text:
How to distribute credit in this situation?
A mathematician Alice discovered a general idea that certain important mathematical object should exist. However she could not construct it rigorously on the technical level in full generality. Nevertheless she published two papers: in the first paper she rigorously constructed the object in a special case of independent importance; in the second paper she generalized it further to rather auxiliary situation which later became technically useful for the next case of maximal generality.
However to construct the necessary object in maximal (and natural) generality she was missing some background in another field. A mathematician Bob, an expert in that another field, has provided a missing argument upon her request. Together they wrote the third paper thus constructing the object in maximal generality.

The question is how one should call the new object: Alice-Bob object or just Alice object?

Alice feels that the name Alice-Bob object distributes the credit equally, which is unfair in this case: the general idea belongs to Alice, and she could make it rigorous in some cases and published alone two papers on that. On the other hand, Bob feels that the name Alice object is also unfair as his contribution is not reflected.
The new object started to be used in the field and people started to name the object in various ways without knowing the details I explained above.

Could you please provide context for such a question? As is, it looks like homework for an ethics course.

Related question: Is it a good idea to name some mathematical objects after my thesis advisor? and I really like this sentence in the answer "When you name objects, name them in a descriptive and evocative way, that will make using the terms intuitive and non-confusing"

What @scaaahu said. One shouldn't name things after themselves, as a general rule. Other people may start citing it with your name (often wrongly), but you'd better stick with a descriptive name.

I'm afraid neither Alice nor Bob will decide this question, nor anybody else by authoritarian decree, but simply all those applicants who use the thing. Of course, there is not need to call the object after either, but one could give it a more descriptive name.

In fact both Alice and Bob use more descriptive name. The problem arises when other people start giving names to the object. As I said the object started to play some role in the area and other people stared using it.

To amend my previous comment, the answer is from @Kimball.

You may find Wikipedia's description of the naming of the HIggs boson illuminates the issue.  In particular Higgs himself is still reluctant to use the term (or was when I saw him give a talk shortly after the experimental discovery) and his name was attached to the particle as a shorthand for a list of relevant theorists

As noted in the comments, it would be best if Alice and Bob didn't try to get either of their names on the object. That smacks of both egotism and insecurity, and is a recipe more designed to create bitterness than scientific progress.
Instead, this type of complexity is exactly what related work sections are for, in which you can say something like:

Homogeoisopolymorpholisms were first identified in [1,2], then generalized in [3].

and let credit be distributed over time by citation and by ongoing work.  Alice and Bob, as current leaders in this subfield, are in a good position to set a descriptive name, and if they do so and insist that others use it rather than using people's names, then they are likely to have a strong influence on the name that does get adopted.
In contrast, fighting over which person's names are on the object seems likely to damage what appears to be a productive collaboration, and to prevent Alice and Bob from publishing a future set of high impact papers together.

Unfortunately the process of giving names was not started by Alice and Bob, but by other people. While Alice and Bob use more descriptive names, some other people prefer to use names of people. It is not so easy to approach everyone and ask to stop it. – user74479 9 mins ago
add a comment

@user74479 Well, if the rest of the world is determined to use some other name, there's nothing Alice or Bob can do about it. Everybody (including you, Alice and Bob) can use whatever name you feel is most appropriate, until the community as a whole sorts out what the "standard" name is.

@user74479 It will also help if Alice and Bob are explicitly discouraging use of their names and explaining why.


text:
Is it permissible to request a new reviewing editor?
I submitted a manuscript to an established ecology journal and received reasonable reviews. The reviewing editor requested a revision. However, the comments from the reviewing editor were abysmal. First, the literacy and analysis were, in my judgment, poor by high-school standards. Second, based on the comments, I seriously doubt the reviewing editor read the manuscript. I have published 10 papers (mostly in higher impact journals than this one) and this reviewing editor stands out. I think I would rather withdraw the paper than deal with this person. Is it possible to request a different editor? I have never heard of that, but I have no desire to work with this person.
EDIT: The email from the journal contains 3 sets of comments. They are labeled "Reviewer #1", "Reviewer #2", and "Associate Editor." I am referring to the comments from the Associate Editor, who is not named. The comments from the AE synthesize the comments from the reviewers, which is his/her job, of course. However, it reads like the AE was busy and let his 12 year old son write it for him.
EDIT 2: Thank you for the input. I asked this question because A) the comments from the AE were unusually bad and B) it will require more finesse to deal with a bad editor than a bad reviewer. However, I have decided to proceed as normal anyway. I have already invested the time to get reviews and I need to deal with reviewer comments regardless. Once you are halfway into the forest, forging ahead is the quickest way out. So I will play the journal-review roulette even though I think it will be more random and aggravating than usual.

The role that you ascribe to the "reviewing editor" sounds like what in all my experience is performed by an external "reviewer" or "referee".  @Peter Jansson pointed that out as well.  Could you speak to that: is the person who has made these comments an actual, named editor of the journal, or is it an anonymous reviewer/referee?

Thank you for the question. I have edited my post to clarify that this is definitely an editor.

You clearly have a very low opinion of the competence of the anonymous Associate Editor (AAE).  It might be worth looking through some issues of the journal and asking around about the quality of the journal: does it really have the stature that you previously thought?
If so, then I would draw a distinction between the impression that the AAE has made on you and the effect this will have on your manuscript and your own revision process.  The relevant question is: is it going to be more trouble to push this paper through to publication -- is it even headed in that direction? that wasn't completely clear to me from your description -- than to start fresh with a different journal?
It sounds like you think that the referees made reasonable comments, comments that you would have to address anyway before resubmitting.  So what is the downside in preparing a revised version that addresses the referees' comments, together with a brief, unconfrontational reply explaining that the AAE's suggestions were considered but ultimately not followed?  To me it seems strategically best to try this first and see what happens.
As a final point: let me address the question: How do you communicate to the journal your professional opinion that the AAE is truly incompetent?  I would say that criticizing an unknown editor of a journal is difficult or impossible to pull off in a way which is likely to be productive: the risk seems too high that you would simply be writing to the person you are complaining about and informing them that their work is "poor by high-school standards".  I tried to imagine a person who might respond well to that...and I did not succeed.  In my experience, the current journal system makes the process of complaint / appeal / seeking of restitution so awkward as to rarely be worthwhile for anything other than a cathartic (Festivus-style?) airing of grievances: too much of the process happens out of your sight.  The point at which you feel like you need to complain is probably the point to resubmit somewhere else.

You have some points, so +1. Just one thing: I wouldn't complain to the AAE, I would contact the Editor-in-Charge. His work is to associate the AAE to your manuscript, and review the AAE's work.

@tohecz: Because the "associate editor" is anonymous, it seems to me that there is a non-negligible chance that it is the editor-in-chief, or managing editor, or whoever might be directing the journal.  In general, I think trying to appeal to one editor of a journal against another editor is a low-percentage move.  (I say this because I have tried to appeal to an editor of a journal against a referee, and it usually does not go well.  This seems less auspicious.)

On the other hand, we all make mistakes and we all hurry with the work. I know from my practice that good Ed-in-Charge will revisit the review process because he know that mistakes or imperfections happen. Therefore it makes sense to point it out. However, I would stick to addressing the reviewers' issues; that's the most important thing anyways, which is what you suggest.

@tohecz: The level of the OP's criticism of the AAE is well beyond "we all make mistakes and we all hurry with the work".  He feels the AAE is incompetent.  That's a hard message to deliver.   "I know from my practice that good Ed-in-Charge will revisit the review process because he know that mistakes or imperfections happen." This sounds true by definition.  In practice, EiC's are open to certain kinds of appeals, but at least in my field, the sentiment that if you disagree with the intellectual evaluation of your work you should simply resubmit elsewhere is quite strong.

Well, in my humble opinion that the OP is over-reacting, but it is something he has to re-consider, not us, because he knows the situation much better. And after all, we can only suggest something and provide a bit of help, but we can't solve the issue ;)

Thanks for the input, especially on the risks and rewards of talking to the EIC. Is the MS likely to be accepeted? The AE's comments were so disjointed and illogical that I can't even guess. I don't think the AE read the MS, so I doubt the AE has a good idea of which way s/he is leaning. Am I over-reacting? I still maintain that the AE is unusually incompetent, but perhaps my Vulcan logic has been compromised by human emotions.

@chiroptologist: I see.  In my field, the enthusiasm of the referee(s)' report(s) is most often the primary factor in the decision to accept: based on those reports I could take a decent guess at whether the paper will be accepted mostly irrespective of what the editors say.  If you really don't know, it's hard to say.  I still think that just preparing a version which addresses whatever sound commentary you received and briefly mentioning that you acknowledge but did not follow the other comments is a reasonable strategy.  Isn't that what you would do anyway if you resubmitted?

As chief editor of a journal, I can say that I would see such a request as reasonable under certain circumstances (and it has happened). However, in the case you describe I do not see what it is that the editor has really done. The reviewers comments form the basis for your revisions and the editor should judge if any comments are more important than others and summarize what the editor sees as important revisions you should make. It is then up to you to do these as you see fit and if you disagree argue against those that need such action.
Change of editor requests come when an author feel a paper has been unfairly judged (usually rejected) and I know of one case where an editor rejected a paper after using a set of reviewers that were marked as "non-preferred" due to a conflict of interest. I also know of cases where a zealous copy-editor has modified the language to a degree that the science was almost completely lost. In your case, it is not clear what has happened to the manuscript, has it been rejected? have you written a rebuttal and argued against changes imposed?
I would suggest that you make the revisions you think are reasonable and provide a rebuttal on the suggested changes to your paper. If you encounter more unreasonable resistance from the editor, I think it is only fair to write to the Editor-in-Chief and state that you think you have been unfairly treated and wish to get a second opinion on the handling.

I appreciate the informed response! In answer to your questions, the MS has not been rejected; the AE requested revisions; I have not yet revised the MS nor responded to the AE. At this stage, the AE has not done anything egregious. However, I showed the AE comments to a colleague who said "These are the dumbest comments I have ever seen from an AE." I have no faith this person is qualified for the job and I anticipate a painful experience and I hesitate to invest a lot of time in a response to this AE. I might request a new AE, or I might withdraw and try another journal.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Misunderstood exam question with consequences for incorrect answer
I suspect a student misread an exam question worth 10 points (exam out of 120). Aside from this one student, the rest all understood the question and the average grade was 8.2/10 for this question. One student did something entirely different and got 0.
After staring at their answer for a while, I realize he / she had confused "map generalization" and "general purpose map". I suspect English is this student’s second language. Now, this question awards 3 or 4 times the points of a typical multiple choice question as it is of a higher level.
I do not like the thought of giving this student a zero on this question when it may be a language nuance issue. They are very close terms, the one I used and the one they misunderstood if for. This student has had issues all semester though with handing work in, attending class, completing assignments, etc., (hence, why this is important as it may have implications for their grade, major, graduation).
The student is on an important grade boundary and it could make a difference to their final grade even a difference to if they have to take the class again / can graduate on time / or even stay in the major.
My thoughts are one of:

Give them another stab at it with more language context, ASAP.
Give them some consolation points.
Stick with the 0 for this question.
Grade the question they answered and not the question asked.
Give him / her the lowest grade anyone else got (or 1 lower) for
this question.

The semester is over but I have a few days before grades are due.
What to do?

UPDATE
The Department Chair recommends removing this one question from this one student's exam and the Associate (sub) Dean applying the "rest of the exam average" to this one question. This is two ways of saying the same thing really as the outcome is identical. Either way you do it applies this one student's average grade for all the other questions to this one question. The Chair and Dean (both whom I highly regard) have no more information than this board aside from the student's name. So if the student averaged 70% on the other questions this would be identical to giving them a 7 out of 10 on this question (this 7 is close to what would happen).  Hmmmm. This has not come up in all the answers or comments below.
What to do?

It looks like "map generalization" and "general purpose map" are terms of art in the subject you're teaching.  Regardless of the student's facility with English in general, it is reasonable to expect the student to be able to know and use the terms of art in your subject as covered over the course of the term.

Also, if I had a nickel for every time I wrote, "True, but not the answer to this question," on an exam, I would have taco money for the rest of the year.

This student has had issues all semester though with handing work in, attending class, completing assignments, etc. — Then this is likely a bigger issue than a single exam question.  These may be signs of ADD or another learning disability, rather than a language issue.  You might suggest — gently — that they be evaluated by the relevant professionals on your campus.

@JeffE Good observation, but any particular reason you singled out ADD? Why not depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, autism, borderline personality disorder, etc? :|

@BCLC I am absolutely not qualified to diagnose anyone, especially from a dozen words on the internet. ADD was just the first possibility that popped into my head.

tbh its a bad question if the entire thing hinges on the initial understanding and doesn't allow grading of the follow up based on what they took for the first part. Leaving this question out of marking for this student seems like the only acceptable alternative to a 0 though because why should their grade depend on how anyone else has done?

"and doesn't allow grading of the follow up based on what they took for the first part"????

"What to do": Zero points. As I wrote in my answer, I don't think it was a misunderstanding at all, and giving points for this student's answer is, in effect, penalizing the other students, those who actually had learnt what map generalization means. "Hi, I passed the cartography course!" -- "Bah! I talked to this other student who also passed, and didn't even know what map generalization is, so clearly a passing grade from that course isn't worth anything."

Since you've asked your supervisors what they think you should do, why don't you take their advice? They know your situation much better than we do over the Internet, and you're accountable to your supervisors, not to us.

Update: What do do?  Well, you're scrod.  You have to do what the chair and dean have said.  In doing that, you will have allowed a marginal student to get away with the "answer some other question" stratagem and unfairly disadvantaged other students in the class.  The moral of this story is never ask administrators to advise you concerning individual grades.

One way to think about what to do: suppose your action will be made public, and you will have to deal with requests from all other students to be treated on the same grounds (after all, even native speakers may not know words or mis-interpret them ..). Which action will you choose?

Bob Brown, I went to two "strong" administrators whom I knew would advise and not force a solution on me. I will take into account what they say but they are both the kind of people who will not step-in, the solution remains my prerogative.

Something to consider: if you were to ask a student with a full native command of English but who has never taken a class in your field to explain the difference between "map generalization" and "general purpose map", what do you think they would say? If you would expect them to have no idea, doesn't that suggest that this is about subject matter competancy more than language skills?

At my institution the default way to handle this is (3 Stick with the 0 for this question). Essentially, every student is required to handle the teaching language well enough to be able to work on the test. In practice, many teachers will fall back to (2 Give them some consolation points) if giving 0 points seems too harsh. If (1 Give them another stab at it with more language context) is an actual option, that seems like a senseful way, too (e.g., in a short verbal exam). However, in practice this is often not possible in my courses, either because it would be very impractical or because the course regulations do not allow it.
Both, (4 Grade the question they answered and not the question asked) and (5 Give him / her the lowest grade anyone else got for this question), seem like relatively weird ways to handle this situation. With (5), you are essentially decoupling the grades for the student from what (s)he has actually written on the test. (4) breaks a fundamental exam concept, i.e., that the instructor chooses the question that the student should be answering, and not vice versa.
As for this:

The student is on an important grade boundary and it could make a difference to their final grade even a difference to if they have to take the class again / can graduate on time / or even stay in the major.

As bad as you may feel if "your" grade is the tip of the iceberg that leads to bad consequences for the student, you should be aware that it is the sum of bad performances that has gotten the student into troubles. Your grade is just the last in a series, and your grade is as much "at fault" as any other bad grade the student received. Hence, I feel you are not required to take the larger picture into account.

I feel the same way on the tip of the iceberg point. It shows the big difference in opinion on an issue such as this that you think 4 is weird yet another thinks it is the best answer. Good advice though.

"I feel you are not required to take the larger picture into account". I would go further: you definitely should NOT take the larger picture into account. If you do, you are letting the grade you think they deserve influence the mark for the question, rather than using the individual question marks to determine the grade. Doing the former negates the point of having an exam.

@user2390246 if the questions are essays, then the individual question marks are random variables.  Remarking will result in a different grade.  If the different grade is wildly different, then you are not a consistent marker (bad).  If the different grade is close, then it does not matter which of the two grades you use except if the student is on a border.  IMO if you can not consistently grade the exam on the same side of the border, you should give the student the benefit of your doubt.

That's a fair point, and perhaps I was a bit strong. But I'm not sure it really applies in this particular situation, since we're not talking about random variation in grading, we're talking about a decision to award 0 marks on a question, which would be completely consistent if re-marked.

I could mark it 100 times. Still zero.

I'm going to stick

Obvious zero points. The student didn't misread the question, but just didn't know the term. He or she made a wild guess at what it meant, and guessed wrong.
I have been grading exams for a long time (since 1988 or so), and it is not uncommon for a student who doesn't recognize a term to guess its meaning, and get it more or less wrong. Map generalization means (as I just googled) decreasing the level of detail on a map so that it remains uncluttered when its scale is reduced. That is a technical term from cartography, and something that I had to look up. I assume that by "general purpose map" you just mean a map that isn't specifically designed for a certain purpose. I didn't have to google that, and if you have no idea what map generalization means, it is not an entirely unreasonable guess that it has something to do with general-purpose maps.
(This answer may sound a bit arrogant, but I do have many years' experience trying to figure out, from a few hard-to-read words scribbled on a paper, not just if the answer is right or wrong, but if the student has understood the subject or not. Also, the only reason I am posting here right now is to get away from the exams waiting to be graded.)

What if the confusion was in the other direction? I.e. general purpose read as map generalisation ... Would it be as obvious in that case?

@LamarLatrell: That would be more unusual, and the exact mechanism of the error wouldn't be as obvious.

It is of the nature of students that, if they cannot answer the question that was asked, they'll answer some other question and hope the professor doesn't notice.  (I know this because I used to be a student.)

That's right, a general purpose map is a map designed for general reference (e.g. see https://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/socstud/frame_found_sr2/tns/tn-7.pdf ). The maps found in a random atlas or included in National Geographic magazine issues are usually general-purpose maps. Someone interested in learning about, say, Greenland could learn a little about a lot of things by reading such a map. Non-general purpose maps could include a surveying map used by real estate agents, a wind current map used by meteorologists, or a map showing airport waypoints and runway alignments used by pilots.

Stick with the grade deserved for the question.  I don't understand the concepts you're referring to, but I suggest the possibility that if the student had attended class regularly, then the student might have been aware that "map generalization" and "general purpose map" are two different things.  You should not be surprised that poor attendance can impact an understanding of a topic in interesting ways.

I think the central issue here is that the paper is graded consistently with the rest of the exams.
If you have been awarding points for things that are correct even if they don't necessarily address the question that was asked, then give this student the appropriate number of points. Otherwise, I think you should not.
I think it is a very slippery slope to try to guess why a student got something wrong. I don't want to live in a world where, say, an instructor makes judgements about which students have disabilities and/or are at a disadvantage, and treats students differently as a result. (I'm not saying you are such an instructor.)
Having compassion and advocating for students is, of course, good. I have "saved" two students from disastrous exam performances by talking with them privately and recommending they speak with Health Services and Disability Services. But I only gave them make-ups after the appropriate office at the University told me that such a make-up was warranted.

We live in that world, just someone else makes the judgment.

How do you do partial credit normally?
(Or if relevant, what is your institution's standard policy on partial credit?)
There's a number of different philosophies in assigning partial credit. One general approach is to take an absolute correct-or-not approach, either for the question as a whole or by parts.
Another is to treat an answer as a process, and give students credit for those parts of the answering process which they did correctly and take points off just for those steps where they made a mistake. That is, if they mess up an early step, they aren't penalized in subsequent steps which proceed correctly from incorrect results they've already been penalized for.
Different have their benefits and drawbacks, and their proponents. You need to figure out which philosophy you ascribe to and why. If you don't have an "official" partial credit policy (e.g. on your syllabus), think back on how you've approached awarding partial credit in other situations.
So how does this apply to this particular situation?
Answering the wrong question is similar to other mistakes made during solving the problem. But instead of getting partway through the solving and making an error, they made the mistake out of the gate. If you're an absolute correct-or-not person, things are clear: they get no credit, because nothing is correct.
But if you're the type of person who views answering as a process and gives credit for steps that are done correctly but from an incorrect starting point, then you should probably give the student partial credit. In the process of answering the question, the student made only one mistake - they misread the question. If your philosophy is that mistakes shouldn't cascade, then that mistake in reading shouldn't cascade to the rest of the answer.
That's not to say you can't take off a large number of points (or even all). How many is a judgement call and depends on how severe the misreading is. How important the distinction between the two for your class? Were there any red flags which should have told the student they were incorrect? Was the pedagogical point of the question the understanding of the term? Would swapping the two terms give a reasonable question? How severe would an answer to a different question be if the student were to have the correct meaning, but simply wrote the wrong term for it?
My main point is that you shouldn't necessarily think of this as "answering the wrong question", especially if you take an "answer as a process" type approach. Instead, you should view it as the student making a single mistake in the process - that of misreading the question. If you frame this as a "brain fart" type situation, you can fairly and consistently apply your established partial credit policy.
That is, if you're a process person, take points off for misreading the question, and then fairly grade the rest of the answer on an "assuming the question was written how the student interpreted it ..." basis.

Not really an option as they answered a different question so no parts are correct on my question.

@user27239 I tried to clarify. It's more an issue of how you philosophically view partial credit, and you're grading results or process.

@user27239 That comment right there would seem really to be key. The student answered a different question which can correlate to the student didn't answer THE question as written which results in the student got the answer wrong period. I guess I don't understand your issue after all.

I try to give partial credit when the situation applies such as in this 10 point question (get it half right get half points sort of thing).

It sounds like you would like to help the student since you do not want them to fall just short of an important grade boundary due to them having possibly misunderstood a question because of language issues. You have thought of a number of ways that all seem reasonable and have asked for additional advice. Your department chair and Dean both suggested the same solution that is not wholly inconsistent with your desired goals. That would be enough to sway me. I would just go with their suggestion. Then I would email them and say I took your advice, thank you very much.

Do students have an opportunity to come to you if for any reason they don't agree with how their exam was rated? If they do that would be an excellent opportunity to find out what the student knows about the actual question, and then you can go from there. If you asked question A and he answered question B, then you would want to know if he actually knows the answer to A or not.
So if that is the case, then you can rate the question at zero point. If the student honestly believed they were answering the right question, he will come to complain about the rating, and then you see what happens. If he intentionally answered the wrong question because he didn't know the answer to the correct one then 0 points is correct and he likely won't come to complain.

It also happens that students don't show up for shyness, thinking it won't make a difference, or a dozen other unrelated reasons... but grades can't depend on second guessing those either.

The point of grading an exam is to try to give you, the instructor, objective evidence of the skills developed / knowledge gained by the student in their course. In the end, you should give the grade that the student deserves; and the exam/homework/attendance etc are all factors that play into your evaluation.
Most of the time, students will complain bitterly about "unfair" grading if they feel that they did well against the objective criteria, and didn't get the grade they "deserved". It is very rare that a student will complain about unfairness for being given the benefit of the doubt.
The question you have to ask is this: is there an "injured party" if you decide to grade this one person leniently on this one question? Are you sending a future employer a false signal about this student's competence? Does passing this student mean you have to fail another? If the answer is "nobody is hurt", then your next question has to be "what is the right grade for this student?". The fact that you say "he/she" either means you want to cloak the identity (thinking that one might answer differently for a male or female student), or you genuinely don't know this student personally. I hope you do know your students personally, and that you are able to draw a reasonable conclusion about their competence based not only on their written work, but also on interactions in class and outside.
If the Department Chair thinks it's OK to not grade this question, and base the final grade of the student on their percentage score of the remaining questions, then that is a kind and generous solution; but make sure that doing so doesn't debase the effort of others - and that it doesn't falsely give an incompetent person an appearance of competence. Would the student benefit from taking the course again? From getting additional English help?
Personally I think too much emphasis is given to exams, and not enough to learning. Exams are often a poor measure of learning... which ultimately is the goal of an education.

I agree on the learning vs. exam comment in most ways but this is an exam that is given and it is not worth a huge portion of the final grade but in this case it matters to the final grade. Yes, I know the student very well but the gender does not matter so I do not use it in the question. It is irrelevant and English does not have a good gender neutral third person pronoun so I avoid stating he or she as an extra level of privacy for the student.

As a professor at a degree certifying institution, you have a responsibility as a gatekeeper.
Your compassion needs to consider more than one individual's plight; A bad representative injures reputation more than a good one improves it.
A question you need to decide:
Is it fair to the rest of your students and the institution to help an inferior student pass?

Either -
A) give no points.  Part of taking a class is learning what the terminology means.
B) Ask the student to come in and talk to you.  Rephrase the question to the student and go through it orally.  If the student demonstrates an understanding, then score that understanding appropriately.  If not, then 0 was the correct score to begin with.

Bouncing off @R.M. 's answer, another way to award partial credit is to look for elements of the student's answer that actually would fit in to an answer to the actual question.
It's not clear in which direction the student's error was, but let's assume for the sake of example that the question asked the student to perform a Map Generalization on a map given in the question but the student actually drew a General Purpose Map derived from that map instead. Does any element of the student's General Purpose Map fit in with what a student would have done when performing a Map Generalization? If so, those elements or steps can count for partial credit.
If the error was the other way, ask yourself whether any element of the student's Map Generalization produces elements that would be found on or appropriate for a General Purpose Map. Assign partial credit for those elements. Deny, or possibly deduct, credit for any element that is not in keeping with General Purpose Maps, whether or not they represent proper Map Generalization best practices.
To make an analogy: Suppose a student was assigned a project of building a lighthouse out of brick but they actually built a jail instead. What did the student do right? They probably mixed their mortar correctly, or at least mostly correctly. They probably poured an appropriate foundation. They may have been able to take a plan and compute the correct number of bricks necessary to execute that plan (even if the plan they drew up was the wrong one). They set at least three bear traps in the building in keeping with Smith (2017)'s Best Practices in Brick Buildings Under the Hypertext Quantum Trans-Paradialectic and posted the No Smoking sign. They can get partial credit for all of those. What they do not get credit for are placement of the lamp, alignment of the lamp in conformance with applicable Coast Guard regulations, and filing Form 55-E with the Department of Lighthouses.

If the grade boundary is at stake, one possibility is to give them a (short) viva on a few topics (something around 10-15 minutes) to break the tie. Of course, you should coordinate it with/get agreement from the program tutor (or whoever is responsible at your place for consistency of assessment).

You can't do that with only one student, you'd have to give everybody the same chance. And that way lays madness...

I think I agree.

Giving everybody the same chance here does not address the OPs issue. To my understanding it is not problem competence of the student, but rather his incomplete competence with language. Others did not face this problem. Now,in past decades, you could assume that everybody could be expected to have the same competence with language.  Today, with increasing mobility of students, language deficits needs to be taken into account. Unless you consider precise understanding of distinction of similar-sounding notions  part of the learning outcomes to be assessed, in which case I would agree with you.

Grade the question they answered and not the question asked. But if this happened in part (a) of the question and then later part (d) leans on part (a), don't hand out additional benefit-of-the-doubt marks for part (d) even if you suspect the same misunderstanding is still at work. The chain of charitable interpretation has to break somewhere, otherwise everybody deserves an A. (Which is a philosophical point to be debated elsewhere.)

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

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


text:
Is praising students' aptitude harmful?
As a computer science professor, I have told some talented students one-on-one that they show a real aptitude for computer science and that they should seriously consider taking more classes in it.
I'm questioning the wisdom of this now that I'm reading Mindset: The New Psychology of Success by Carol Dweck, which cites extensive research on the benefits of having a "growth mindset" (the belief that intelligence can be grown) over a "fixed mindset" (that intelligence is unchanging).
Additionally, two of the students I recently told this to performed way below their ability in the second CS class.  Of course, this is not statistically significant.
FWIW, I teach at a women's college with a large number of students who are the first in their families to attend college and/or from ethnic groups underrepresented in CS.  Thus, all of my students are at risk of stereotype threat for at least one category to which they belong.  It was my hope that pointing out their aptitude would help counter this and encourage them to pursue an area of strength.
Is there any research on whether it is a good idea to let students know a professor believes them to have aptitude, or is promoting the idea of innate aptitude likely to backfire?

Without any data to support it, I think the opposite statement "no one believed in me, so I got depressed and quit" is far from unheard of. I am looking forward to see how to convey this, though.

Do you only tell this to students who you genuinely believe have an aptitude for CS? Or is your intention mostly to motivate the students to succeed in the course they're currently doing?

@Moriarty Yes, I only tell this to students whom I genuinely believe have a clear aptitude for CS.

Aptitude is only half of the story. One also needs to put in the effort. As children, girls are told that they are good at something because they are clever, whereas boys are told that they are good because they tried hard. So when a girl fails, she believes it is because she is not clever, whereas a when a boy fails, he believes it is because he did not try hard enough. The consequences are that many women do not even consider the sciences. [Citation required.]

@DaveClarke Indeed, aptitude is necessary but not sufficient.  FYI, found a citation for your claim: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-science-success/201101/the-trouble-bright-girls

I see these answers below.  Rather than compete with them I'm going to make two comments.  1)  I would do this sparingly and not pick like 5 students a year to whom you absolutely must say this.  You should have spent a reasonable amount of time and seen progress before making such a statement.  2)  Make sure there's a complete statement made and not just "You seem to have aptitude for CS."  Something more like "Watching you work you seem to have an aptitude of the subject matter and I think with lots of hard work you could go very far.  I would be glad to mentor you in this if you'd like."

While those studies are important, I would say they have their limits. If they can be applied to not in given situation, it highly dependent on the person, their cultural environment, their personal issues and motivations. As you yourself pointed out, the social and personal circumstances of your students and their issues may not be the same as of the white, upper-middle class kids from Harvard among where many of these studies were carried out.

My advisor guided me mostly by asking questions.  You can ask the student, "You've been doing very well [in this course / with debugging / fill in the blank].  How are you finding it?"  Hopefully that will give you some context about the particular student. - - - The other thing you can do is say at the end of the conversation, "I hope you'll stop by and check in with me from time to time.  I was very impressed with your work in this class, and I'd love to hear what you're taking, how you're enjoying your course work."

I think this blog article is relevant: it's not only "good vs bad" but also how realistic they are.

Growth mindset and praising can work together. I know that with children, it's better to praise action than result. It also depends on how often you do it.

Praising members of an ethnic groups more or less often than another perpetuates stereotypes.  Praise on the content of one's work, not judged by the color of their skin.

@chux I'm not sure where you got the idea that I praise in the basis of ethnicity; I agree that's wrong at many levels.

@espertus It was the "... groups underrepresented in CS. ... praising their aptitude would help ...".  That sounded like a reason to praise folks of a group differently than members not underrepresented.

@chux I see that my original post was ambiguous.  I'll try to clarify it.  Thanks for advocating equality (and clarity).

See here, and other posts on the same blog, for a discussion of some issues with Dweck's studies: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/08/no-clarity-around-growth-mindset-yet/ There's some really fascinating looks at what's been shown, what's still unclear, and how the field of psychiatry has generally received ideas about growth mindset (fairly uncritical acceptance, according to the author of the post). However, I haven't read Dweck's book and don't know how accurate slatestarcodex's summary is.

Also, in case it could be a confounding factor: what are the differences in content/material/style between the first and second CS class at your institution?

@MiloPrice The courses are very similar, but the professor is different.  The students' problems seem to have come from poor attendance.  Now that I think of it, I was wrong to dismiss the difference in professor as insignificant.

Dweck's results are not universally accepted. Have you seen http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/08/no-clarity-around-growth-mindset-yet/ which claims the data looks suspicious.

@espertus' citation is from an opinionated piece by a lady trying to flog her new book on psychologytoday.com. She describes her domain as "the science of motivation and communication", which may help explain why she promotes bigoted views, such as "women need to perform at extraordinarily high levels, just to appear moderately competent compared to our male coworkers". The use of our, over their is very telling.

@CarlSmith Good point.  I wasn't endorsing the link, just trying to find a reference for someone else's claim, but I should have at least read the page.

No worries @espertus. It's become a delicate issue lately. They're super serious issues, but it's often taken to absurdity [even by PhDs]. I wouldn't have been so critical otherwise.

Praise tangibles, not intangibles.
Tangibles
Say things like:

I was impressed with the way you were dedicated to completing programming assignments, even when they are difficult.  Other students gave up, or skipped requirements X, Y, and Z.
You did a great job thinking through the logic on the Data Structures assignment.  I'm assuming that you took the time to think it through on paper, or in pseudo-code first -- something that a lot of first year students never do.
Your algorithms are elegant and show that you studied the coursework and theory behind them.  In particular, on the travelling salesman problem, I could tell that you took the time to study the problem, and think through different solutions.  Well done.
You used parts of Java (or C#, C++, whatever) that I didn't teach.  That gets me really excited, because it is the mark of a great programmer that they are inquisitive about better ways to do things, and to learn their tools without waiting to be spoon-fed.

Then you can follow with encouragement related to those tangibles, such as, "based on the skills and work ethic you've demonstrated, along with your willingness to put in the effort to solve problems, I think that you could make a really talented programmer.  If it interests you, I hope to see you in more CS classes in the future."
Intangibles
Avoid generalities like:

You'd make a great programmer!  You should take more programming classes.
You've got a great mind for CS.  It's not for everyone, so it's fun to see talent in such a young student.
If you stick to programming, I know you'll go far.

Intangibles can set people up for failure because they don't help them identify and grow their strengths.  If a student earned an A in your class, it's because they worked hard, and were determined, and stuck to it.  But if you tell them that they are "good" or "talented", without telling them why, it gives them the impression that their success is not because of their hard work, but is because of some unnamed virtue inside of them.  This can lead to a variety of ills:

They may have only taken that class to fulfill a requirement, and may have worked extra-hard because they were nervous about passing it.  If you praise them by saying that they are a "great programmer", it risks pushing them to continue with a field that may not actually interest them.  Worse, it can make them coast in the future.
It can actually hamstring them, because they are afraid of letting you down, but don't know what it is about their work that pleased you.

Your intentions are good, and it's great that you want to encourage these young women to feel empowered to tackle a field traditionally dominated by men.  But when you encourage them, be sure to give them tangible feedback, not just generalities.
Hope that helped!

+1 This is a fantastic answer, particular given the clear and actionable recommendations for tangibles vs. intangibles.

-1 For ignoring the "nature" part and considering only negative sides of praising students' aptitude. (Plus, general "preaching" tone.)

I'm half and half about this answer, because if a student only gets praised on one or two things that they personally don't consider to be important then they might not acknowledge the praise as being particularly good.

@PiotrMigdal I disagree that the "nature" part is ignored. The "Intangibles" section spends a full paragraph and a list discussing why getting into specifics is better than simply noting natural talent.

Is praising students' aptitude harmful?

A universal once-for-all answer to the question is impossible. There's a lot of subjectivity in here and a lot really depends on the particular student in question. In general, both praising and not-praising can potentially have their pros and cons:
Praise them -

Positives - Given the kind of students you mention, with an undeniable  possibility of stereotype threat, it is generally a good idea to have the "growth mindset" in mind, and make sure they stay interested. They may start putting in more from their side, when you praise their potential.
Negatives - There is of course a possibility of 'I'm so good, I can get away with working less, and still sail through' mindset creeping in. And if effort drops, the I'm so good part becomes useless. One of my teachers in grad school used to convey this sentiment by saying:

A person with B grade intelligence and A grade effort, is always going to end up further than one with A grade intelligence and B grade effort.

Don't Praise Them -

Positives - The only positive seems to be that you are projecting yourself as being hard to win over. There could be an occasional person who may take this up as a challenge and work extra hard to impress you. But again, not every body would think in that manner, and there would be some other blokes who'll say - 'He almost never has anything good to say about anyone, let's just stop caring about what this tough nut says'. So, again, it is not universally going to be positive.
Negatives - Davidmh may disagree, but it does put off some people (like the example right above). Especially when the the students are typically

... the first in their families to attend college and/or from underrepresented ethnic groups

It is easy to imagine that they could be fighting odds, and wouldn't be having a very high self-esteem. In that case, this attitude is unlikely to help them come up. Plus, if their performance suffers at any time, add low self-esteem and this attitude, and you'll most likely have them regretting their decision to join this program. Again, that's not universal - may work for some and not for others.

The best policy is to remember that your entire batch is not a bunch of (as we say in Physics) identical, indistinguishable particles, and approach this one small step at a time. Focus on one, let's say A. Try praising A at an instance, and see how he/she responds. Accordingly modify the approach further, if they are getting more confident about themselves, and effort goes up, then good. If they are getting more cocky and casual about work, retract the approach - be less charitable in praising and show them there's still some way to go. And please remember, what works for A may not be the same for B.

As the first in my family to attend college, I've never had any problem not getting praise from professors. Granted, it would be really nice if I did, but I'm going to university because I love to learn and I love to teach. Hell, I wouldn't even consider myself anything more than moderately-motivated, and praise (or lack thereof) has never had any effect on that. Your assessment is good though; I've seen each of these 4 reactions from my various classmates over the years, though the usual case is that, praise or not, people just try to pass the class and don't care about anything else.

My comment was along the same lines as your argument. We are in full agreement.

I like this, especially the point that the students aren't all the same and you can have repeated, considered interactions with them! I have found, TA-ing first generation or shy students, that reassurance of their capability seems more helpful than not. I often add something like "There's tons of work in this course, but once you've done it you'll have these skills [...] which are useful in these jobs and academic fields [...]; what were you thinking of going into?"

Like so much else in academia, I think there's a false dichotomy here.
It is certainly possible to give praise for students' aptitude for a given subject, but the reinforcement should be along the lines of: "If you apply yourself and work hard, you'd make a great [whatever field the aptitude is in]."
That way, you make it clear that you think you've found talent, but you've also stressed that the way to make the most of it is by putting effort into it and working hard.
One further point to consider: if you really see someone whom you believe has lots of aptitude for your particular area, and you'd like to see her career blossom, consider acting as a mentor to that student. Making sure that students have strong support networks is a critical component for later success, particularly in academia.

When I was a student, I was regularly told how smart I was, and I learned I did not need to work hard to do well. This came back to be a problem when I got to higher levels of college.
I think that it is important to give well-rounded compliments. Rather than just saying,
"You're really great at that!"
which might breed indiscipline, and rather than saying,
"When you work hard to do your best, you do really well!"
which might give a negative feeling of, "I'm not actually smart; I just have to work really hard", instead why not say something like:
"You are naturally talented/really gifted at this; when you work hard and diligently put a lot of time into it your work is incredible!"

Related: https://lwn.net/2000/0824/a/esr-sharing.php3

This fixed/growth mindset (~nature/nurture) dichotomy is a trap. For virtually every specialized activity both innate skill and effort are crucial.
You can't change innate factors (by definition) but you can grow, so it's not surprising why it's good to focus on the later. Yet, in the very competitive world of academia, it's good to hint that someone may be a good fit - but as long as it will make working more, not less. (Otherwise, they may think that there are not a good fit, and focus on something different or resign.)
That is - focusing on working according to one's own limits, rather being better than the majority of a class.
See also:

Smart guy's productivity pitfails
The parable of the talents

And from my personal experience:

praise made me working more,
saying that "I put a lot of effort, because I got nice results" when I knew I put little effort made me working less.

I might have done a poor job explaining growth mindset.  It does not say that innate skill doesn't matter, just that it counts far less toward success than effort does.  Or perhaps that's the point you're trying to make.

Speaking as a male student with a multitude of learning disabilities, I would much rather the instructor show me that they see value in me by providing additional instruction and acknowledge that this instruction is because they see a specific advantage that I have over the other students.
Case in point, if your students whom you speak of have a superior aptitude for the computer sciences, then teach them something beyond what their peers are learning. This not only shows that you are more involved in their education, but it also demonstrates to these individuals that the effort they have put into learning their crafts has paid off and that they have been noticed in a positive light.

I honestly believe that this really depends on the person in consideration,I can say that in my family...we are never praised at home for any achievements (except probably behind our backs), and get criticized if we mess up.While this helps my brother to do better..I on the other hand feel I can do nothing right.I honestly feel one must understand how the student responds to praise or criticism.
Some people fight harder when told they are not good enough while some fall weak to such comments,and some people work harder if told they are amazing at something.

In addition to the answers above, you shouldn't put too much weight to psychological material. A lot of the research Dweck cites borders on pseudo-science and most of the rest is simple common sense.
So let's use some common sense. For example, don't praise them in a way that is likely to make them put in less effort. If you tell someone they're already good at something, you put them in a frame of mind where they've already reached the goal, when in fact they're at the start.
On the other hand, innate ability is a thing and it is important that talented pupils know what their options are.

This will depend on the person, its background, experience, how one was brought up etc.
I had excellent marks in primary / high school, praised by many, and the love to learn was inoculated by my parents. Being relatively clever helped as well - but I did not know that.
When I went to a top-tier university I saw people who were way better than I was. Some of them did not make it to the second semester (or second year) because they were so used to "getting it" on the spot (because high school aims for average pupils, at least in France). They were not used to working hard to understand things.
I ended up with a PhD in Physics, again with many brilliant people who stayed in academia and are doing great. I see myself as being average, possibly average+ but with a love to learn, which helped a lot.
What I am trying to say is that you might consider inoculating them this love to learn which, consolidated with their natural cleverness, is going to make magical sparkles.
My son was tested for intellectual capacities (for many reasons irrelevant here - not because of an obsession of his parents :)). He had capacities of a 16 yo when he was 8. I made extra, extra, super sure he understands that he must love to learn (and work) and that his capacities are a booster if he does.

Maybe regression toward the mean played a role here?
Consider the following experiment: Start throwing six-sided dice, and when a six comes up, you should praise the die how well it rolled. Observe, that over 80% of the time, the next roll will be worse. Was it because of the praise?

Professors do not actually grade students by rolling dice, although I know it sometimes feels that way.

@espertus : I was not talking about professors grading students by rolling dice! It was an example to illustrate that an event can have completely random causes and so we have to consider the possibility whether the drop in prerformance was really caused by the praising or had completely unrelated causes. This way of thinking is actually mandatory in research, in every experiment the probability of the events having random or unrelated causes must be studied. I edited my answer slightly to make it more clear.

I was trying to humorously make the point that grades are not random.  My experience (15+ years of teaching) is that grades by the same student within the same subject are highly correlated.

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


text:
How important is your school?
I am looking to pursue an online master's in MIS starting next spring. I'm in the process of deciding on a school and I've narrowed it down to two choices: Florida State or Illinois-Springfield.
Both are accredited, but I'm trying to think about which would benefit me more in the long run. Florida State seems to be the more well-known, popular university, and, I would assume, would "pop" more on a resume. However, each credit hour is $810 and the program itself is upwards of $27,800.
In contrast, UIS is a much smaller school, and probably less well known. However, their program is $403 an hour and would come out closer to the $15,000 range.
I could probably pay for the UIS degree out of pocket, but FSU would require me to get loans.
Is it worth the extra money for a more recognizable name on your resume? Does anyone pay that much attention to the school?

Does anyone pay that much attention to the school? The answer is "yes". There are tens of thousands of universities in the world and even more programs / supervisors. No human can keep track of all of them. At some point, at least for non-academics (think recruiters), people will use your university's reputation as a proxy for how good the program is. The bias can actually get pretty substantial. Examples:

Alice graduated from the University of California, Los Angeles. Bob graduated from the University of San Diego. All things equal, some people will assume Alice is more competent than Bob. This applies regardless of topic and regardless of whether USD has a top-class program in that topic.
Charlie graduated from Nameless University in New Zealand, Denise from Sseleman University in Romania. Some people will assume Charlie is more competent, because NZ is a developed country and Romania is not.

In your case, Florida State will be more recognizable because even if one is unfamiliar with the university, it has "State" in the name, and state universities are generally more recognizable. Whether or not it's worth it to pay for it is up to you to decide. Some points to think about:

See calculations like this one and apply it to your own circumstances. The key takeaway is that there's a massive difference between having to pay interest on loans and earning interest.
If you intend to work in the US, chances are much better the recruiter will recognize both universities, in which case bias applies less (the recruiter might still not know which university has the better program in your field).
If you intend to pursue an academic job, the name of the university is less important, since you'll be judged by people who can understand your academic work.

OTOH, UIS is probably not that bad compared with FSU. The University of Illinois does have quite some recognizability (ostensibly mainly due to the flagship campus in Urbana, though).


text:
Switching tenses from past to present within a paragraph in a research paper
I am confused about which tense to use in presenting my results in a paper.
"In this study, we created a mathematical model of the herding behavior using the A-algorithm. The goal of this mathematical model is to allow the ..."

Am I correct in using the past tense "created" in the first sentence?
Notice that in the second sentence I shifted to "is" instead of "was".

When do we use past or present tense in the results portion of the paper? Your insights will be of great help.

In a paper, actions taken are typically in the past, while goals, interpretations, and conclusions are still valid in the present.
Thus, the juxtaposition of tenses in your example is entirely reasonable: the creation took place in the past, while the goal remains the same in the present.  You could also, if you wished, place the goal in past by tying it to the creation, e.g.

Our goal in creating this model was to allow the ...


text:
Fairness of assigning different reviewers for final decision on paper
I recently submitted a paper to a journal. My paper came back with a reject and resubmission allowed decision. When I resubmitted the paper it went to other reviewers.
Under the journal's rules, this is the last time i will get reviews and after that paper will be either rejected or accepted. How is it fair to send the paper to different reviewers, who will than again give their comments on the paper? If the reviewers are changed shouldn't the author be given one more chance to address the comments?

We do not know the journal's rules, but generally the editor can do that and it is considered fair.

If two different sets of reviewers reject the paper, and you were given feedback adn chance to improve the paper after the first reject, it doesn't look unreasonable to me.

@NickS but after the first reject and chance to improve the paper , I am not allowed to improve it if gets rejected the second time.

I understand this, but publishing is not a game where a paper gets rejected and improved many times until it can get in. Also many journals don't give a second chance, so I don't see any issue with them giving a second chance but making it clear you won't get a third.... If the reviewrs don't have major concers or issues with the paper, they can always accept pending review.

When you submit a paper to a journal, you agree, in essence, to go by their rules and procedures for that paper until and unless it is rejected. It is too late, now, to object.
The fact that the editor wanted additional views of the paper is a good thing, for the journal and its readers. Their goal is to publish high quality papers.
And, if you are rejected, by whatever process, you have the opportunity to submit the paper elsewhere, of course.


text:
"Will be recommended for publication in IEEE Xplore." What does it mean?
"All accepted papers will be published in the conference proceedings and will be recommended for publication in IEEE Xplore." The quote was taken from a conference site. Does this mean that accepted paper will definitely be published in IEEE Xplore once accepted, or does that mean that there is a chance only?

If it is an established IEEE-sponsored conference, then I would expect that it means they will definitely be published in IEEE Xplore.  Typically, the IEEE simply transforms the conference proceedings directly into an IEEE Xplore collection, and that is the official archival proceedings of the conference.
The only publications that typically do not make this transition are those which are not presented at the conference (e.g., the authors don't show up), which the IEEE does not generally allow to be published as part of the final proceedings.

Your latter statement contradicts "All accepted papers will be published" in the quote of the question... (I suspect that your explanation is more accurate, and that there is some fine print somewhere regarding revocation of acceptance in case of no-show -- but the original rule really then ought to say "All accepted and presented papers" for clarity)

Hey, as you've said, it's right. They transform the conference proceedings into IEEE Xplore collection. Just checked their last year work of that. Thanks for the clear information.

@BenVoigt I agree that the conference organizers do not appear to have presented things in the most clear manner.

I recommmend you to be careful. There are a lot of spam or predatory conferences, and some claim to be, or claim they will be, indexed in some more or less "prestigious" collections. They use that to lure authors.
You could check whether the conference was indexed last year (and the year before). You can give the website, some here may know.

Hey, I checked it out and as you've said, the conference was indexed in IEEE Xplore last year but not the year before last year. They are even specified in the conference search list of IEEE.

My opinion is that IEEE is unlikely to withdraw the recently accepted conference, but noone can be sure. And IEEE is not a certificate of quality, even if it looks nice on a resume. Personal advices to avoid weak conferences: Scam/Spam conferences

Thanks, I'll look into it. Hopefully it's a good and legit one :)

Very personal, and depends a lot on participants :) The real question is: how important for you is that the conference is indexed in IEEE XPlore

So far, pretty important I'd say. Considering this is my first paper to be published. Plus "it looks nice on a resume" as you specified it :)

If you dare to say the name (and delete the comment afterward), if it is in my field, I can give you a feedback (for what it's worth)


text:
How to cite in APA format for an author who uses only a first name?
How do I cite in APA format for an author who uses only a first name?

The type of work being cited will affect the citation, so it's impossible to answer based on the information given.  Does your style guide really not give any example of this?  Historically authors often had only a single name, e.g. Homer, more recently pseudonyms are not uncommon e.g. Voltaire, and organizations also have only a single name.  In fact, the First Name/Last Name pattern can be assumed only for modern Western cultures.

Related http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46983/how-to-cite-where-names-are-not-of-firstname-lastname-form-in-particular-patr

Have you looked into the APA Publication Manual?

When there is only one name, simply use that name.
The guiding principal of citation is to give a clear and unambiguous pointer for finding the work in question and related works.  Thus, when dealing with a mononym, the general APA dictum of "author's last name" (which is quite culturally narrow in any case) maps cleanly to "author's only name."
Examples can easily be found for famous ancient authors such as Plato, e.g.:

Plato. (1961). Meno (R. S. Bluck, Trans.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published ca. 380 B.C.)

The same principles can be applied for modern mononymous authors.

According to the APA Style Blog you should cite what you see. While it does not specifically cover people/references with one name, it does cover the Dalai Lama (a single title) and Dr Suess (a pseudonym that cannot be separated). Based on the cite what you see principal,  just treat the name as a last name.


text:
Research paper with experimental results from a small amount of data
I have written a research paper in image processing that I will be submitting to an IEEE conference. I have proposed a new method to detect 'X' in images. However, due to hardware failure I could acquire only 4 sets of images. Thus, I have applied my method only on 4 images and I have also compared the results of previous two methods in literature by applying them to the same 4 images. The results obtained by my method are much better.
My question is, is it OK if I submit the paper showing results only on 4 images? The previous two papers have demonstrated their method on around 10 images or less. Also, is it OK to quantitatively compare the results (accuracy in percent) with just four images?

Did you make any use of those four images in developing your method?

@PatriciaShanahan: We had an idea and we validated our approach on those four images.

"due to hardware failure I could acquire only 4 sets of images". I do not understand this. Get a friend of yours download additional sets and use a USB to get them on your PC.

@Alexandros: The 4 sets of experimental images were obtained using a special camera setup. The same camera setup cannot be used now because of some hardware failure.

Email the authors of similar papers to send you their datasets then. If you are polite, they might accept.

@Alexandros: The new method which we have proposed requires an additional image of a given scene, whereas previous two methods use only pair of images.

I assume your paper contains a description of the required camera setup. If so, perhaps you could post that description in some forum that attracts people with lots of cameras, and ask them to send you images.

@stalin The validation on the four images did not cause you to modify the method? Then you may give it a shot. However, if you adapted your method or its parameters afterwards, then your evidence is probably not strong enough.

The amount of experimental evidence that is needed in order to adequately demonstrate a result depends strongly on the current state of the art that you are comparing against.
In some cases, even a single instance will be interesting and publishable, as there is much knowledge that can be gleaned from it. See, for example, the discovery of homo naledi: even though specimens have, to the best of my knowledge, only been found in the one cave, they are nevertheless clearly of interest and scientifically significant.  On the opposite end of the scale, if you want to assert that you have a better method of determining significant websites than PageRank, then it will likely be difficult to convince readers unless you apply to datasets of a similar scale to the "whole internet" scale that PageRank is routinely applied to.
Without knowing details about your exact image problem, it is difficult to know how much can be learned from a single image.  In general, image processing is a very well developed field in which most things are applied to large data sets, so my zero-knowledge guess would be that you need more data (though since you say the prior papers have <10 images, it may otherwise).  On the other hand, you might be doing something where four images are actually significant.  Finally, you can always send it in anyway and see what feedback you get.


text:
How to grow as a researcher outside of research?
I am a Ph.D. student (after mid stage) working in theory. I do as much hard work as I can, but there is something I think I am missing. My experience so far is many people don't know what I do and many people don't want to know what I am currently doing. Many of my fellow researchers (Ph.D. students) are very good at organizing various events that happen in the department. I've also tried but have not been as successful. I mean to say: non-research activities also seem to be very important for a researcher and also as an academician.
To be frank, I don't like non-research events very much but still try to give my best. Many professors also know that I am not that good at organizing and managing events, but they always support me. I don't know how much this is going to hurt my career as a researcher and as an academician. I am an introverted kind of person and not that good at talking to other people (especially ones who I meet for the first time).
Question: How to grow in these ways as a researcher? After my Ph.D. I will be looking for postdoc or another job specific to research.

What sort of "events" are you discussing here?

Can the two be combined? For example: an event with talks about research (something you are probably more comfortable with) and coffee and cake (or beers) afterwards for an informal discussion of the research and maybe other subjects.

I would describe the areas you're concerned about as networking and service.
While neither of these are critical path for your ability to succeed as a researcher, they most certainly will make you more well-rounded and can help you in many ways, so they are definitely worthy of investing a small but significant fraction of your time and effort.
What I would advise you, however, is that there are more ways to do networking and service than taking a leadership role in organizing events.  There are many other types of role that you can ask to take on that can ease you more slowly into such organizations and roles, but which won't push you out of your comfort zone too quickly.  Two good directions that I would recommend are:

Secondary event organizing positions, such as web chair, publication chair (i.e., the person who turns accepted papers into proceedings), local arrangements chair, tutorials chair, publicity chair, etc.
Reviewing for journals and conferences (often starting as a "sub-reviewer" for your advisor or other professors you work closely with)

The professors that support you can likely help you get such opportunities, and from these "training wheels" positions you can start to establish yourself as a known contributor in your professional community and start getting more comfortable with more visible roles and more active forms of networking.

How to grow in these ways as a researcher? After my Ph.D. I will be
  looking for postdoc or another job specific to research.

Everyone has parts of their job that they hate. For many researchers, including myself, "Networking" falls into this category. A couple suggestions that have proven helpful, at least in my case, or the cases of people I have watched closely:

Volunteer at conferences. Some conferences have student room monitors, registration desk helpers, etc. In my experience, beyond getting a break on registration, these are often remarkably good ways to meet important people in your field in a way where there is a natural introduction, and a sort of structured means to exit the conversation.
Twitter. While social media is often dangerous (see: many, many public personalities), engaging with your field on Twitter is a decent way to increase your visibility and meet new people - again in a fairly low impact way. There are several people in my field who are far more prominent than they otherwise would be for due to their social media engagement, and I've met at least two of my co-authors through social media.

The best way to grow as a researcher is to do research: ask questions, find answers, disseminate results.
Networking and participation in / organisation of various events are important for your development as an all-rounded academic, but this is more expected at the tenure-track stage. Your postdoc applications will be judged based on your research results in the first place.


text:
When I compare my results to others in the literature should this go in results or discussion?
In a Geopyhsics paper going into a more general interest journal (say PNAS as a good example), with the headings,

Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion

I plan to have 3-4 paragraphs in which I compare my results with other results in the literature.
Should this section go in the results or discussion section of my paper? The comparisons are what will be of most interest to the majority of readers of the paper and my results are most relevant when viewed in the context of earlier results.

The results section is for your results. The discussion section is for discussing them - and this includes the significance in light of other results.
Keep the former purely for statements, the facts of the matter. The latter is where you move into interpretation (and expanding on very brief comments which are necessary for reading results reported).

Do any exceptions exist to this rule?

I assume that if you are reporting results, they are your own, or at least those of your coauthors. Mixing the work of your collaboration and that of others with no relation becomes highly complicated at best, confusing or hard to read most often, and quite possibly misleading. Better to make clear what is the fruit of your own work, and then make clear what is a comparison of that to others'.

I have no intention of misleading anyone.

While I think that is true, what we intend to do is not always what happens.


text:
Advice on: Quitting your PhD because you dislike the place and the associated project?
I'm a year into my PhD (electrical engineering). I loved my topic from the beginning, and the direction in which my research is going. My advisor is also a really understanding and experienced Prof.. However, I am an international student here (Netherlands) and I don't like living here. I cannot necessarily point out one particular aspect of it, but life in general doesn't "feel happy" and is now getting to me. The place where I live is also kinda dull. I doubt I could go on like this for 3 more years. Normally, in times of stress elsewhere, the social aspects or something outside work always brought up my motivation, without really trying. That here is seriously lacking, at least from my perspective.
I find the university's attitude towards international students a bit indifferent. And, I dislike the graduate school.  Its very disorganized. I would like to point out that I have lived in many places before (in and outside my home country) and this isn't the first time I got out of my house. I even have 3 years of work experience. I enjoyed studying in the US and made good friends easily. May be it was just accidental, I don't really know.
To make things worse, my phd is associated with a project, which is a highly disorganized, almost a bloody joke and would mostly get worse over time. I knew this earlier, but thought it would get better. It isn't. People in the project aren't thinking like engineers, sometimes ignoring physics, in short. This causes a lot of stress sometimes and could affect my research output itself.  Having said that, my output for the past few months is not great either, due to stress, but I see that as a temporary thing.
I am contemplating quitting the PhD but continue to work on the research, from my home country, without a job/salary, to do justice to the topic. I haven't communicated this to my prof. yet, but he knows I have second thoughts. I came here only for the love of science, to improve my skills and not to escape my country (may be the general mentality in my country towards research, however, its not good here either). Having said that, I'm open to new cultures, people, etc. There are limits though. Reports of rising xenophobia in Europe also bother me at times, worrying about how it would escalate in the future.
In short, I feel the cons are outweighing the pros (funded phd, awesome topic, good prof.) and the cons might invoke lot more stress in the long run. I have no issues with the stress of learning and discovery itself. I understand that this is the essential stress. What I find difficult (and made me quit jobs) is the stress caused by bad policies/ attitude, peers, society, etc. And I find putting up with these things a waste of time and mental energy.
I would appreciate your opinion or recommendation on quitting in such a situation. Thanks for reading

You mention your advisor is very understanding. If I were you, I would talk to my advisor and see if he has any advice and if he can do something about getting the project in shape. Just be honest and take your time to make your mind up. Take a holiday if necessary to clear your mind and stress.

Thanks. I took a holiday few months ago, when my anxiety levels were really bad, but I can't keep doing it. Contract is limited. I would be seeing him in some time. The project has bad management issues and too many partners. He can only suggest. Then again, the weather changes too much too often and the apartment situation is bad. Heating is not always working, same with the univ.. I didn't anticipate compromising basic living conditions when I moved here. With anxiety I only get more sensitive to these issues. I fear, I might suddenly quit later out of frustration.

We can't tell you what you should do. But do remember that it's okay to walk away.

I can sympathize with the social aspect - how much Dutch do you know? Almost everyone speaks excellent English, but you'll feel better integrated if you try to learn the language (and the language courses are a great way to meet other students who are new to the country).

I can read some and I interpolate the rest. If I focus hard, I can understand what the locals say. While I was eager to learn it and all when I got here, I realized that I barely got time to work on my hobby, playing guitar/ composing. Then again, that's mental work and can be tiring at times. I'll consider learning dutch my head's a bit free. As of now, grasping things/ concentrating, in general, has become very difficult.

I am not international, but understand what you're going through.  In fact, when I was in undergraduate, I had an Italian friend in your exact position who left after a year to go to graduate school in Europe...so it certainly does happen.  A couple pieces of advice:
1) have a plan for where you are going before you leave.  I'm not sure about the Netherlands, but the economy in the US is not completely back to normal and it can take time to find (good work)...even for well educated folks.  As you said, having a funded PhDs is a pro, so don't waste it!  At the very least, use this time to study all of your interests, not just your dissertation topic.  For example, if you want to become a computer programmer, master some languages, contribute to some projects and document your work on (e.g.) GitHub.  This can help out A LOT if you decide to leave.
2) having a good advisor and topic are the most important pros.  I live in a great place (nyc area) with great friends...but my advisor and I have communication issues (I chose poorly) and my topic is not so interesting.  For me, these cons (sort of) cancel out the pros as they make life miserable more often than not.  On the other hand, if you live in the middle of nowhere...I can understand why you'd want to leave...but you may not find such a great advisor and topic elsewhere!
At the end of the day, of course, you have to choose for yourself.  But I would say that if you are currently doing what you want to do and/or this is the kind of work you would like to do after leaving/graduating, then you should stay. At least until something comes along you know would be better for you.  Plus, things could get better for you at school within the next year or so (graduate school is long) and the you would be leaving for no good reason!
Good luck!

I'll start with telling you in short about my analogous situation and how I cope with it, then I will suggest my ideas for you.Situation:
In my country we have a much loathed system where everyone participates in mass exams and the top x people who chose a particular school in a particular university make it in. This has placed me 200km from my home, which in a country about 1000km across is considered a little far from home. I hate the place I stay in but will not move out because it's practically outside the university, in one year of studies I only found one great professor in my field, the other decent professors are into areas indifferent to me (I am into software, they teach hardware), or teach math and physics. As for classes with other professors, they are generally ridiculous and to pass them you have to rely on open courseware and books. Also the school is disorganized and this has cost me, semester exams are incoherent, while it's hard to find out about any papers you might need for a class, changes in the schedule and so on. In short, I can't wait to get out of here.My approach:
What I do to compensate is work on my own on stuff, I am aiming to get Microsoft and Oracle certifications in summer, have participated in an international contest held by Microsoft (nothing achieved but they know my name at least, and gave some good comments), and am up-first in the list of new Microsoft student partners for October (the whole Microsoft thing is because it's the only company that opens doors to students in the area). I am more specifically headed for game programming and thus have started learning the systems of Unreal and Crytek, and am trying to write lots of tutorials on my webpage, which I see many others saying that is what earned them their job.The result:
Essentially, I see this as defying the awful circumstances and trying to surpass the diploma of CS I will get in 4 years (I also have more personal reasons), because professors are indifferent, incompetent, or anything else, and I get to forget about where I am. It is also said that when one gets through something hard, the best chance he's got is getting devoted to work. Looking back at these 8-9 months, I realize that 85% or so of the progress was done in the last 4 months, and the rate with which I advance grows exponentially (though exams have brought it to a halt currently). It has been lots of fun, I now know a few people who are graduating next year and sooner or later will be in the industry, and I have stuff to write about in my CV.Bringing it to your needs:
Talk to the professor and see if the system there will allow you to switch to another project or work on one you pick and start yourself, this way you have a clean project and make sure the team is reliable and serious about it. You can also see if you can reboot the Phd altogether. I will insist on starting your own side projects, and try to see what the world thinks of them, it is very rewarding. It will also prove your point to the professor that you are serious about your work and held back by the others. Even if you do quit, when interviewed for another PhD you can show your work and show them the exact same thing, that you are good in what you do but will require them to give you at least a neutral environment.
In any case, see if you can change the project or the team, or if you can reboot the PhD, if you decide it is insufferable and see no way out of it, make sure you have already started your own projects and work, and look for another PhD you are interested in, since you have started for a PhD, make sure you get one, whether it be there or elsewhere, otherwise you are taking a step backwards. Whatever you do though, I insist that you start a project of your own, that fascinates you, straight away, and as soon as you have something you can show, make sure one can verify that you are indeed doing it.
I hope I helped in any way, I am in a similar situation psychologically so i thought I should share my experience.


text:
Have there been studies of differences between journal paper authors and conference paper authors?
In research fields such as computer science, academic publication mostly happens at two kinds of venues: peer-reviewed journals, and peer-reviewed conferences. The main difference is that conferences usually require that some author presents the work at the conference and pays a registration fee for the conference, whereas journals do not.
One criticism of conference in this light is that they are not open to all academics: they exclude researchers in poorer countries and institutions which cannot afford the conference registration fee or trip, they discourage geographically remote authors for which attending a conference is complicated, they discourage people who for personal reasons cannot easily travel (caring for a child or family member, having a disability, etc.).
My question is: has there been any systematic study to estimate the magnitude of this effect? E.g., take the dataset of article metadata for articles and journals of various fields, and study if there are systematic differences in terms of the author's institutions, countries, gender, etc.

Even authors who are next door to the conference may not be able to go - can depend on funding and advisor, so it may not be distance...

Many conferences have avenues to support attendance from disadvantaged countries in an attempt to ameliorate their situations. They, and those who have difficulties traveling (times in life many of us have experiences), are also well served by having co-authors who can travel and present the work. But, I have seen no systematic study, and suspect there are many confounding parameters that would make it difficult to determine much beyond the fact that it likely is an issue.

Sure I guess it's noisy, but already determining that this is an issue (or that there are other factors at play which make some other unexpected difference in the distribution, e.g., age, nationality, etc.) would be interesting. I wonder if someone has done it.

My relatively quick Google and Google Advanced searches didn’t identify empirical studies that address the question you ask. However, a search using the terms [scientific conference presentation] and [diversity] yielded this article discussing the need for actively working to increase diversity among conference presenters:
https://physicsworld.com/a/fifteen-tips-to-make-scientific-conferences-more-welcoming-for-everyone/
This article does not address your question directly, but it makes me think that framing your question in terms of a comparison between authors of published papers and authors of conference papers may not be the most productive approach to finding relevant literature.
The majority of researchers who have published in peer-reviewed journals have also presented their work (sometimes the same work) at conferences. By making the author/presenter the unit of analysis, one risks substantial overlap in the two groups—-very likely washing out any real differences that exist. “Noisy” data are problematic in their potential to overlook effects as well as to suggest them erroneously.
I think that a reasonable answer to your question would be more likely to come from separate examination of the two avenues (journals vs presentations)for the diversity of their authors.
In 20+ years’ experience with both conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications, I note barriers to diversity in both venues. It is certainly true that attending a conference takes time and money that many researchers lack. However, research of sufficiently high quality to obtain inclusion in peer-reviewed journals typically comes from well-funded labs to which only a small percentage of the academic world has access. Biases in admitting students into graduate programs, biases in hiring academic/research personnel, and biases in the awarding of research grants guarantee that both journal and conference avenues will have less than optimal diversity. I think that separate investigations of the two would be very interesting.

The main challenge for those living in countries with low financial support in academia is not that they cannot pay the conference registration fee.
In most cases they actually can pay such fees by several approaches: Many theory conferences provide financial supports for Ph.D. students or those who are living in the 3rd world countries. Or in a worst case, the participant can ask for payment from the corresponding authority in their country and since this is nothing for a nation they pay for it (if it is a decent conference). Of course for the reasons that I will explain in the following, they usually cannot get into good (computer science) conferences, and therefore they go for (lower level) journals. But even there, their publications are usually way less than their peers that are living in developed countries (even if they have the same country of origin).
The major problem for people living in such countries is that they cannot have a reasonable academic life. For instance, a professor has a very limited budget to support his Ph.D. students (almost nothing), thus, students have to work and study Ph.D. at the same time, which drastically reduces their performance. Even income of many professors is not enough to live a decent life in their own country and they also have to engage with industry or other occupations to make profit out of it, hence after a while it makes them a completely different person, a non-academic person.
Therefore if there is a lack of paper from such countries in good conferences, it is not because they cannot pay for the conference fees, this one or two time payment per year, contributes very little in their scientific outcome, as explained above the main issue is the entire structure of the country that pushs back science.

Thanks! This is a reasonable point, but does not really answer my question.

I believe it perfectly answers your question. I explained that the assumption you make is wrong in the first place (they can pay to participate); second, to elaborate it further consider this: why there aren't many studies to check the effect of the common cold in the death of patients with brain cancer? Answer: one with brain cancer has a more important reason to die than the common cold, if the system immunity goes down one will die for whatever mild sickness, so, it is not relevant to study that topic. Actually, such questions are more like attempts to downgrade the actual cause.


text:
Unwanted references in author proof
By mistake, unwanted references are present in my accepted manuscript and I want to remove them from my author proof copy. Will the manuscript go to the editor once again or not?

At the author proof stage, you are expected to not make any more substantive changes.
Thus, if the copyeditors introduced these unwanted references, there is zero problem in asking for them to be removed.
If you realize that you messed up any put in things that you should not have or wish that you had not, however, it's a bit more iffy.  You can ask to have them removed and the journal staff will make a judgement call of whether it requires reconsideration or not.  If it's a simple mistake, don't worry about it.  If you were to try to remove all references to prior work, on the other hand, they would be right to consider that a serious substantive change and to strenuously object.
Bottom line: just explain why you want the references removed, and if it's reasonable don't worry about it.

the text of the article does not cite those references as they are not needed and the copyeditors have included them as citations which is not needed.

@Curious Then you are likely on solid ground to object.

"The copyeditors have included them as citations". How is that possible? The journal editors added new references without your knowledge? Is this really a serious journal?

there were present in the references and copyeditors have included them and cited them. I do not know what made them do that but I ll surely get it corrected.

I recently corrected the proofs of one of my papers. The copy editors had found two references in the bibliography that were not cited in the text. (They had been cited in earlier drafts but not in the final one.) They asked me to either insert citations for them in the text or remove them from the bibliography. That seems reasonable to me. I can't imagine why any copy editors would want to insert citations (in random places?) on their own.

@AndreasBlass (being a copy editor myself) Why? BECAUSE. \end{sarcasm} Now seriously, mistakes happen. For this reason, it is IMHO good to remove uncited references from your bib file if you submit in LaTeX. I actually personally prefer not to submit the bib file and just copy-paste the bbl file in place of \bibliography{file} in the source code; it reduces the chance of bibliography getting messed up. However, some journals (AMS for instance) enforce the bib file submitted.

@yo' I didn't use BibTeX in that paper or (in any of my recent papers).  I agree that it's good, in general, to remove uncited references, and I'm glad the copy editors caught those two.