text:
Is it common for undergraduate students to feel overwhelmed by the reading assignments? How to deal with it?
I'm in the second year of an International Affairs undergraduate program.
When classes first began last year, I - like most of my peers - felt overwhelmed by the amount of text assigned for reading, which I averaged as 400 pages per week, the whole year.
I initially managed it by reading the texts faster than I should (thus not properly apprehending the text) and prioritising the ones with an obvious precedence and skipping others right away.
If that wasn't improper enough and made me feel lacking, we were briefed on how to do scientific reading in two of our disciplines. Basically we were 'taught' how to do a 'micro-research' on every text assigned to us, by first reading the text superficially, taking notes of everything unknown to us (authors, dates, events, places, concepts, word definitions) and then getting to know each of those, to just then go back to the text with the goal of apprehending and taking notes of the logical structure of the text, identifying its main theses and how arguments are presented, in order to be able to reconstruct the presentation the author gave accurately, either mentally, or when giving a speech or writing.
In theory, we should be doing that to every text. In practice, I felt like I barely had time to read the texts once and then I would go to the next. By the end of last year I assessed I had to at least double my reading skills to handle that amount of text. I maybe improved 20%, tops.
Now we began having online classes because of the pandemics. There was a lot of opposition from professors and students, but as a state university, costs were still running and there was a lot of pressure coming from the upper realms, thus, online classes began. Now, we're being given harder texts. I just finished watching a Political Theory class. I literally didn't understand any of the texts, neither the class itself made sense and my professor kept asking questions to me, it was frustrating.
It makes me feel somehow depressed and it makes it even worse when I see there are a few students who not only seem able to handle it, but are doing research and a lot of other stuff, I can't even imagine how they do it.
Edit: One thing that gets me beaten and very sick sometimes is how relatively unimportant authors that talk about the simplest concepts are the ones writing texts that almost demands me to become cryptologist. On the other hand, some of the authors presenting the most complex topics, e.g, Kant and Weber [especially Kant], despite being very demanding, seemed to be quite clear and straightforward in their argumentation. The problem here, again, was time. When reading Kant I had to skip almost all the other texts in other to complete it with a satisfiable understanding of the text. I got the 2nd best grade of the class in that discipline.
Edit 2: I also find it interesting, for lack of a better word, how some professors throw you in the lion's pit. For today's class we read a text by Italian Norberto Bobbio which is an answer to a critic of an earlier text. I felt totally out of context, as we didn't read the first text nor the critics, I was simply unable to understand half the text, as it was constantly referencing stuff we didn't read and would never be able to do it in time.

400 pages/week sounds pretty crazy, it's not really possible to read that much in a week unless the material is really easy.

@Allure In the first year at least, I didn't feel like any of this was voluntary on the professor's side. You do have to get a grounding in many different topics for you to be able to 'navigate' on. We had a broad introduction to History that went from antiquity until very recently and I can't imagine how you can discuss anything else related to International Affairs if we hadn't gone through extensive reading in that subject, for example. However, I felt like many of the professors simply forgot we had other assignments and gave us unreasonable amount of [difficult] text.

And 400 pages was in average, some times less, some times more.

Sounds similar to my daughter’s reading load. The not simple answer is that reading that volume for comprehension is a learned skill like many others. Pay attention to what the prof wants you to get out of the material.

@JonCuster Well, this second part of your advice is definitely something I need to learn. Good. "Pay attention to what my professor wants me to get out of the material". This is not really something I have stopped to think about as many times. I am more like "DAMN, got to read it". I'll definitely try paying attention to that, at the same time, in the back of my mind I have it that some disciplines can tolerate you going to class without reading anything. Others you read it all and still there are gaps left. Perhaps it'll take another year for me to adapt, I'm getting better at it...

Does your university offer a general introductory class on "study techniques"? This should also cover strategies for efficient reading.

@henning--reinstateMonica no, it doesn't.

I studied IR and this was a problem I really struggled with. Given my course load I was ultimately forced to conclude that there was no feasible way to thoroughly read all of the materials assigned. I really didn't like this feeling of always being underprepared.
I don't know if this is an adequate answer, but a few comments:

You will get a lot better at reading and writing quickly. 20% improvement is already really good! Some people are natively just faster at reading to begin with - it doesn't help to compare with them. You'll improve at your own pace.
If you only have time to pass through an article once, I find the best way to do it is to make highlights and notes that clearly sketch the structure of the article. For example, focus on highlighting topic sentences and key quotes you might use for your paper. In the margin you can number the key points, etc. In this way, once I've read an article, I can look back at it and just read the highlights/annotations to reconstruct the whole thing, without having to delve back into each paragraph. This is also useful in discussion sections when looking for part of an article.
You'll need to start shifting from high school mindset (do all the tasks assigned) to college mindset (do the tasks that are useful to your understanding of the topic). This was the hardest part for me. Basically: choose to carefully read the texts that seem important and influential, for example those frequently referenced and cited (Kant and Weber seem like a good place to start). You do need to do some readings in depth or you won't learn. On the other hand, if you feel some reading is useless/irrelevant/poorly written, spend a shorter amount of time on it (or, find a better alternative text covering the same topic). I guess it might be embarassing if you get called on for a text that you don't know well, but generally, the important thing is to make optimal use of your limited time in order to maximize learning. In your Kant example, it seemed like this proved true.
Generally, I think some  professors focus more on having comprehensive syllabi than on workload. From their perspective, they are adding value by pointing you to key texts that are critical in the field (and that you might have a hard time compiling for yourself). Sometimes, I got the sense that they simply didn't realize the impact on the students -- for example, assigning a whole book for reading when only 1-2 chapters were relevant for the topic at hand. Other times, we were genuinely just given references that were terrible and I could never figure out the reason they were included. Try to remember that the person compiling the course outline was trying to be helpful, and figure out what is actually helpful about what they've put together.

Finally, have you considered speaking with your professors in office hours? You can explain that you are struggling to keep up with the readings and ask if they have any tips for how you can best prioritize. They might have some helpful guidance about how you should be studying.

Speaking with professors won't solve any problem. Rather they will worsen the situation by giving ill advices. My experience.

I know understand how important you advice is. I read it back when I asked, then I tried to apply it. It does make a difference, although I still feel my performance leaves a lot to be desired, your guidelines made a significant difference.
Thank you very much.

glad to help! good luck with the rest of your degree :)

You don't need to read from the first word of the title to the last word of the conclusion. You should learn how to skim through the large materials. Use a highlight marker to highlight important sentences, terminologies, dates.

If you find it the text lengthy, try replacing it with online videos or similar shorter texts. A book can be replaced by a single research article.

So basically telling one handles that amount of text by cheating. That's precisely what I've been doing, I just think I'm not efficient in doing so, especially considering, as I mentioned above, those 'scientific reading' classes put a lot of stress on detailed reading early on, so I guess you can understand I'm not coming from a favorable position.

@EzequielBarbosa Using one's reading time efficiently is not "cheating". For some works it is enough to know it exists and what it is about.

@PatriciaShanahan makes sense. This is actually being eye opening, because, in all honest, I thought I'd somehow just learn how to read and understand all of that text, like, you know 'Yes, it must be possible, I just have to learn how', that's how I've been thinking to myself.

My understanding is that for history/political science type majors this is not an uncommon amount of assigned reading.
Here is a trick for humanities reading: read the first and last sentence only of each paragraph. That is usually enough to give you an overview of the content of the paragraph, and you can then decide if you want to read it in more detail. Doing this for a whole article can give you some idea of what the article is about and how the author structures their argument while cutting down on the reading time dramatically. Make sure you write down some quick notes about what the article covers so that if you’re writing a paper later you don’t have to skim the whole article again to figure out if it’s useful.
This routine can help you learn how to effectively skim articles and you’ll find over time that you’ll get less regimented about it.
When trying to decide what information is most important to extract from your reading, it’s helpful to look for details that you can either connect to another reading or to discussions/lectures in class.

Wow, I didn't see your answer back then, but that's an idea I never had. And in fact, a lot of our reading is just blabbering on and on about the same thing they've already stated in the paragraph. I haven't tried it yet (we're on a recess now), but I do feel this is helpful advice.

Though I have no way of knowing what your particular instructors are thinking about your reading assignments... in my own experience (in mathematics, which might seem wildly different from humanities, but in fact is not so much so, I claim...) with myself and my students, a large part of the point is to learn how to cope with bodies of information which one has not been able, or had time to, "master"... but have to discuss/use, nevertheless.
There's no simple answer, but there are obviously (as you perceive) many obvious failures of more-pedestrian line-by-line-reading approaches. Impossible.
Then what?
The answer to that is very complicated, in any subject, I think. But/and that is perhaps the genuine issue. So, yes, how will you deal with this? :)
EDIT: in some senses, there is no "solution" to this "problem". Rather, as perhaps was tooooo implicit in my earlier remarks, one must "let go" of (naively?) more-idealist notions of "reading" and "mastery" and so on. It's like "the train is leaving..." with no room for negotiation. Indeed, many of the earlier school-inculcated ideas about "perfect" understanding/reading, become useless and hopeless. (The US baseball analogue is something like, "even if you were a super-star as a kid and batted 1000 in Little League, you will be lucky to bat 300 in the major leagues... supposing you're lucky enough to get there at all")
A sort of "external" description of strategy is that the fundamental goal might/should be to "get to the end", rather than "being super-careful and getting as far as you can".
It is psychologically discomfiting, yes, ...
Another analogy is that "showing up is half the game". E.g., "showing up" at the scheduled time, rather than failing to show due to dithering about being ready...

Thanks for the answer, Paul. I found these, especially, quite interesting of your part.
"[...]a large part of the point is to learn how to cope with bodies of information which one has not been able, or had time to, "master"... but have to discuss/use, nevertheless."
and
"There's no simple answer, but there are obviously (as you perceive) many obvious failures of more-pedestrian line-by-line-reading approaches. Impossible."
And yeah, how will I deal with this. In asking this same question I came here in hope for some insight.

Now, you definitely have more experience than I do in the academia and I thank you for taking your time to answer the novice.
Although not conclusive, it's good to see a parallel and as you put it, it is something common in academia that has to be handled. There's no way I can just ignore it.

As well as the advice, of course.


text:
Does 'pagination' refer to page numbers only or line numbers as well?
With reference to manuscripts, does 'ensuring pagination' only mean that each page is numbered, or does it mean that lines are numbered as well? Is there an equivalent word/phrase for numbering lines?
The question is about the general use of the term, rather than a journal/publisher specific requirement.

It is strange that the referee cares about pagination. The article will change a lot after copy editing into the journal format.

@VladimirF- this is not a referee comment (yet atleast), rather a general instruction, i.e. 'Please ensure that your manuscript is paginated, as this will help both editors and reviewers to process it promptly.'

Do you have a style guide you're following? This should normally explain about page and line numbering requirements. Without a style guide, you need to see how documents are commonly formatted.

@StuartF- This instruction is from the style guide, leaving me a bit confused. I've seen other submission documents since, and their formats seem to be in line with the answers below.

In general, proper, and precise usage:

Pagination (aka page breaking) refers only to the process of segregating content across pages.

Line breaking is a similar process of segregating content except across lines.

In both cases, the quality of the solutions to the problems is measured by computational efficiency and design aesthetic.
Both terms are orthogonal to numbering, referring to where to place breaks, not whether to number the resulting pages or lines.
References

Breaking Paragraphs into Lines, Donald E. Knuth and Michael F. Plass, 1981
Optimal Pagination Techniques for Automatic Typesetting Systems, Michael F Plass, 1981

Thanks, the references are useful!

The term "pagination" refers to the process of separating content into distinct pages.  Poor pagination occurs when content is cut-off in a strange way across pages ---e.g., the heading for a new section occurs on the last line of a page, a figure and its label are separated onto distinct pages, etc.  If a referee is criticising your pagination it probably means that you have a part of your manuscript where you have something cut-off over pages in a way that looks strange.

Thank you! To clarify, is there no relation between pagination and actually numbering the pages?

Not to my knowledge --- as I understand the term, page numbering is a separate issue.

Consider a book or thesis - you'd paginate a chapter by splitting it into pages suitably, but the page numbering would only come when the chapters are assembled into a whole.  This also applies to journal articles where each article starts at the top of a page; if articles can start partway through a page the journal will re-paginate. In practice they probably will anyway; some provide LaTeX classes that match the final pagination pretty well, though abstract books and proceedings of small conferences may use author-provided files as-is

In a comment the OP says "this will help both editors and reviewers to process it promptly.". That suggests  to me that they're talking about page numbering, since they would be used to refer to the locations that a comment is about. Poor pagination just makes the document slightly harder to read.

source: Stack Exchange

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

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава

sort: votes


text:
PhD in computational mathematics without a strong mathematical background
I'm interested in starting a PhD in computational mathematics at one of the top 5 universities in the UK.
My first degree is in Electrical Engineering. I went to one of the top 2 public sector universities in my country of birth. Owing to difficult personal circumstances and also the political turmoil in the country, I didn't perform well and graduated with a CGPA of 2.9/4. It's noteworthy the US style grading system was introduced for the first time in the country. The CGPA in question is still categorised as 'first division' by the higher education authority in that South Asian country. Later I completed a master's in Computer Science with an overall distinction. I have worked as a software engineer in the UK for well over a decade.
I don't think I have the mathematical background that would be expected of applicants for a rigorous computational maths PhD programme. Whilst I can master all the required maths on my own through self-study using resources like MIT OCW, I'm not entirely sure if I would be able to convince the admissions committee of my maths ability.
Would it make sense to complete a second master's degree in mathematics?
PS: I'm 40 and a UK citizen.

I admire your drive. Would you elaborate a bit on your motivations? That might help us think through the paths you might consider. There are, to be sure, several flavors of computational mathematics and computational science.

Unless the program is heavily application-oriented, you probably will have a hard time to handle a math-heavy PhD out of the box.
Of course, we do not know your personal talents and you may be a fast learner. But advanced math is one of these topics, such as high-performance sports, where time investment and structured guidance matters in almost all cases.
I would suggest taking a master's degree in math at a university with a strong math program. This will give you also the opportunity to gauge how well you are doing, and you'll learn useful skills in a structured way. Whatever you decide to do afterwards, it will not be wasted time, and puts you in a much better position subsequently.
Your age should not play a role (and neither should your citizenship, except for visa issues, perhaps funding, as mentioned in the comments).

Citizenship helps for funding as well in this case, and by admittedly n=1 personal anecdote I've seen that correlated with whether or not a program will deign to send an acceptance in the UK, for whatever it's worth.

I strongly second Captain Emacs answer. I would advise getting your mathematics up to scratch before applying. This will not only be good for you in your studies, but also may put potential advisers at ease and make them more willing to accept you. A masters course in the UK is only around 9 months and there are various funding options available for British citizens in the UK.

I agree with the following 2 comments, In general doing a masters that has a research/publication component will significantly increase you chance of being accepted into a PhD program in the first place (in Australia in particular it's pretty much expected that you do an MPhil/MRes) plus it gives you a bit of time in a (slightly) lower pressure situation to plan out and prepare for your PhD topic.

Perhaps this isn't strictly an answer to your question, but my advice is to contact the person offering the PhD (probably the prospective supervisor) and have a conversation. Get their advice. If you are not going to cope then they will not want you and you will also not want to be there. Conversely, maybe your industry experience is just what they are looking for, and they can advise you on the best way to evidence your mathematical ability.

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


text:
Using a viral CV/ cover letter LaTeX template for undergraduate research internships
I am planning to apply for a few undergraduate research internships and I recently learned LaTeX, so I am thinking of transferring my resume from Word to LaTeX. I came across LaTeX templates for a "Deedy CV" and a "Deedy Cover Letter" which apparently went viral in 2014. Admittedly, the "Deedy" templates look very attractive; in fact, they were the most attractive-looking CV/cover letter templates in the entire Overleaf gallery. Is it recommended that an undergraduate applying for undergraduate research internships uses the Deedy templates? What about a template for a somewhat infographic colored CV? Do these formats of CVs convey unprofessionalism in academia?
P.S. If this is relevant, I am in the US and am also planning to cold email some professors on the US to ask if they would be willing to take me on for a research position.

It might help you to look at how academics present their CVs (a lot of academics, myself included, have their CV on their website or university page). Both presentation and content differ hugely from what is the norm in industry.

The deedy template looks fine - What about a template for a somewhat infographic colored CV? <- I'd be careful with this

From a quick search, I disagree that this is a very attractive template.  I think the two-column layout with two very different columns makes it very hard to access.  I've seen far nicer looking and better to read latex templates.

It doesn't look standard.

I'm sure that the recipient won't really be concerned with which template you use for your CV or cover letter. Most probably they are not familiar with what templates are available. What  they will be concerned about  is the contents, and do you offer what experience and qualifications they are looking for.
The documents just have to look respectable, that is all. You are overthinking this.

I don't think this is entirely overthinking - a badly formatted CV, which is hard to parse with a quick look, is certainly not helping the case.

This is usually good advice, but certain disciplines and locations have more strict CV standards.

A CV should allow to access the relevant information to judge if someone is (at least potentially) a suitable candidate quickly and easily.
This is true even more so if you are going to cold-email people.  Professors get lots of such emails.  They will first have a very quick look at your CV, and only if it looks like it might be a reasonable candidate to look at, they will give further consideration.
Thus, you want to have a CV where the relevant information is quickly to find and which is easily accessible.
The template you mention seems to me, at least in the two-column version with two completely independent columns which seems to be the standard one, impossible to parse quickly - one never knows which column to look at.  So people might not find the information they are looking for or, worse, overloop it, since they don't know where to look for it and parse the right column only.
So I think it is important how you format your CV, especially if you are going to cold-email people.  It should be formatted such that it is very easy to find relevant information - publications, education, and so forth. To this end, I think a single-column layout with clearly visibe captions is suited best.  Beyond that, the "fanciness" of the actual layout is indeed not relevant.


text:
How to search who exactly to cold-email for a research internship?
I am interested in cold-emailing some professors to ask whether they would be willing to offer a research position to me. However, I am not sure who exactly to email. I have an idea of the sub-fields of economics that I am interested in, and I've tried reading some of the journals in those subfields. However, as an undergraduate, most research methodologies don't make much sense to me (isn't this a universal undergraduate experience?). To be clear, it's not that I don't understand the research at all. Sometimes the choice of a particular statistical model used in a paper makes perfect sense, but at other times, the statistics involved is way too advanced.
I also do not attend a research university, so I cannot email any professors at my own institution (I am pretty sure no professors in the economics department at my university are taking on mentees; I've tried asking!)
So, how should I approach this process? Where should I begin this search? Should I target professors in my home state or who are otherwise geographically close? Should I target those who are tenured, old, and established? Should I target younger professors? What about those at lesser-known universities? My observation was there that there usually are a couple of professors at smaller universities who do some really interesting work and are also somewhat well known in the field. Should I target exclusively these professors? Should I look at recent articles from a field journal and just start emailing authors of those articles that I can understand, to a certain degree, and whose topics I am interested in? And what exactly should I write my email to the professor, given that the research they published was most likely beyond my understanding?
P.S. If this is relevant, the discipline is economics.

Are you searching for a position that pays you to do work a professor needs, or one that pays you to do work you're interested in?

@AzorAhai--hehim Probably the former. Also, I'm not looking for any kind of monetary compensation since I'm just getting started in the field of research and I don't think I deserve that yet.

no, you should be paid, or receive credit. You can't receive credit at a university you aren't attending most likely, so that leaves the options I proposed.

You're right that it's hard for an undergraduate to know where to start, and you've done the right thing by asking professors at your own university first.
The next thing to try would be to ask those professors again, but instead of asking to work with them, ask for their suggestions of a couple of people at other universities who you could get in touch with. You can do this iteratively: each time you email someone to ask for an opportunity, say that you understand if they're too busy to take on a student and ask if they have a suggestion for someone else you can contact.
Those more senior to me may weigh in on this, but it's generally frowned upon to offer your work for free. If the professor isn't able to compensate you financially, would you be able to get course credit for your work? I'm not too familiar with the US system, but perhaps it is possible. I would avoid working for free if you can -- it sets a precedent and allows professors to favour those who have their own financial support (and thus puts less well off students at a disadvantage when looking for research opportunities).
Keep studying the literature if you can, and persevere with emailing professors. To maximise your chances of a response, keep the email polite and to the point. Good luck!

You wouldn't normally get course credit by working at another university unless those universities had credit-sharing agreements. This is common between SLACs and nearby R1s


text:
University's motivation for having tenure-track positions
Suppose I used to hold a tenure-track math position at a R1 institution, but then I was denied tenure. Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared) and I would be more than happy to keep working under the same conditions and would work just as hard as I worked before tenure denial. The question is: what are the reasons why the department would not be happy to keep me (under the same conditions)?
Some hypotheses:

Me working at the department is beneficial for the department at any given point of time. If this is true, then they should be OK with me remaining in my present position.
Accepting someone for tenure-track is a calculated risk the department takes (because it can not judge purely from the post-doc record whether one is going to be a great researcher or not). Now that my tenure-track is over, they have figured out that I am not good enough and it is beneficial for them to kick me out.
For an average person, the possibility of tenure is a strong motivator. It is beneficial for the department to have someone who has been promised tenure at any given point of time but it is not beneficial once the person knows they won't be given tenure. I am just a weirdo who happens not to care.

I think the answer is the second hypothesis, but I will leave it to one of the more senior faculty here to weigh in...

One could dream up a number of other hypotheses, but to what point? That’s how the game is played, and those are the rules. No tenure, time to move on.

In the situation you described, even if the department were happy to keep you as an untenured faculty member, they couldn't do so. In my university, the Regents' Bylaws say that, if we kept a tenure-track assistant professor in that position longer than 7 years, then (s)he would automatically have tenure, whether or not tenure was "awarded". (Department and college administrators whose negligence led to such "de facto tenure" would be in very hot water.)

@JonCuster I personally did move on but the point is somebody at some point did invent the rules of the game so that they would benefit him. I want to understand the rationale.

I think you're missing opportunity cost.  Suppose they had a choice between keeping you at your current salary, and firing you and hiring someone new at the same salary (or likely less).  You've already demonstrated that you do not meet the standards expected of a tenured faculty member.  The new person might eventually do so.  Doesn't that seem like an easy decision?

@NateEldredge you also got a point, that is true.

@NateEldredge now that I think of it, I would be OK with a massive reduction in salary (by half, for example) given two conditions: I stay at the same institution and the teaching/administrative service expectations remain the same. Do positions like this exist at R1 institutions? Would this still be a bad deal for the university? Of course, you do not have the specifics but let us assume my research and teaching performance is less than 1.0their expectations but more than 0.5their expectations.

Tenure policy is supposed to benefit you, not the department. They have to promote you after seven years if they want to keep you around. Of course the department is made up of other individuals who reaped this benefit too at one time.

There's a paradox here. Quoting: "Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared)" and "why the department would not be happy to keep me".

I had a beloved-by-students (and definitely the most dynamic professor that i had in that department) claim that he was denied tenure because he was popular and pulling in more grant money than the rest of the professors--so politics. In another department a professor that many students did not like did get tenure. The rumor was that he pulled in a ton of grant money.

In most jobs in industry, new employees go through a probationary period during which they can be let go (fired) for poor performance without the protections and benefits that more experienced employees might get.  If a new employee isn't working out, then they'll be let go during this probationary period.
In higher education in the US, the (customarily at most 7 years long) tenure track is an extremely long probationary period tied with policies that (in the name of academic freedom) give tenured faculty very strong protection against being fired or laid off.
When a tenure-track professor is denied tenure, the university has decided that they're not doing well enough in the job to justify a lifetime commitment from the institution.  There are significant costs associated with recruiting a replacement, as well as significant consequences for the morale of other junior faculty,  so these decisions aren't made lightly.
Allowing a tenure track faculty member to continue as non-tenured faculty member after you've denied them tenure has problems.  In addition to lowering the morale of other tenured and tenure-track faculty, it runs afoul of the guidelines for tenure promulgated by the American Association of Union Professors (AAUP) that say that tenure must be granted after seven years of service.
It should be noted that the tenure system is in a significant decline in the US.  More and more, teaching and research work is being done by people in non-tenure-track positions and the number of tenured faculty is declining.

thank you for your answer. So the answer is essentially "There is pressure from the society to give tenure to people who have worked for the department for 7 years." Do I understand correctly?

The tenure system is something that was created and maintained by universities and their faculty.  I don’t think that the rest of society has had much to say about it, although some politicians have certainly argued that it should be abolished.

I interpret this as "At some universities, local employment laws and/or university policies require giving tenure to anyone who works for the university for 7 years."

In short, it's not worthwhile, but many new PhDs hang on desperately in contingent positions while trying to get hired into one of the few remaining tenure-track faculty positions.

It is a strategy to avoid the Peter Principle, similar to the military's up-or-out policy.
In particular, there are only so many slots for professors (tenured or otherwise). They want to allocate those slots to the best candidates as possible. Mathematically, there is some quality threshold Q', and they want to give only to candidates with Q > Q'. Now if your Q is less than Q', letting you go will allow them to bring in someone else whose quality may be greater than Q', which improves the department (or your replacement may also have Q < Q', in which case they'll get let go also and try again). In other words -- by not offering tenure, the university is taking the gamble that they can find someone better to fill the spot long-term.
Further, I suspect it is also true that Q is not static, but changes (decreases) after a tenure decision is made.

It benefits the department to have more tenured faculty.  The dean cares about nothing except the budget, and wishes the entire faculty were adjuncts.  I know of a case where the dean, who was trained as an engineer, decided that the only useful math was applied math and decimated the math department, which then created a war between the math department and the dean, who then re-decimated the department.  Half the math faculty were tenured, and that was the only way a (sort of) viable math department survived.
The war on tenure has been brutal, and we're losing.  If your department kept you, that's another foot of lost ground.

There might be exceptions to this but in general universities have rules that faculty can only be employed without tenure for a number of years, so you can only stay for so long after being denied tenure.
It is also true that many times the denial of tenure is not meant to "fire" you, but to say "you are not ready". I know several cases where the denial of tenure included "you are not ready" language, and clearly implied that the candidate would apply for tenure again.
As others have mentioned, these decisions are not taken lightly, and there are usually avenues for appeal.

the candidate would apply for tenure again — In most American universities, a candidate can only apply for tenure again if the first application for tenure was early—at least a year before the (usually 6th year) deadline— and early tenure applications are discouraged and rare.

I don't doubt that's the case. But I also know several where it is fairly standard to apply for tenure by the fourth year, and the rules allow for six.


text:
As a TA how to ask for more time to prepare tutorials
I am currently a graduate TA and my duties include preparing tutorials for an undergrad course, we are supposed to prepare the sessions based on the material sent to us by the professor.
The problem is that the professor has been emailing the material 1 hour before my tutorial starts for three weeks in a row. I feel like I can't prepare anything decent in such little time. Last week I asked the professor to please send the material with more time, the professor agreed but this week she did the same thing anyway. When I saw that 2 hours before the tutorial started I had no news from the Prof, I prepared the material myself and ignored her email that was sent 1 hour before my tutorial.
I definitely have to write something to her since the instructor should know what happens in the tutorial sessions, but what do I tell her? It might sound aggressive to say "if you don't send me the material with enough time I will just do whatever I want", but that is exactly what I want to say (in a different tone). Am I wrong here? If you are a prof, how would you react to something like that?

Is this her first year teaching this course?

I think it's her second year, but I am not sure.

What course is this? If it's something like freshman calculus it's probably not expected that you plan extensively in advance.

I'd rather not say which course it is,  it is a first year and fairly easy course.

@srchunchurria Trust me, we won't be able to track you down if you say "intro to psych"

First of all, you CAN do whatever you want in your recitation sections. Presumably, you know what the recitation is supposed to be about, and the professor merely sends you some materials such as example problems or theorems to go over. Recitation sessions are pretty relaxed.
Also, if you are teaching a first year, freshman intro, course, it should be pretty easy material and as a graduate student you should more or less be able to wing it.
You should ask the professor if she is making these materials from scratch or if she is modifying them from past years. You say this is the second year she's teaching this course and if that's true she almost certainly is doing the latter. You can ask her to send you the outdated version beforehand.

Talk to your professor.  All professors are people, and you're not just a robot that does their bidding.  Let them know what you'd like to do after receiving their  direction, and how long it is expected to take.  Then ask if you could get the assignments earlier, at a specific time before the class, so you can carry out your desired tasks.
You might get directed to not do what you're planning, you might get congratulated for your desire to do more, and you might get something completely different.  If you never ask, you'll never know.
Working for a professor (or anyone else) isn't a one-direction communication channel in a healthy working relationship.  You should offer supporting suggestions; but, if told your suggestions are not desired, you should deliver what you are instructed to do.  Professors have a lot of demands on their time, and your suggestion should be rehearsed to be short and to the point.  If you get a "No", you might also want to rehearse how you will accept it.
If, after a long run of failed suggestions, maybe you need to find a different Professor or find out why your ideas aren't working.  It's hard to generalize, because your brilliant idea might be known to be bad, or your professor might not recognize a brilliant idea.  In any case, in this, as in life, you must be prepared for failure and success.  In some cases, "yes" becomes worse than "no" when you've launched an effort you can't reliably deliver.
Good luck, and start with talking to your professor.

Are there any TA meetings or does the professor/instructor have any hours allocated where you can discuss this issue in person with them?  Professors are busy people and get a lot of emails to the point that your emails may occasionally slip.  It can usually take multiple reminders by e-mail to get your message to stick.  When I TA'd an introductory data structures course and was tasked with leading a recitation, we had weekly TA meetings where we discussed the week's events and anything that was going on, and had the opportunity to bring about any issues (that said, there were multiple undergraduate/graduate TA's, so I'd say it depends on your situation a little as well).
As for e-mailing the prof about this situation, I wouldn't particularly say, "if you don't send me the material soon enough, I'll do what I want", a better way to word that specific line in my opinion would be "if I don't get the material by a certain time for the week's recitation, it will make it significantly harder for me to teach the material the way you want."  Something along that line.
I should note that this is something that even undergraduate students experience when taking a course (not necessarily just TA's).  Occasionally students/TA's will run into problems involving lack of communication with the instructor, whether it is getting questions answered or being late on posting assignments or other material.

There was a single zoom meeting at the beginning of the term but no more meetings afterwards and there is nothing scheduled for the future.

Could you try and meet with the instructor one on one to try and address this lack of communication?  I did this occasionally as an undergraduate TA when I needed clarification on policies or assignments.


text:
Citation type for a NIST Publications
In my masters thesis I need to cite from "NIST Special Publication 800-22".
We are to use IEEE referencing style and I am using an online LaTeX editor to get this done.
Now that this document I need to refer to is a PDF document, I have no idea what is the type of the document that I should treat it as. Is that okay if I treat it as an article? Or else is there any other type that it should fall under?

Perhaps a “report” is more suites for a NIST publication.

@TheGuy I am currently going with that choice actually.. but I need something profound. Thank you very much for your time.. :) Much appreciated!

I can get it on a google scholar search. If you click on the "quotes", it’ll show you how to cite it and you can opt for bibtex if that’s what you need. Be warned, though, they’re not always perfect (but will give enough information for others to find your reference).

At least in my field, NIST special publications and technical notes are cited as handbooks or reports. In particular, I'd cite that as follows:

A. Rukhin et al., "A Statistical Test Suite for Random and
  Pseudorandom Number Generators for Cryptographic Applications", NIST
  Special Publication 800-22, US Department of Commerce, National
  Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, April 2010.

Thank you! Much appreciated.. :)


text:
Poor Grade in First Real Analysis Course
I'm currently a sophomore majoring in pure math with the hopes of going to graduate school to study applied math, specifically numerical analysis, machine learning, statistics. I have A's in my courses such as Linear Algebra, Discrete Math, Calculus, etc. Real Analysis is the first course that is giving me lots of trouble, and I think it is because I was not well-versed in writing proofs coming into the course. I received a B-/C+ on the first exam, and expect to receive a similar grade in the overall course.
How heavily will my grade in this course affect my chances of getting into a good graduate school for applied math (numerical analysis) if I receive A's/A-'s in my all of my progamming (up to an Advanced Algorihms course) and applied classes (PDE, Numerical, Complex Variables)?

Sophomore - does that mean undergraduate?

It's a little unusual for most US math majors to have real analysis sophomore year. What  book are you using for this course and what were the prereqs?

@ElizabethHenning: At an elite undergraduate college/university, it's quite common for math majors to take their first analysis or algebra course in sophomore year.  Generally speaking, the sophomores in the class will do better than the seniors.

@Alexander At those schools, the freshman curriculum includes calc and linear algebra courses that are heavy on proofs and theory, which the OP said they lacked experience in. So it's hard to assess this particular situation without more information.

@ElizabethHenning: Not in my experience.  Students are just expected to pick up how to write proofs in their first upper level course, and, for the most part, given the student body, they do.

@ElizabethHenning I didn't really have much proof experience before I took this class. My Linear Algebra and Calculus courses were very computation heavy. The only proof course I took before this was "Discrete Math" where I learned a bit oof loogic, some number theory, and some methods of proof.

It's hard to have a competitive application even in applied math with a low grade in real analysis. It might be a good idea to  withdraw from this course and retake it if you aren't planning on taking a more advanced real analysis course later. Either way, be sure you have whatever background you need to do well.

A poor grade in a single course (especially in your second year) is unlikely to have a lot of effect on your application most places. But it isn't an indicator of success. When you apply for grad school or a job you need to indicate in the application process that you are an excellent candidate for success going forward. Poor grades don't help you. If managing proofs is really your issue then it will be hard to be a success in mathematics no matter what the field.
On the other hand, insight into mathematical structures isn't uniform across disciplines. I was great in analysis and topology but marginal (at best) in abstract algebra. I could follow along OK, but had no real insight into the big ideas.
Analysis can be pretty important in statistics, of course, and probably also in numerical analysis. But much less so in most of CS.
But, there is tremendous competition for slots in doctoral studies. You will be competing with a lot of people with better grades. That doesn't necessarily make you worse overall, but you need to make the case that you are the one for whom they can easily predict success. Make it so.

I'm not too worried about managing proofs in future courses now that I have been exposed to harder ones. I really just didnt have much proof experience before taking this course. I did receive a much better grade on my second test and may end up with a B or B+ depending on my final grade!

I agree, but I'd also claim that students' difficulties with "algebra", or "analysis", or "topology", or  are most likely due to adversarial instruction, dubious assigned texts, and similar, in their prior course on X. My experience as Dir of Grad Studies in math without-exception indicates that students having difficulty with X would admit to having "X-trauma", that is, an unpleasant experience in a prior course on X, which invariably involved an unpleasant instructor. No, surely "mathematical talent" is not homogeneous, but I also don't think it branches at basic grad levels. :)


text:
Is it bad if my mom comes to a conference with me?
I am going to my first conference and my mom wants to join.  (She can probably get funding from her university to accompany me, even though she is in a different field.)  Will it reflect badly on me if we stick together?

How do you feel about it?

@aparente001 I think it's kind of cute.

Ah.  Well, if it doesn't bother you, and you would both get more out of the conference in each other's company, then by all means -- go for it.

How do you expect she'll behave at the conference? Will she stand back and let you act independently? Or will she be in the presenters' faces, telling them about her wonderful son and his amazing ideas, all the while interrupting you?

I feel like if you have to ask, the answer is obvious. (And if you don't, well, the answer is also obvious.)

To me this question can be rephrased as: "Is it bad if my mom comes to work with me?"

She can probably get funding from her university to accompany me, even though she is in a different field. -- this sounds ethically very questionable, I must say.

I hope your first name is not Leonard. XD

It might reflect poorly on your mother if she uses university funding for a trip taken for personal reasons.

Just my two cents here but from a pragmatic point of view this will make you a social pariah, conferences are about meeting people and getting contacts - if you bring your mum you might as well just get the conference papers after the event. Just to be clear, I pass no judgement over yourself or your mother, just the general public (myself included).

Choosing between what would be totally awesome and how you'd be viewed by your peers.

No, academics do this all time. Here is a picture of Landau presenting with his mom, and here is Keller drinks water with his grandmother after the conference. Also a lot of people take their parents to the job interviews.

You ask about "stick together". This is probably not an ideal idea.
Generally, in a conference, you want freedom of action. Going with your mother may induce you to "talk to the known" person whenever you are unsure; i.e. you talk to her whenever you are not sure how to approach people - the notorious "escape route" - but this is exactly what conferences are not for.
When I went to my first conference, I made a point to talk to as many people as I could. At the beginning, it is quite a leap of faith. But later you find, it is fun, you get to know people, and you get to know new research directions and ideas. Sometimes it feels difficult, but remember: all you people have one thing in common - the topic of the conference. You are very unlikely to go wrong starting a conversation about that.
If you are unsure how to start, start with people which look like they are alone at the conference, and probably a bit lost. They will be grateful to get somebody to talk to; you may meet interesting colleagues (don't think that, because they are alone, they are not good scientists - good scientists may not be good at socialising), and notch up a good deed, to boot.
It is fine to take your mother to social events and the like, but I recommend that, if she joins the conference, say, because she is interested, that she stays mostly in the background and does not send signals of "supervision" to others or - even more importantly - to you. If you can keep that balance, then, by all means, bring her with you.

+1 for the "escape route". Making yourself meet new people is essential at a conference but can be hard, and it is much harder if there is an easy option available of talking to someone familiar

A couple of things that come to mind:

It's a bit troubling that you say "my mom wants to join." What do you want?
Also, your first conference is an exciting moment in your academic career that you'll likely remember for a long time. Such an occasion can be a really good opportunity to strike out on your own, be independent, feel free to invent yourself as the person you'd like the world to see you as (and, as others have said, make maximal use of the professional opportunity of being at a conference, though personally I'm less bothered about that). With all respect due to your mom, who I'm sure is an extremely nice lady, it sounds probable to me that her presence will hinder such personal growth on your part, though she may not realize that.

Just my two cents based on the very small amount of information you've provided. In any case good luck, and have fun!
Edit: I also want to add, just in case you or anybody else reading this care, that I think "will it reflect badly on me" is the wrong question to ask. What I mean more precisely is this: if you happen to be a mature, strong-willed, independent person who just happens to get along fabulously with your mom and think you'll enjoy having her around, I'd say bring her along, and it doesn't matter what other people will think; life's too short to care too much about that (or, as Steve Jobs said, "Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice"). On the other hand, the advice I wrote above is a way of helping you reflect on whether by letting your mom come to the conference with you, you may in fact be holding yourself back from becoming a mature, strong-willed, and independent person. If that is the case, then although having your mom at the conference may indeed reflect badly on you in the eyes of some people, that is not the reason why you shouldn't bring her -- rather, you shouldn't bring her but for a different reason, because of the more intrinsic fact that having her be such a dominant presence in your professional and social life is simply not good for you.

Curious to know whether Steve Jobs would've wanted his employees to not let his screaming at them drown out their inner voices :)

@RobertGrant this Steve Jobs quote seems like a good response to your question.

Foolish as I am to debate with the Faithful :) 1) that quote is an argument of the excluded middle; I don't just belittle others, as evidenced by my not doing so here. I just applied Jobs' own quote in a way it should withstand without ad hominem responses. 2) It's an obvious inconsistency that Jobs said that while yelling orders at others. Except it's not inconsistent, because he didn't believe that. He wanted to do whatever he wanted, including shout at others, and dressed it in feelgood language.

And 3) Direct answer, as though Jobs were asking: I wasn't a terrible father and husband and didn't overshadow my much brainier and more talented colleague to the extent my tat gets rebleated online, so I've got that going for me :)

@DanRomik I think, as Steve can't defend himself, it would be fair to point out what he might say in response to such allegations by our friend Robert Grant: "While I was yelling orders at my employees, I didn't want them to let me drown out their inner voice, I wanted them to fight for it." (And if you fight, make sure you're right about what you're fighting for.) His employees were employees because they needed a leader to look up to, because they didnt have the aptitude to be the one yelling orders whilst changing the world.

@RobertGrant Perhaps he wasn't drowning out his employees' inner voice, but only making up for the lack thereof. I didn't know the guy, but I doubt you did either. Lets not shroud the reputations of great men who earned their places in history whilst improving the world.

Would your mother attend the conference even if you didn't? If so, then sure -- but make sure not just to follow her to the talks she is interested in. If not (and the question makes me think that's the case), I think it would be a bad idea for her to join you.

Conferences are professional events where your goal should be to meet and share ideas with others in your field. You will have something to talk about with them, but your mother won't.
How would her being there impact your ability to socialize? This is going to depend on the conference, but people generally like to get drinks in the evenings. It would be odd if you went out with a few graduate students and she came along.
Irrespective of how independent you can be, you should think about the signal it sends to your potential employers (i.e. people on search committees). Think about job applicants who bring their mothers to an interview and ask yourself whether that hurts their chances of getting the job.

+1 for Would your mother attend the conference even if you didn't?

Good answer, but as for Would your mother attend ... even if you didn't? I think you're making a rather utopian assumption that an academic's decision of whether to attend a conference should depend purely on professional interest and never be influenced by any other factor. E.g., no one should ever choose to go to a conference in Hawaii and skip a different conference in Cleveland that's slightly more relevant to their academic interests. (Yeah, I bet that never happens, right? ;-)). If humans were robots that might make sense, but they're not. I agree with the other things you wrote.

@DanRomik The answer to "Would your mother attend... even if you didn't?" isn't necessarily binary. If the answer is "Hell, no!" then she shouldn't go; if the answer is "Of course she would", then she probably should go. If the answer is somewhere between, then that's more information to base a decision on.

I downvoted because I think the point raised is entirely ridiculous.  Not just moot...ridiculous.  Parents should be honored and celebrated.

@dwoz Parents should be honored and celebrated... at the appropriate place and time. And by the same token, children and their independence should also be honored, celebrated and respected -- something that too many helicopter parents don't appreciate.

I have seen non academic mothers accompany their children, or more accurately their grandchildren, to conference and there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. Even in the absence of grandchildren, it would be fine. For example, lots of conferences have time for an afternoon of site seeing and people often add on a couple of days of vacation.
As your mother is an academic in a related field (presumably since you said she can get funding). It makes perfect sense. As for sticking together, within reason that is fine. This is especially true if she can introduce you to people. Just make sure you keep the relationship professional.

The first answer mentioning the relevance of "academic mother"

Remember that a conference is first and foremost a major professional opportunity for you.  So long as you will meet as many other conference participants as you would otherwise, and it wouldn't affect your performance giving the talk, then I see no reason not to bring her.
My mother sometimes asked to come to conferences with me, but I didn't let her, because I was afraid seeing her in the audience during my talk would put me off and I wouldn't do as good of a job giving it, which would negate the entire purpose of attending the conference.  My mother could be very critical.  Unfortunately she didn't live long enough to get to the point where academic talks got put on YouTube all the time, but she did read my papers. My father enjoys watching some of my talks on line now.
On the other hand, my partner is also an academic, and we often attend each other's meetings, and even go to different talks in parallel sessions and learn from each other at the meeting.  My partner is very supportive and I love seeing their smile in my talks.  If your mother is a good academic, I could believe that having her at a conference might be similar to that.

with all due respect, Joanna...your relationship with your mom might not have been all that it could be.  who knows why that happened.  Not me, certainly.  Parents that are also academics can be celebrated without the least problem.

@dwoz What does "celebration" — whatever it means in this context — have to do with this? Me (or whoever else) giving a talk has nothing to do with my mother, and all to do with me and my work. If I feel that my mother's presence in the audience would hinder in a noticeable way my ability to give a talk to the best of my abilities, then I should feel obliged to tell her so and ask her no to come.

It's unlikely anyone would notice or care.  Anyway, how would they know you are parent and child?
Having said that, in the UK a lot of conferences are funded by EPSRC or similar agencies, which in turn are funded by tax payers.  As a tax payer, I have to say the folks who go on jollies to unrelated conferences can grate.
Overall it seems unnecessary and while I don't think it would necessarily look "bad", it would likely be a missed opportunity to talk to other people.

I downvoted because I don't like the idea that relatives are any different from any other non-expert attendee.  If a conference wants diversity in its audience, then the organisers probably value that source of innovation.  if it's a small workshop for experts, then how would a family member get in?  I don't see how either strategy wastes tax-payer resources.  Unless you are complaining about people who sign up to attend the meeting but then skip talks to be a tourist, in which case yes I hate that, but I don't see how that relates to family members.

OP says "mom [...] in a different field" and answer is based on that.  Nepotism != just family and nothing else in answer restricts to family (albeit all examples are family).  By your logic, doesn't it make sense for OP to edit their question to "acquaintance ... in a difference field"?  Also nothing mentioned in answer about it being a small workshop for experts.  No idea how "[s]he can probably get funding from her university" or "get in", that's not the question.  Anyway thanks for the comment.

But (in my experience) few people bother with name badges.  Also many women use their original name.

I would chime in that if she wants to come to celebrate your success(es) and witness you if it's something you are publicly participating in, sounds great.  I would say terrific.
However, if she is coming to overtly - overly - mother you when you are an adult?  I recently learned terrific actually means terrifying by definition.   So maybe it is terrific.  So in that case... hmm
Was hard to tell from what you wrote, in that case, time to cut the ole umbilical cord, probably was time some time ago, in fact, not being sarcastic, I'd argue that cord was cut a long time ago.
That said, I'd welcome her to come and celebrate your participatory role in the conference, sure, bring grandma Esralda too,  your family is likely proud of you and wants to support you.
If the former, go for it- if the latter?  I'd politely state you are now an adult, and would prefer if she only came to witness the conference but did not bring any unnecessary focus during your academic responsibility post conference.
Best to you and her.
Tim Miltz

There are at least three issues here: conference funding, conference participation, and joint travel.
It is theoretically possible, but unlikely, that your mother's department has so much travel and conference money that every researcher gets to every conference they want. It is also possible that the conference is one your mother should be attending, and your participation is only a tie-breaker among conferences.
If neither of those cases applies, consider the following scenario:

There is a conference you should attend.
Your department regrets to inform you that there is insufficient travel budget for you to go.
You find out they funded another department member going to an off-topic conference primarily to hang out with a relative.

How would you feel? Unless it is a conference she should be attending for her own research, I think your mother should either not attend or pay for it herself.
As others have pointed out, to get the full benefit of the conference you need to get into casual conversations with other participants. Having someone with you who is not a specialist in your research area could be a hindrance. On the other hand, if she is attending primarily for your company, telling her you can't have lunch with her today because you want to continue a discussion over lunch would be unfair to her.
If the purpose in her going is spending time together in a different location, consider extending your stay for a few days after the conference and having her join you for that time as a vacation. That way you can concentrate on the conference while it is running, and give your mother your full attention during your joint vacation.

In my experience, faculty tend to go to conferences on their own grant money. Assuming the asker's mother is faculty, her spending her grant money on going to this conference doesn't affect whether anybody else in her department can go to a conference: they couldn't travel on her grant money anyway.

The obvious answer is a RESOUNDING "yes."  Invite your mom to come on her own dime and credentials.
When you present your paper, stop, point her out to the seven people in attendance at your session, and acknowledge her, calling her out as a beloved colleague in the unrelated field of xyz.  Blow her a kiss, say "thanks, mom!" and go on with your paper.
Spend MOST of your time at the conference schmoozing with colleagues.

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


text:
Does an associate professor work in the laboratory on a daily basis?
I got a position as an associate professor at new university. I observe my colleagues that they do not work in the lab normally which is quite strange for me. In my previous job as assistant professor I needed to work hard myself in the lab to produce the results, then describe them and publish. Here I am generally ''forced'' to sit in front of computer but without going to the lab and work physically I do not produce any results and no publications... How it looks at your university? Life science field.

What is your field? "Lab" can mean different things.

Some do, some don't. This  "sit in front of the computer" is not related to research?  It seems your new employer hired you to do that stuff, and not to do research.  Talk to your chairman about this.  Ask whether you are supposed to do research, and if so how.

@Buffy - lab meaning life science field. Standard analytical lab with chemicals and biological things.

@GEdgar, you could probably expand that a bit to an answer.

@GEdgar - I am supposed to do the research, but I do not know how to do it without sitting in the lab. I do not want to ask my colleagues because they could feel offended.

What "force" is applied? How are you forced to sit...?

It is not a mobbing etc. :) I just do not have any training in the lab, I do not know the procedures of buying new things to do the research, I do not know whether I could use the equipment or not. There are other associate professors but I see that do not go to the lab.

@MarcinK Hmm, I've written my answer before seeing this last comment. Are you not an independent researcher as an associate professor? Is this not your own equipment? What sort of training do you require at this point of your career? Do you have money to spend? If so, how long have you gone without asking someone in the office for the procedures to spend that money?

"The lab"? Is it somehow a "common lab" for the entire department/group? Is it "owned/run/funded" by the department, as opposed to an individual PI (Principal Investigator) or team? Can you clarify?

@BryanKrause I am independent but I do not have my own lab. There is only one lab for the whole department where work students of 5 associate professors and one full. I am not allowed to use even HPLC before the training from technician (odd), but I was not trained in that way. I have a very little money to spend like 15k dollars and it is over 8 months working here. I have bought some chemicals for my M.Sc. student.

@paulgarrett - there is only one common lab for the whole department (5 associate prof + one full)

@MarcinK I think it's pretty usual to have a training procedure for shared lab equipment, since its not yours. Someone is responsible for maintaining it and they want to make sure it's in the best shape for everyone. It might seem tedious if you're already familiar but in that case I'm guessing the training will go quick. If you need to use the machine, what are you waiting for? I guess I'm not really sure what you're looking for here, I don't see anyone forcing you to sit in front of a computer, it seems more like you don't want to take any steps to move your work forward.

In my experience in (neuro)biology this is largely a function of the size of the lab, particularly the number of students.
The tasks of writing papers and enough grant applications to support the lab (along with all the other tasks professors do: on administrative committees, reviewing grants and papers written by others, teaching responsibilities) take up a lot of a professor's research time, at any level.
The larger the lab, the more time moves from "bench time" to "supervising time". This is the delegation of responsibilities problem experienced by managers of all types, and also applies to professors.
It is more common for early-career professors to spend more time on the bench because they will have few students/postdocs and those students will be new students as well. As a lab matures, not only are more of the bench tasks done by students, but there are more senior students and postdocs that are familiar with work in the lab and can begin to mentor others on their bench skills.
I've also seen a lot of senior professors, who may be wary of taking on students as they approach retirement and have less career pressure, migrate back to their labs.
If your lab isn't productive without you in it, then you need to get back to the lab, regardless of how your colleagues' time is allocated. Probably more importantly, if you don't have students and postdocs in your lab that you are supervising, you're missing out on a big chunk of your job which is to train the next generation of scientists.

I hope this makes sense to you. It isn't my field. I'm just thinking about what I would do if I found myself in a completely foreign environment. I think you have some freedom to do what you want as an associate professor, even if that doesn't imply tenure in your place as it would in the US, though you don't say where you are.
I would spend some time wandering around and talking to people about what they do. Some of that time would be spent in the lab talking to whoever is there, whether post-docs, grad students, technicians, etc. Ask about how what they do relates to the research they are involved in.
But spend some time, also, talking to other faculty members about their own research process. Explain, probably, that your previous experience seems more "hands-on" that what you see here.
Hopefully it will click. I'm guessing that your colleagues spend more time on supervision and on planning for future experiments than on carrying them out themselves. I don't know, but they will. Maybe you can enter into a collaboration with one or more of them to help you get into the local culture and how it operates.
You just landed on the moon. How do moon-lings operate? They know, ask and watch. Then try it out.

To answer this question one needs more context. Overall, it depends on the field, the higher education landscape in your country, the university, and the lab.
From experience I'd say the more senior (not biological age but hierarchy) you get the less time you will spend in a lab. Over time, you will have more and more administrative duties that take away from your time to do research. At the same time, you may hav more grants and projects and thus PhD students and postdocs to work together with you. So while you may spend less time in the lab you should still be able to have the same if not a higher research output but simply in a different role.


text:
Is it negatively viewed by PhD programs if I completed my masters in 3 years instead of the standard duration of 2 years?
I am doing my masters in Mathematics in Germany and I wanted to switch my major area from Geometry to Probability Theory after my first year, so that after my masters I can get a PhD in Statistics.
This would mean that I would finish my master's degree in 3 years instead of 2. Is that negatively viewed by graduate admissions committees in US / Europe?
Edit 1: The candidate must write their masters thesis in the major area and also get  more than a certain number of credit points in the major area
Edit 2: I might be getting the opportunity to be a TA in the stochastics department if I do take another year. So money might not be ab issue(except maybe in the mid semester break)

If you can explain why it took longer, it should be no problem, and maybe even speak in your favor.

https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/67612/writing-a-masters-thesis-for-2-years-is-that-appropriate Answers to this question might also be relevant

A Master's in Mathematics is presumably what is necessary for a PhD in Statistics (check with universities you'll apply to): There's no need to switch. It'll cost time and money. Instead, change the classes you'll take as soon as possible.
Bureaucrats are looking to tick-boxes: They'll presumably be looking for a undergraduate-, postgraduate-degree, or both in Mathematics. They'll likely not consider the classes you took.
A PhD supervisor may be interested in the courses you've taken. Their opinions will vary considerably. Get in touch with some candidate supervisors and ask them.
To a supervisor, a Master's with fifty percent more classes may make you more appealing to a candidate with fewer classes. But, it isn't necessary, so I'd suggest you don't give-up a year. You can learn whatever you don't know during your PhD.

This would probably be more suitable to answer the OP's other question.

This might result in me not being able to take as many courses in stochastics and other applied fields(data science/computational biology) as one has to earn greater than a certain amount of credits in the major area. Also I would get the chance to do research in stochastics VS doing research in differential geometry. It seems to me that the former might be of greater value when applying for a PhD in statistics

Also I might be getting the opportunity to be a TA for the stochastics department in the 3rd year. So money will not be an issue(except maybe in the mid semester break) However the loss of time is definitely valid

@user385655 (I've edited upon reading your comments.) I note: Fewer classes doesn't necessarily matter. Is it necessary to major in an area at your institute?

The major area is the one in which you are supposed to write your master's thesis in and get over a certain number of credit points

@user385655 Are supposed to or must? Having a master's thesis in the domain of your PhD may be useful. (Equally, having broader knowledge is useful too.)

You must write the masters thesis in your major area

I think some caution is needed here. At some departments (for example in Sweden), you are required to have a certain amount of courses in statistics to be eligible for the PhD program. So yes, having a master’s degree in mathematics is certainly helpful when studying PhD level probability theory, but you would be immediately disqualified by the recruiting committee. Bureaucrats indeed like to check tick boxes, and at some places a mathematics MSc wouldn’t let you tick the eligibility box.

@hejseb The opening line of my answer was intended to deal with exactly that. (I'll edit to clarify.)

@user385655 That's more relevant. Maybe edit your question to clarify some of these details. To determine relevance a PhD, ask candidate supervisors.


text:
Recommendation Letter: the final position of a student in the class
Suppose there are 25 students in a class, where two students scored 100/100, and four students scored 96/100, while the rest of the students scored below that. The question is: Should I mention the position of a student who scored 96/100 as "3rd out of 25 students", or is there a more appropriate way?

Well, no matter what, it's certainly not 2nd, since two students were ahead of this student! I would probably write "this student and three others had the same result, the 3rd through 6th best in the class." I'm surprised to see so many ties, though.

@KevinArlin Sorry for the typo. In the case of multiple courses,  It may seem redundant to write all these words for each one. Could you please write your answer to such a case.

You could just write "3/25", but it would be a bit more informative to write "tied for 3/25". I don't really see any of these options as being importantly different from each other, either for the effect of the letter or for its length.

@KevinArlin You can however say the student got the 2nd highest score on the exam.

The student was "tied for third" place out of 25. That would be the common way to express it in the US (and in most sports). The same would be true if everyone else in the class (but the two top) had 96 also.

Thank you for these details. Could you please edit your answer to give an example for a case of multiple courses (see my previous question), in some of them, say two, the student has the same condition mentioned in this question. I want to write in a correct and formal style.

I wonder if most places need that sort of detail. If so, they will probably ask for it, but speaking in superlatives generally is possibly enough. "At or near the top of the class in several courses". The institution will most likely see official transcripts.

Some scholarships/universities asked for such details (e.g.,  Saïd Foundation Scholarship: Referee guide). Hence, I think it is a good idea to generalize these informative details in all letters of recommendation.

Kindly write an example for such a case.

And what do you mean by "but the two top"? Isn't it correct to say, e.g., statistics (100%, tied for first place out of 25)?


text:
Is it a good idea to write an inquiry email to professors when applying for a Masters program in Europe and Asia?
I have read a lot of suggestions on mailing professors beforehand when applying for PhD. I, however wanted to know if the same strategy applies to a Master's program too?
I have been a professional for a few years, and I am applying for Masters in some top universities in Europe (Germany, Netherlands, Sweden) and Asia (South Korea, Singapore, HK) in CS (specializing in Data Science or Machine Learning).
However, I don't have any research based credentials and I became interested in research as part of my job and I want to maximize my chances of being accepted into a program because I have a poor CGPA (also failed in some core courses but managed to graduate in time) and NO academic recommendations (I have only professional recommendations). Also, I don't have any specific research idea - I would probably just work on what the professor is working on.
I had tried last year for Masters programs in the USA but got rejected everywhere. I don't want to repeat the same again.
Does it help at all mailing particular professors asking them if they are taking Masters students in the coming year?
Edit: I am applying for Research based masters because over the years I think I have more than made up for my poor grades by taking lots of MOOCs.
EDIT 2
What it eventfully boils down to is given that I HAD a slightly poor record, NO academic recommendations, BUT a great PROFESSIONAL record and a drive for learning...how do I MAXIMIZE my chances in for a RESEARCH based MASTERS program?

Are you applying for research-based Master's or coursework-based?

Research based masters because even though I don't have any pure research experience, I loved the applied research aspect of things in my professional career - implementing research papers, reading etc.

In that case, I think you are wise to apply as if you are applying for PhDs, and so get in touch with potential supervisors beforehand. Be mindful that in some universities they will want you to have a supervisor's agreement to supervise you before you even apply.

I am not quite sure that I understand that....I am quite sure that I will not be pursuing my PhD, I would rather work in a research lab or any research based position after my masters. Moreover, for universities, the applications for PhDs are separate right? What it eventfully boils down to is given that I HAD a slightly poor record, NO academic recommendations, BUT a great PROFESSIONAL record...how do I MAXIMIZE my chances in a RESEARCH based MASTERS program?

Yes, I understand that. I meant that you should apply the advice you have read about PhD applications to your own situation, as you are applying for a research Master's and want to work in research afterwards.

Also regarding your statement "I don't have any specific research idea - I would probably just work on what the professor is working on": emailing professors beforehand to work out a project idea with them would help your application enormously. What will you write about in your statement of interests if you don't know what you want to work on?

Ohh, about that statement, I should have been a little clearer....in general my interests lie in Natural Language Processing, ML. What I meant by that statement was the exact research problem that I would solve....that would be something dependent on the prof.

In Germany individual professors are not involved in the admission of Master students. So if you're hoping that it will positively influence your chances, there's no point.

You have nothing to lose by emailing professors, provided that you go about it in the right way.
Professors get a lot of email, and anything that looks vaguely spammy is highly likely to be ignored. So don't email every professor in every department you want to apply to with the same cut-and-paste email. Find out which professors are doing research that you're interested in (perhaps by looking at their website or a couple of their recent papers) and write a short, polite email explaining who you are and why you would be interested in studying with them in particular. Possibly also attach your CV.
Don't simply ask them if they are taking students in the coming year, as you will only get a "yes" or "no" answer, with no opportunity to start a conversation about research, which is what you want.
You may not get a reply, or you may get the standard "Thanks for your email, I encourage you to apply to the programme" reply. You may have to wait for a long time to get a response (perhaps after two weeks, send one short follow-up and then leave that person alone). It also depends on the typical procedures of the specific field, country or university. Some will expect you to have the support of a potential supervisor (and possibly to have even drafted the research proposal with that supervisor) before sending the formal application. Check what is expected before sending your first email, and write it accordingly.
Finally, since you say you have been working in industry for a few years, I don't think having no academic recommendations will harm you overmuch, but it could be worth getting in touch with your tutor or Bachelor's dissertation supervisor (if you had one) to explain your plan to do a research-based Master's and ask if they would be able to write you a strong reference letter.

Thank you for your suggestions! I will try to do as much as possible. Unfortunately my thesis was in Electronics and since my job is in a completely unrelated field, I am afraid my thesis professor will straightaway say NO. Also, one last question, will getting a recommendation from a Humanities professor with whom I am quite close help at all given that I am applying for a very technical AI-ML related field?

@jar If the humanities professor can talk about your aptitude for research then I expect that would help.


text:
PhD in Biology: how time consuming?
I am currently pursuing my master's in bio-medicine. I am taking classes, doing research, and working as a graduate assistant at the same time. So far it has turned out to be very time consuming. I can do the work just fine, but I am having trouble finding any time to spend with my family. I was originally planning to continue with a PhD in bio-medicine after graduating with my master's.

Question
In your experience doing research in a bio-medical PhD program, were you required to spend all of your time working?
Is it possible/likely for me to enter a PhD program that allows me to treat it as a full-time or even overtime job?
Through undergraduate and now in my masters I spend pretty much all of my waking hours working, and I don't think I'm interested in another 4-5 years of this.

Edit: I am in the United States. My goal in getting a PhD is to teach at a university level, but I'm open to research or industry jobs as well.

If you're not interested in maintaining the same level of effort from your Master's, it's probably not advisable. (I know I shouldn't answer in  the comments but that seems to be too short/opinionated/unreferenced to be a real answer ...)

"Required effort" for a PhD is determined by your own goals, your supervisor's expectations, and regulations at the university or country level, and also, specifically for biomed, whether your work is more lab / clinical / analysis focused. Consider narrowing your question down to one of these aspects, otherwise it's too broad to be answerable.

Hello. I have been through such a PhD, still work in academia (love it btw) and interact with a lot of PhD students. Short answer is no: I don't know of any PhD in bio that does not consume the full time of a PhD student.

were you required to spend all of your time working?  This is quite unclear.  Obviously nobody spends all their time working.  So what are you asking?  How many hours per week does a PhD usually require?  At least that we can answer.  I think most people here have completed an undergraduate program and postgraduate programs and I don't think many of them would say that any of those things required all of their waking hours.  If you are putting in that level of effort now, it's likely only because you are driving yourself that hard and burning yourself out.

It's also important to consider that lab-based research does not really allow for a nice work-life balance unless you have a lab-manager to do the daily tasks (unlikely). You will need to go into the lab to take care of your cells/animals/whatever on the timeline that this requires.

@juod I edited the post to include some specifications. Since I have no idea where I'll go for my PhD or who my advisor is, obviously I can't detail that.


text:
How many publications/citations/h-factor for EE tenure track in top ~100 research university?
Does anyone know of statistics how many publications/citations/h-factor an assistant professor in Electrical Engineering has at the beginning of tenure track in a top 100-200 research university?
If there are no statistics: What could be typical numbers? While I know that scoring a tenure track depends on a lot of things, I would be curious what the average and variance is and what would be a good number to set as a goal.
Reason for my question: I have a PhD from a top 3 university from a well known PI in the field. I did not really consider an academic career before and hence my publication record is (very) sub-optimal compared with other people I know. I have two journal papers, one conference and some patents (for some reason nobody seemed too interested in my work so I have only a few citations). I am planning for a postoc but since this is a big decision I want to be very clear what my goals should be.

It's a little bit specific.

of publications and # of citations are so low at the time when people get hired into assistant professor positions that they are essentially meaningless. People get hired not for the papers they have written, but for the promise to write papers.

@WolfgangBangerth This is somewhat hard to believe. The commitee must base their decision on something (and I know publications are not everything but I am very confident they play a big role). I edited my question to provide some background.

Electrical engineering is quite low comparing to other fields. What are of EE?

@mellin Yes, of course. But people applying for assistant professor positions typically have 5-10 papers, and they haven't been out long enough to garner a substantial number of citations -- so their H index is maybe 3-6. Of course people take into account number of publications when they look at candidates, but the quality of these papers matters a great deal more simply because for such low numbers, the numbers themselves are not so statistically meaningful if not put into context.

Depends on where you are.  In Australia, we have many people who have gone through multiple post-docs and posses a CV that is better than most academics, and yet they are still looking for a  job.

@WolfgangBangerth I think it really depends on the country, but also on your field. A comment that came up during some interviews for a tenure track position was that I had too few journal articles, while at that time I had something close to 15. Sometimes faculties have unrealistic expectations of just how much quality work you can publish. In my case the field was engineering-related.

@BlaB: Huh, how bizarre. Was this after just one 3-year postdoc? Regardless, I'm glad you got the job, we like you in our community :-)

@WolfgangBangerth in my case this was after 2-3 years as a researcher in a national lab ( in which you generally publish less). Expectations are sometimes over the top. This emphasis on number of papers and citations is not very constructive. Actually, it is not even legal for our funding agency to use these type of metrics in Canada !