" - citation required. Early acceptance deadlines create precisely the dilemma that candidates will have enough time to jump ship at the most inconvenient moment and are more often than not a requirement imposed upon the departments by HR.

@CaptainEmacs The purpose of the April 15th Resolution is precisely to avoid placing students in situation where they have to withdraw from an early acceptance because another offer arrives later.

I had a very similar situation twenty years ago when applying for PhD places in biology. I went into the process late and the person I most wanted to work with had already allocated funding to another student. But I did manage to win a place working on a project I knew relatively little about at an institution with a good reputation.
Shortly after I'd confirmed my acceptance of that place, I got a letter from my original institution explaining that their chosen student had dropped out at the last minute, and would I like the place after all? I declined because, like you, I felt that was the "ethical" thing to do.
I figured that at such an early stage it didn't much matter how engaged I was with the project, that I could pivot toward my research interests later. But the reality is that a doctorate places high demands on you for 3-4 years of your life in exchange for relatively little money. My relative disinterest in the project showed and, combined with a poor supervisor and the fact it was (I eventually realised) a poorly-planned project, I eventually abandoned my write-up and any hope of an academic career with it.
During my time as a student I met the academic I'd hoped to work with and the student he eventually found for his project at a conference and spent a fascinating evening with them finding out about the amazing project I could have been a part of. I'm not sure academia was really for me, after all, but I wonder sometimes what could have been. I certainly would have avoided essentially wasting three years of my life and regretting it.
In short: your initial PhD project is too important to let a relatively minor quibble over politeness spoil it. Hong Kong will find another student to replace you. If your heart lies with the work in Austin, go to Austin.


text:
What's a good strategy for coming up with a lab name?
I'm going to be starting a research lab as a junior faculty, what is a good strategy for coming up with a lab name?
How important is a lab name in differentiating yourself in the field or potentially attracting graduate students?
Is it common for one to use their last name, i.e. 'Smith Lab' or should it be a term from the research domain?

I like "Smith's Research Domain." It imbues some sort of implicit domination. Really though, at my university, individual faculty get "NAME Lab" and groups of faculty get specialty names when working together.

In some universities (US) you will need to be careful because certain designations must be officially approved at a very high level because the word has some sort of legalese meaning  (i.e., Smith's "Center' for Great stuff needs high level approval, but Smith's Institute (or Lab) for Great Stuff  doesn't need anyones. (Or vice-versa). Seriously, if the lab name is what is keeping you up nights, then I'd worry about you.

I've always hated the "Smith Lab" naming convention (which Smith? at which university? which years?), but my PhD advisor had a straightforward lab name the "CFD Lab" for Computational Fluid Dynamics Lab, which no one outside our university ever used, and there were lots of similar names within engineering and computing departments for their version of a similar thing (Comp. Fluid Mechanics Lab, Comp. Fluid Phys. Lab, etc., etc.). I don't think the lab name is useful at all for junior faculty unless you're already or nearly a rock star in your field.

Obligatory Ph.D. Comic

@Bill Barth, like your last sentence. This is the exact concluding remark in the above discussion.

You should read funding applications for your preferred agencies.  If you can see a pattern - names like X get funded with higher probability than names like Y - then you will want to choose an X style name.

Isn't it your middle name plus the street you grew up on?  Or am I confusing genres?

You should find some megatrends and buzzwords, hand them to a PR consultant and name the lab whatever comes out. It sounds like a joke, but there are (hundreds of) thousands of grant dollars to be had - and some of them are handed out on a "wow that sounds cool basis"...

You should use your own name in the name of your lab because it (likely) has existing name recognition.  You should not include the subject of research in the lab name because it will evolve over time and shut you out of potential collaborations beyond the subject stated in the name.

I'd never name a lab after myself: traditionally, in my country, if there is a lab named after a person, it's because he or she is dead...

I second @MassimoOrtolano. It works the same in my (a different) country.

I think this varies by discipline. I think in biology "Smith lab" is the standard, but in computer science it would border on arrogance and instead the lab is named after the subject of inquiry.


text:
Am I screwed with a Computer Science degree?
I'm in my second year of University in Computer Science for a Bsc and I'm getting very scared for the following reason : all jobs I'm interested in seem to ask for a Software Engineers!
I'm starting to worry I didn't make the right choice in chosing CompSci...
Should I try to switch for Software Engineer?
I have a 3 year Technical DEC (Diplôme étude collégial = Collegial Study Diploma (Quebec CEGEP diploma)) in Applied Computer Sciences and have done some side projects...
Could this help me land a software engineer job even if I only have a Bsc In Computer Science and not a Software Engineer degree?
Will I have to redo all my courses even if some are almost the same?
I'm not even sure I understand the difference between the two programs to be quite honest...
Thanks for helping.

I'm not sure we can answer this question as there are too many individual considerations here.

(Also, questions arbout undergraduate study are out of the scope of this site. See the [help/on-topic] for details.)

Stop worrying.  I did a degree in Electronic Physics, and that didn't stop me doing software engineering.  My brother did Chemistry.  Software Engineer is a job title, not a qualification.

Silly question, there is such an abundance of opportunities with you degree. I strongly advise seeing a career adviser that can show you the list of jobs and salaries you can have with your degree.

No you're not screwed. Job titles != university majors. CS is just about the best prep for a software engineering position.
Generally, you'll land (or not land) a job based on your ability to do it. It also helps to have people who can vouch for your work ethic and technical ability. Stay the course, work hard, and produce visible, positive results and you shouldn't have any trouble finding software engineering positions with your CS degree.

Issue is many universities call software engineering courses Computer Science,
Or Applied Computer science (Even more so).
If your course has  more units on Java, or Python, or whatever programming language, than it does on Math and Proofs; then your course is probably actually software engineering.
Your university may offer another course called Software Engineering,
which also would be on software engineering, but it may be at a master level.
And/Or it may also include extra units on project management.
It will likely be a better course in someways because of that.
But it may have less actual programming, so be worse in others.
In the end though, having a degree doesn't make you a software engineer.
Your degree gets your foot in the door for your first job.
it may even teach you a few useful things.
But once you have a year or so as a full time software dev,
that is what people are going to care about.
That is going to get you more jobs than your degree.
There are still plenty of self-taught software devs in the world.


text:
Should bullet points be used on research posters
From my search on the internet on how a research poster should be designed I got a lot of different opinions on best practices.
The area where opinions seemed particularly diverging were the use of bullet points. Some (1 2 3) suggested to replace any longer paragraphs with bullet points, while others were staunchly opposed to the use of bullet points for any reason (4 5).
I can see validity in both. However I would be interested if there is a reason to use one over the other to improve readability and engagement.

To me, they would be appropriate for most research posters at a conference.  See if you can find similar publications for that conference in past years or conferences in the same field of research, and compare with them,  please.

Bullet points are a tool and like any tool it can be used well and it can be used poorly. Bullet points are great for displaying an unordered list of items. This is not saying that the order in which they are presented does not matter didactically, only that the content of one does not rely on knowledge of the content of another.
Now how does this relate to posters? I can only speak for myself here, but I rarely read a poster from top to bottom. I will skim bits, I will skip sections I deem less important and I will jump around a lot. This works great with the type of information described above. But bullet points do not create this kind of information, they only signal to me that the provided information is of this type.
That is I think, where a lot of the criticism stems from. If you just write some consecutive paragraphs of text and put a bullet point in front of every one of them, you are actively misleading me, because your layout tells me I can skip around, while the content should be read in order. In turn, if things should be read in order, signal that to me by enumerating them or if need be, by putting them as consecutive paragraphs into some block in your layout.
On the flip-side though, if you can, avoid the latter. Long paragraphs don't work well for the type of reading described above. But this does not mean that you should put bullet points in front of them, but that you should think about, if it is possible to restructure the information usefully in such a way that bullet points (or enumerations) are the best way to display this information. If you can, then maybe do so. If this does not work, then use paragraphs.
tl;dr: Use the right tool for the job, but don't be afraid of changing the job to suit the tool you want to use.

I have a strong opinion on this:
A: Don't use bullet points they just add visual noise with no gains.
General comment on: "suggested to replace any longer paragraphs with bullet points,"
Here the problem with most scientific poster appears: A lot of people want to basically write a paper onto a wall. But a poster is a different format than a text, so you have to think of how to make best out of it.
Q: What is the goal of a poster in a poster presentation?
A: First, to be a bait to draw attention and kick-start a conversation. Second, to guide the conversation.
And this does not work, when you add a huge amount of text onto a poster. So you would like to have the minimal amount of text on a poster, so it is still comprehensible but also is easy to digest. That's why you should use bullet point-like style instead of a wall of text.
But you should not use bullet points. What is the information content of a bullet point? None! So, instead use text of different size, make text bold or italic, or use some color to visually structure the information on your poster without using bullet points. And always align things in the correct way.
One of my posters where you can see how we did this is available here.

This is a subjective answer—font sizes/styles/colors can be considered just as much as visual noise as bullet points.

If one changes a color, one should change a font or style, per accessibility rules.

I agree with your first point yet disagree with the second approach. Consistency matters. FWIW,  I also find the use of multiple colors, multiple font sizes, and boxes inside boxes next to boxes can be distracting.

I fully agree to @mlk: A poster is not a paper on a wall. It's a completely different format.
Maybe the #BetterPoster approach is a good inspiration for what you should focus on...
It uses a magnitude of the poster to just bring attention to your research question and most(!) important result as a conversation starter. More details and some sort of paper-outline can be much smaller and may use bullets or other formatting.
The whole this is to draw the visitors attention to your research. The design is also intended that you as an author are standing close and can answer questions right away. The poster uses only some small proportion of its area for supporting figures, diagramms, tables, ... in small font, as you and the interlocutor are standing close to the poster. All other visitors are still able to see the main takeaway.
https://astrobites.org/2020/02/28/fixing-academic-posters-the-betterposter-approach/

While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes or disappears.

Thanks for that comment. I edited my answer to be more informative, even without the link.