text:
How can we check if a book is a sequel edition of an older one with different names?
How do you check if  a book is a new edition of an older book, but they have different titles, without accessing the books? Are there websites which maintain such records?
For example, is this book
Fundamentals of data structures in C / Ellis Horowitz, Sartaj Sahni, Susan Anderson-Freed.
Edition 2nd ed.
Published/Created   Summit, NJ : Silicon Press, 2008.

a newer edition to this one
Fundamentals of data structures / Ellis Horowitz, Sartaj Sahni.
Published/Created: Computer Science Press, c1976.

Does the second one have later editions?

Why would you want to do this "without accessing the books"?  The easiest (perhaps the only) ways to find out are (1) read the preface of the more recent book, and (2) ask the author(s) directly.

(1) no access. (2) expect no reply.

According to the first author's web page (http://www.ellishorowitz.com/), Fundamental Data Structures in C (1992) is one of several "Derived Versions" of Fundamental Data Structures (1976).  It seems likely that Fundamental Data Structures in C (2nd edition) (2008) is the second edition of the 1992 "derived version", but not (strictly speaking) a new "edition" of the original 1976 book.

@JeffE: Thanks. The background of my question is: I am interested in formally learning data structures. I felt the 1982 (not sure if it is the same as 1976) fits my taste. But I worry if it is outdated. I admit that I haven't had access to many books yet. If interested, could you leave some comments here or under my more relevant post http://cs.stackexchange.com/questions/30627/is-horowitz-and-sahnis-data-structure-book-outdated ? I appreciate that.

I don't know if there's an easy way to track this. The Library of Congress catalog, for instance, shows no trace that the second book was an earlier edition of the first. However, if the edition numbers are consecutive, there's usually no "intervening" edition.

thanks. is this the first edition for the first book: http://lccn.loc.gov/92002524 ? It is not the same as the second book.

No, it shouldn't be the same. Here's the second book, representing the older edition. But what I meant is that there's no link in the newer book pointing back to the older one. You'd have to check for each book manually, or so it would seem.

There's really no general answer to this, since sometimes a book is completely rewritten (including things like changing the computer language that is used in the books examples) and published as a second edition, while in other cases a book will be published by a new publisher under a different title with very few actual changes (typically after the authors have regained the copyright from the original publisher.)  The choice of whether or not to call the book a new edition is really up to the publisher.
As another example of the this, look at Don Norman's "The Psychology of Everyday Things" also known as "The Design of Everyday Things."  These are basically the same book with different titles.


text:
Computational neuroscience postdoc prospects given computational neuropsychology Ph.D. research?
I have been accepted for a Ph.D. in computer science (CS) and funded projects I am applying for are computationally focused whole brain neuroimaging (e.g., MRI, DTI) cognitive neuropsychology research with new experimentally-derived human data. My end goal is to do computational neuroscience at a molecular electrophysiology level using experimentally-derived subject data which my biology, math, and CS background and prior neuro research projects help with (also, would greatly enjoy the positions but end goal strong favorite).
Would doing a Ph.D. with my research in those funded positions (which are more top-down whole brain, as opposed to my bottom-up individual neuron end goal) prohibit me from being a good applicant for postdoc positions in my end goal research area? How much of an extra challenge would this cause compared to doing a Ph.D. directly with research in my end goal?
In general terms: would agreeing to do funded research for a Ph.D. in a related area to the one that is eventually desired allow for getting a postdoc in a position one most wants? Also, what are good ways to do extra work during the degree toward the postdoc wanted?

Voted to close as unclear.

@aparente001 Please allow me to add descriptions that help clarify the question and thank you for alerting me to it not being clear. I have added a description in parenthesis to try to help clarification. My question is: if I do a Ph.D. with research in a related but different area to my ultimate goal research, will that still lead to me being a good candidate for a postdoc in research in the ultimate goal area? Are there other things I can say to try to help explain the question better? Thanks!

@compneurophile Computational neuroscience, even with respect to your "bottom-up individual neuron end goal", is still big enough to make your question too broad. Are you talking about working with "realistic" data-driven models (which involves a lot of mathematics), or analyzing experimental data (which still involves a lot of mathematics, but also potentially machine learning or image processing), or something else. There is also often a fair amount of (software/hardware) engineering required in major projects, e.g. to develop some of the experimental systems.

@compneurophile That being said, researchers in the field understand the highly multidisciplinary nature of the field, so as long as you have a chance to familiarise yourself in your CS PhD with some of the essential low-level neuroscience knowledge (electrophysiology, neuroanatomy, neuromodulation, etc), you should be okay.

people commenting must be from other fields, because this really isn't an unclear question. obviously it would be best to study your topic of interest now, rather than bank on getting a post-doc doing what you like 5+ years from now. that said, if you have no choice but to stick with your current lab for the PhD, it certainly is possible to switch to molecular/cellular comp neuro for the post-doc. in fact, i've done just that. i did my PhD doing psychophysics and some modeling in an fMRI lab, and will be starting a post-doc this fall in a comp neurosci lab.

@101010111100 Thanks for the further explanations. In the position I would work with experimental data on neuroimaging, not “realistic” modeling in the purely theoretical side. I have updated the question’s first paragraph to include that. I want to somewhat avoid being too specific about the work for anonymity reasons. Does that help the question to be clear?

@dbliss That is encouraging to find that you have done it, well done! Thanks for saying the Q is understandable. In this case, the potential position is the best one available after I have tried my Ph.D. applications. A question I have is how much extra preparation do you view do needed to do to get accepted into the comp neurosci lab.? Also what was your Ph.D. major?

my PhD is in Neuroscience. i took time in my PhD to teach myself how to do neural modeling at the cellular level, and i am (hopefully) about to publish a paper with such a model in it. i'm sure that experience helped me sell myself to the computational lab for the post-doc. i've also tried to stay up to date with the computational literature most directly related to the questions i'm interested in.

@dbliss That’s impressive about the paper, best of luck on it! Given that you said you’ve worked in an fMRI lab, how did you find a way to do the paper with cellular modeling? Did you pitch it to the lab or find another way to do it?

i have a very hands-off advisor, and i used that to go off in a direction pretty different from what other people in my lab are doing. my neural modeling is focused on cognitive questions that other people in my lab are approaching with fMRI. so there is a relationship there. even if your advisor keeps tighter control on you, i'd bet you can connect his work to some kind of computational question that excites you.

@dbliss Good advice thanks so much! That was savvy to maneuver your way into that. Advisers can range such a lot in terms of allowing certain work, but I too like to believe that if a good evidence-based case is made and it relates to their work, than at least one article can be added in that direction.

This question should remain open. It is clear that the asker is asking whether expertise in computationally focused whole brain neuroimaging (e.g., MRI, DTI) cognitive neuropsychology can be applied to another, related, area to the extent of doing a postdoc. That's not a question that depends on personal circumstances. That the asker has received useful answers, demonstrates it is a good question.

ThomasKing Thanks for the support! To @scaaahu MassimoOrtolano aparente001 Buzz user3209815 I have added a statement to describe the question in terms that generalize to other situations, and I trimmed some extra descriptions that was complicating the question. Please tell me if more editing of the post is wanted, thanks!

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Staying longer as a postdoc vs doing another postdoc elsewhere
I am currently on the third year of a postdoctoral fellowship that is due to finish in ~10 months. I'm looking into faculty positions, but I take into account that I might not succeed in getting one immediately. This is my first postdoc and if I want to continue in academia, I see two possible strategies for the short term.
One is to stay longer in the group I'm working with - my advisor has funding to extend my contract by at least a year or maybe even longer. The other is to do a second postdoc elsewhere.
The first option sounds attractive because it would not require applying to postdoc jobs at the same time as faculty jobs. In addition, I could continue working with my current advisor and take more projects from him. He knows what I am capable of and it could be a productive time in terms of research output.
The second option also has its advantages, as I would be able to branch out to a different research direction as well as acquire a larger network of people. Just like people in industry do job-hopping, this sounds like a way of increasing and diversifying my work experience.
Apart from personal preferences, what would be a better strategy, (a) assuming I want to eventually move into faculty-level positions, (b) in all other cases where I don't succeed or decide not to advance to becoming a PI.
For reference, I'm based in Europe (currently Germany) and plan to stay here.

In the US there is a pretty common rhythm to faculty hiring, with postings in the fall, interviews in the spring, and appointments starting the next August/September. Is that the case in Europe as well? The timing of these cycles vs the post-doc duration has impacts as one can imagine.

Where do you think you could do better work, and what is your time frame?  For just an extra year, moving might not be worth it, but moving to a place that could significantly enhance your research for a few years could be.

@JonCuster It depends on the country, but generally there is not a fixed schedule for faculty openings. Some specific funding schemes for junior PI positions do have fixed deadlines (e.g. in the UK), but in most other cases positions are posted as they come up.

@Kimball Thanks! I'm satisfied with my current workplace, but my research direction is veering off into an area that somewhat diverges with what the rest of the department. Therefore it might make sense to seek a new place in terms of research interests. However, in many other aspects (research infrastructure, location, pay, etc.) there are only few places in Europe that offer similarly high standards, so changing place might require compromising on a few of these aspects unfortunately.

Can you clarify b)?  Does it mean leaving academia?

Yes, either leaving academia or taking a non-PI position in academia (e.g. in administration). Not sure if it makes any difference.

@PianoEntropy I can speak towards Europe, but this may be quite discipline-specific. Can you specify your discipline?

@GrotesqueSI My discipline is theoretical biophysics & computational biology, somewhere on the border between the two fields (physics & biology).

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


text:
Citing a secondary (indirect) quotation in the epigraph
In my thesis I want to use the following quotation in the epigraph of a chapter:

It is very difficult to predict — especially the future.

There are many variations of this quote, and the authorship is attributed to many different people. Very often it is assigned to Niels Bohr, and one of the oldest secondary sources I have found dates back to 1971.
How should I cite this secondary quotation in my epigraph?
Something like the following? —Niels Bohr (Mencher, 1971)

Why not just leave it unattributed?

Attribute to "various sources."

If you want, you can attribute it to me.  I just said it.

For something like this it is unlikely that you would be expected to cite the original source. Cite what you have found.
An exception would be in research directly related to studies of sourcing and such, but I doubt that is your need here.
Some things are lost in the mists of time, of course, and others are apocryphal.

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


text:
How to find suitable PhD programs in Computational Social Science?
I recently graduated from a master's program in Information Science in the U.S. and want to get into a Ph.D. program in the near future. I am pretty interested in computational social science, specifically, I love doing research about social media and understand online communities and social behaviors.
I'm wondering how to find some suitable Computational Social Science programs I can possible get into. I looked up some network science and social dynamics labs. They are pretty cool. But my concern is a lot of hubs of CSS are in CS/EE departments and the competitions are way much bigger than i-schools (where I finished my degree), and I do not very interested in getting too technical or engineering. A good blend of social focus and DS would be ideal for me.
Any suggestions on how I can make the best of the school searching in this specific filed and how to find some inner information are appreciated. Thanks in advance.

There are quite many and as you've studied Info Sci, I'd expect your professors to have pretty helpful informations on this. In Info Sci in particular UMich and Cornell have top tier PhD programs (School of Info at Michigan and Info Sci at Cornell), and they've some of the best in the world in computational social science. I should say, both of these are extremely competitive as you can imagine (and not any less competitive than CS programs I guess). There are also a number of other departments at umich and cornell that share faculty with those departments, e.g. complex systems, sociology, CS.

There are many other places too, I'll name a few: Indiana info sci, USC's and UW's info sci and also communication departments, UPenn communication, Northeastern network sci and political sci, Northwestern's Kellogg probably (I don't know about PhD programs, but they have many top researchers working in this area), Vermont complex systems institute (again, I don't know if they have a PhD program). I'd suggest also taking a look at the Santa Fe Institute and seeing where their external profs work. I strongly advise against going for a PhD because of one or two profs though, so be careful.

Some more disciplinary programs that do comp soc sci stuff as well: NYU data sci (very competitive and not focused on this, but still worth looking into), Duke, Penn State, and UNCCH sociology deps, UCLA communication, Carnegie Mellon social & decision sci and also their business school, MIT Sloan, and check out other business schools too, e.g. Fuqua & Wharton.
You should be careful if you decide to go with any of these though: 1. You should have a good reason to convince the admission committee that you're a good fit, and 2. You should make sure you actually want to be, e.g., a sociologist!

If you consider options outside of the US, there are plenty of places in Europe and a few in Canada as well (and I guess in other places too , but I don't know many except a few people in Korea). These are a few I remember right now:
UToronto and UBC sociology, CEU in Budapest/Vienna, Konstanz, Bremen, MPI for human development in Berlin, Leibniz institutes for social science in Mannheim and Cologne, QMU in London, Oxford's OII, Manchester sociology, Amsterdam (they're one of the best), Vienna complexity hub, and a few places in Paris (e.g. the french media lab in Sciences Po).

I can't emphasize enough though that if you're not from Europe and have not studied there, make sure you fully familiarize yourself with the education system before committing to a PhD in Europe (ideally through a few month of a research internship or something like that). e.g. in most places in Europe PhD is extremely advisor-centric, you're unlikely to receive much training and your PhD is equivalent to just the phase of the American PhD when you write your thesis (candidacy), and many other differences you should thoroughly research before deciding to go there!

I forgot another good option in Europe: Alto in Finland (and also University of Helsinki I guess).

There are several/many programs in Communication (which may sometimes refer to itself as Mass Communication and some related terms) that would be good places to study social media, online behavior, etc. using computational methods. Just going off the top of my head, I'd look at the PhD programs at University of North Carolina, University of California at Santa Barbara, Ohio State, University of Wisconsin at Madison, Northeastern University. I also know that Northeastern has an interdisciplinary network science program.
Basically every Communication program that I know of is actively trying to enhance their capacities in this area and would probably be attracted to prospective students with such interests as well. You should also know that competition for faculty jobs in this field is also much less fierce than in most other fields that I know about (there are typically more open positions than new PhDs in a given year). Of course, COVID-19 will cause a hopefully temporary downturn in available jobs in all fields.


text:
How, if and where to submit a paper when former co-author cannot be contacted
So I have been on my own completing a paper that I had started with initial discussions with a professor more than an year ago. In the meanwhile I have lost contact with that professor and I haven't heard back from him when I emailed him the recent state of the draft.
I had showed the draft to another expert in the field and he had given me some very positive comments and had asked me to complete a certain part of it more fully. He had introduced me to some other renowned experts in the field to talk to about the paper. But I haven't gotten back any feedback from any of them about the current draft.
As it stands I am unable to find any experts to read my paper.
In this situation can I (a) submit it to arxiv and (b) submit it to a journal?

Can you visit him in person? Call him? Check on with his colleagues, to check he is not on vacation?

Currently as it stands I and these people are on different continents.

A visit is impractical, but do you know if he is still at the same institution? Can you call?

What was your previous level of collaboration with these various people?  Were any of them expecting to be listed as co-authors?  How many rounds of revisions have each of them responded to previously?  Where is your advisor in all of this?!

The most important question is whether anyone else should be a coauthor.  From your description, it's unclear whether the professor you were initially talking with should be one (the others do not sound like coauthors at this point).  The fact that you describe it as "completing a paper that I had started with initial discussions with a professor" suggests that maybe he should be.  The key issue is whether he contributed anything significant to the paper's content.  If so, then you need to discuss the authorship issue with him and cannot make a unilateral decision.  If he did not contribute anything, then there is no ethical barrier to submitting the paper to the arXiv or a journal if you choose to do so.  However, you should be careful with this decision, since it is a major problem if the two of you disagree about coauthorship (especially if you find out after you have already submitted the paper without him).  If you think the situation might be ambiguous, then you need to discuss it with him before submission.
When I say there would be no ethical barrier to submission if you have no coauthor, I mean submitting it would not be a form of academic dishonesty.  You might still offend people, if they feel you are not taking their advice seriously or giving them a sufficient chance to respond.  I'd recommend giving everyone plenty of warning before submitting the paper.  For example, you could send an e-mail saying something along the lines of "I'm just about done with the paper on topic X.  I'm planning to submit it for publication in a month, after I do some final polishing, and I would greatly appreciate any feedback or suggestions you may have."  (But don't say it this way unless you are sure nobody else could have a case to be a coauthor.)

I'm not sure you read the question correctly.

@CGCampbell: In what way?  The title now says "former co-author cannot be contacted", but that was changed by a third party (and seems to me like a much stronger assertion than anything actually stated in the question).  I may be misinterpreting the question, but I don't see another compelling interpretation offhand.

You can always submit a paper whenever you want. However, if someone has significantly contributed in your work in any respect, you should mention him/her as coauthor. Again, if the prof. is not responding you, means he/she is not really interested and does not provide you comments/review of the paper (no other contribution)), i believe you can ignore him.
Remember, its always better if someone can read your paper (an expert) before submitting your paper to a good journal/conf. For example, if your prof. reads the paper and gives you the comments, it is perfect. Otherwise, you can ask to your friends/colleagues to read the paper and give you feedback (in this case no co-author is required to be mentioned).
Hope this discussion will help you.

DO NOT submit a paper with the consent of all the co-authors, it is grounds for retraction. DO NOT submit a paper omitting co-author, it is grounds for retraction (and even more for such a bad reason as not answering an email right away).

Davidmh@I'm not saying to remove the coauthors or do not take consent. If it's your work and you asked someone to read and if he is not interested, then you can ignore him. I'm telling this based on my researcher experience of 8 yrs. What is wrong with it? I think you could not understand my comments.

You cannot omit a person who made a significant contribution to the paper from the list of authors. You cannot submit the paper without explicit consent of all authors.

@user24094 your answer is correct only if the professor hasn't made any contribution to the paper, but that is not clearly stated; and the question specifically states he is a co-author, so assuming he is not is wrong. Even if the OP thought he wasn't, he may be misjudging the contribution, in which case, a more thorough attempt to contact him and would be necessary.

@Davidmh Note that the author never stated that it was a coauthor (to my knowledge), that was an edit by a third-party. The original poster has only said that the paper "started with initial discussions with a professor," which is very ambiguous when it comes to authorship.

@Dmity this is what I'm saying. If I have asked someone to read my paper and he has not made any contributions and also not responding, I'm always free to submit the paper. I never said to omit a person who made any contributions to your work.

This is a correct answer. If the person is unreachable and did not agree to be a coauthor beforehand, the ethical turn is to submit a paper without him/her in the author list, but putting his/her name in the acknowledgments and describe the corresponding inputs. People saying that you must spend your life to find the missed contributor at any price are just waffling.

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


text:
If I am going for a second masters and my previous GRE score is expired, do I have to take the GRE again?
I am already done with my masters but I want to go back to school for another one. The only thing is that I got my masters 9 years ago. I know GRE is only valid for 5 years. Since I already done with one masters, would I be required to take the GRE again if I want to go for another one?

FYI, I applied to do a masters in British Columbia. When I submitted my application, my GRE scores were 4 years and 11 months old. They sat on the application a month, then said it was incomplete as my GRE scores were too old. They kept my $150 application fee, of course! The lesson is that your application some times has to get past administrators before it gets considered, and some of these administrators can be particularly unforgiving.

Not necessarily.
I applied to a top department at an RU/VH university in the United States, and asked to have the GRE requirement waived for exactly the same reason, and they waived the requirement, and then admitted me to the program.
Ask the admissions office/committee if they will wave the requirement.

Short answer, yes.  If you want to apply for another masters degree you have to submit a full application (with in-date GRE scores).  If you have maintained a close relationship with the university, you may be able to wiggle out of the GRE requirement, but that is because the faculty already know your work.
It won't hurt to ask.  You should contact the admissions office and explain your circumstance.  If the university is local, it might be worth showing up in person.  Be polite, and be ready to have to re-study and re-take the GRE though.


text:
IEEE Referencing: Same source, different page numbers
I'm fairly new to IEEE referencing and have a slight dilemma.
If I'm going to be citing the same paper twice in my writing but want to cite specific pages of it, do I include the source twice in the reference list or is there a different way round this?
For example:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet 100 [1], consectetur adipiscing elit. Phasellus vestibulum nunc nec velit iaculis viverra [2].
References:
[1] M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Eds., Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Applied Mathematics Series 55).
Washington, DC: NBS, 1964, pp. 32-33.
[2] M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Eds., Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Applied Mathematics Series 55).
Washington, DC: NBS, 1964, pp. 84-86.

No, you include a source only once in the reference list. If you have to refer to a specific part of a source, you do it in the in-text citation, not the reference list, as in one of these examples:

[3, Th. 1]; [3, Lemma 2]; [3, pp. 5-10]; [3, eq. (2)]; [3, Fig. 1]; [3, Appendix I]; [3, Sec. 4.5]; [3, Ch. 2, pp. 5-10];
  [3, Algorithm 5].

Source: IEEE Editorial Style Manual (Wayback Machine)


text:
Is it socially acceptable to consider myself a chemist, if I have a degree in chemistry but no research or professional experience?
I have a bachelor's degree in chemistry, and feel like I have definitely learned enough to deserve it. However, I have only done laboratory chemistry outside of my courses for a few months my junior year. I have not had any internships or professional chemistry positions. Next year I will be entering pharmacy school, so it might never be employed as a "chemist".
When discussing science online, is it misleading to tell people I am a chemist? Is there a difference between someone trained in chemistry, and a chemist? I.e., is being a chemist more than an occupation, but a lifestyle or state of mind?

Context matters.  Depending on context, the word "chemist" could be understood as a description of your education, your interests, your accomplishments, your profession, your job title, etc.  Some of these descriptions would be accurate and others would not.  If it isn't clear from context, then different readers might interpret the word in different ways.

I feel that the statement "I studied chemistry in college" is flatly unambiguous. Saying you're a chemist potentially implies you are employed as a chemist, which can be damaging in situations where you are taken at face value.

My background is in chemistry or I was trained as a chemist might be more comfortable if you are ever in any doubt about possibly sounding presumptuous.

If it makes you feel better, if you become a pharmacist and go to the UK you might be best known as a chemist:

1 British - A shop where medicinal drugs are dispensed and sold, and in
which toiletries and other medical goods can be purchased:
‘antihistamine tablets are freely available in chemists’
1.1 A person authorized to dispense medicinal drugs.
2 A person engaged in chemical research or experiments: ‘chemists have
developed catalysts that can turn low-grade fuels into petrol’

As it is, I'd be a bit concerned that simply saying you are a chemist would be misrepresenting yourself, in that being part of a profession generally means you are employed (or have been employed and continue to keep up your affiliation). It is more an in-context, implied matter of what is assumed in natural conversation, rather than a hard and fast rule.
One problem is that in a natural environment if you say you are a chemist, a person would commonly ask something like "where do you work" or "how long have you been a chemist" - to which you would need to back-peddle and explain that your undergraduate degree is in chemistry, but you are not and have not been employed as a chemist.
Such a situation would make it look like you are mostly "blowing smoke" and trying to make yourself to be something you are not. If you simply said, "my undergraduate degree is in chemistry", and optionally, "and I'm studying to be a pharmacist", that makes the situation clear and there can be no mistake about it.
As a comparison, if someone said they were a philosopher and it turns out they just have an undergrad degree in philosophy, I'd squint disapprovingly at them for being full of it. In some professions this would be much worse - for example, I will have a degree in psychology, but in very few situations would it ever be permissible to say that I'm a psychologist, as that happens to be a special title reserved for licensed clinicians.
It's all about clarity - and honesty - in your communication. Saying something that is technically true, but gives a false impression, should be left to slimeball-salesman types and politicians.

A chemist is a scientist trained in the study of chemistry. Based on this definition, it is perfectly fine to address yourself as a chemist since you have been trained in the study of chemistry. It does not matter if it was a long time before or finished yesterday.

But if someone asks 'what do you do', I'm not sure saying 'I'm a chemist' is accurate if you aren't currently practicing.

The OP is trained in the study of chemistry, but it's not clear that the OP is or was a scientist (the other part of your definition). So the definition you have brought does not necessarily support your argument. (Here's a definition you may prefer.) Regardless, the question is not about definitions, but about what is socially acceptable (which doesn't always match definitions).

@HEITZ Actually, "I'm a chemist" is not an answer to "what you do?" But if you purpousefully state your discipline rather than your current occupation, I still think it is perfectly fine to say "I'm a chemist." When peope ask me my major, I answer "software engineer" even though I have very limited knowledge of software engineering. It is harder to say "I conduct research on graph algorithms in the scope of computational geometry."

@HEITZ I'm not sure it's accurate to say you're not sure that something is accurate when what you really mean is that you're sure it's not accurate.

@Dan Romik - What if I'm sure I'm not sure? Surely that counts.

Ah, but there's the twist: I almost surely consider myself a scientist. Though I am not employed as a scientist, I continue to study science in my free time and apply it to my personal life daily. Science is a lifestyle and a belief system for me, and anyone who knows me personally would confirm "yeah, he's a scientist". So is it reasonable to consider myself a scientist, who specializes in chemistry, but not a chemist?


text:
How can I transfer to a different Ph.D. program after experience with a bad advisor?
I just started my Ph.D. in fall 2015 in a very good, high-ranking school in the United States. However, my advisor and I were not able to work together and I did not like her way of advising, since she uses negative reinforcement. She was harsh, annoying, and trying to get into my personal life. I do not have a co-supervisor.
I started to think about changing school because of her and I applied to different schools but for some reasons I think she got in the middle, because the schools I applied to have raised many questions about why am I transferring! On one occasion, before I applied, I found an advisor and I told him my situation and he agreed to take me (not in writing, though), but then suddenly I received a rejection letter from the school.
I am not sure what to do, I like studying and I like working in research, but my advisor make me sick. She destroy my positive side and now she is in the middle between me and other schools. Hence, I told her that I am not working for her anymore. What should I do in this situation.

If you give some background such as your location (the state, not the individual university) and make your question more focussed than “what should I do?”, this may turn into a good question for this site, but right now it is far too fuzzy.

@acid19 Even in the US, when PhD students get their advisors varies significantly across different departments and different (sub)fields.

@avid19 "There's a few things that don't make sense here. At least in America you don't have a Ph.D. adviser right when you start your Ph.D." This will come as a shock to my former adviser.

Thanks for your comment @avid19 . Yes the school is in the US, and its shocking to start working with an adviser during the first semester. I thought I should work on the courses first and when I pass the exam I will start working on my research! But things are different here for some reasons. She asked me to work for her with no benifiet for me, she did not even let me take research credits for that, and she did not offer me a GA position..

Please [edit] your post to add clarifying information, rather than just adding details in comments.

Mome, you should edit into your question the fact that she's having you do research/work without a formal research assistant appointment, nor without a "independent research" credit-based course.

Doing a PhD is not just a meeting of trained minds over an academic problem, it is a meeting of two personalities. Sometimes the relationship falters on this count. What you're experiencing is not uncommon.
Like any relationship, it takes time to learn about the other person. You stated in fall, but you've already decided to quit, telling your advisor you won't work with her. That was perhaps a little hasty. It might be possible to patch things up, perhaps with a mediator. This way you could express the difficulties you're facing with your advisor's style. Getting into your private life is almost always unacceptable, for instance, and you could express this.
Whether you choose to attempt a reconciliation or to move on, you need to have in your mind a clear expression of the reasons why you couldn't work with this advisor, and they should be specific, concrete and clear. Because the questions you are now getting  from other schools are completely reasonable and you have to answer them. Just telling a potential new advisor that you just didn't get along with your old advisor, is going to raise alarm bells. Why then should the relationship be any different between you and the new advisor, especially when things don't go right at times with the research?
I'd be careful about claiming your old advisor is getting between you and new advisors without definite proof. The sort of questions you are facing are probably the ones I'd be asking you in the circumstances. In the case you mentioned in your comment, I think you are justified for asking for a reason for the sudden reversal.

You made a resonable comment and I totally appriciate it, I am not saying that I am totally perfect, I have made mistakes and I did not prepare much for the phd program, to be honest I though it would be more like my masters program. However, I told the new adviser the reason I am changing schools, and I told him exactley what type of advising I am looking for, and he agreed to take me, but then things did not go the way we agreed to happen!

@Mome I told the new adviser "what type of advising I am looking for". And then you wonder why he did not take you. You are just a student with a BSc degree that has already a fallout with a previous advisor in only 6 months. This is a huge red flag. Why do you think you have any kind of leverage in negotiating?

wow @Mome your situation sound similar to mine, but usually, head of program or department are responsible for helping you in this case

Thank you for your comment alexandros, but I am sponsered student and my sponser asked me to work on particular subject, and what I meant by type of advising I am looking for is the type of advising on the research subject, so I told him I was asked to work on research A just to make sure that he did not pull me out of it or try to change my mind about the research subject


text:
Do I need to tell my rec letter provider that I have language disorder?
This might be a weird question. But here we go.
I'm applying for business/data-related master programs.
I'm a stutter with a certified moderate language disorder.
Do I need to tell my professors (who provides recommendation letters) the fact of my disorder?
I'm afraid that the recommendation letter or the questions asked by the master programs require my professors to evaluate my oral English level. If they don't know this fact, they may attribute my stutter to my English (I'm an international student btw).
Added: is it common that the professors are required by master programs to evaluate the students' oral English skills in RL.

It's a perfectly fine question, but I don't think you can get a good answer from strangers.  If your letter writer is good at writing letters, they will have a discussion with you about how to portray you in a positive way to master's programs.  For example, " has done x, y, and z to overcome difficulties that were beyond their control, which shows they will be successful in overcoming  in your program."  If they're bad at writing letters, they could say anything.  We don't know what sort of person your letter writer is.

I think this is individual; - it's really up to the person!  I mean;  no need to tell anyone;          (I say to everyone I stutter; to make it easier for myself) but really it's a choice; no need to :)

No, nobody needs to know. Your letter writers need to attest to your academic abilities, whereas your medical history is not something they need to know nor do they have any business telling anyone else about it.
As a matter of fact, all that ought to matter are your academic abilities. The fact that you're applying for graduate school implies to me that you must have been reasonably good in school/college -- in other words, that your disability has no implications for your academic performance. That's all the admissions committee wants to know: that you'll excel academically, and they will be able to see that from your transcripts and what your letter writers describe in their letters.

Thanks for the reply, but afaik, some programs may also ask the professors the level of students' English (tho it's not the main question). I could be wrong.

I have to admit that I don't understand the downvote. An applicant's medical history has no business showing up in letters of recommendation. A stutter has or may have implications for someone's ability to communicate, but it has no impact on someone's "oral English level" as stated in the original question. It does not need to be addressed in a letter. The only reason why I would think that it's appropriate to bring up is as an explanation of worse grades in the past -- but it's hard to believe that someone's stutter has this effect in almost all fields.

@WolfgangBangerth I'm pretty sure (although I lack evidence) that me failing to get above the IELTS threshold in speaking for grad school applications was due to my stutter. I fixed the issue by contacting the university and informing them of my stutter - they then waived the relevant requirement. I thus consider "nobody needs to know" without qualification to be bad advice.

@arno: But that's different. If you want others to know about it, then that's fine. But they don't need to know, and moreover, it's not the letter writer's job to tell anyone about it.

I am not the downvoter for this question, but I think you are making a heroic assumption when you say that "your disability has no implications for your academic performance".  OP insinuates that his stutter affects his oral English presentation, which is certainly an aspect of academic performance.  OP seems to be saying that his disability does affect at least some aspects of academic performance and he is wondering if it should therefore be disclosed for context.

Inform your university’s disability office. They should be able to handle things appropriately.
In most OECD countries, there is a law prohibiting discrimination against individuals with disabilities, and obligating workplaces and schools to provide reasonable adjustments. As a result, the universities in those countries will have equity offices who should be able to intervene on your behalf once you identify yourself to them as disabled.


text:
How to write separate subsections for approach and contribution in a research proposal?
I am writing my proposal (that is, the qualifying exam/proposal defence right before the final thesis defence) and my advisor suggested in my outline for the 1st chapter(Introduction) the following order:

Introduction to the domain
Motivating the proposed approach using an example
Discussing in brief the reasons why state-of-the-art fail to address certain parts of the problem
Our approach mentioning its different parts in brief
Challenges in the field/problem that our approach needs to address
Our contribution

I am a little lost on how to separately write the subsections for approach and contribution. Are these two terms different? If so how?

What does your advisor think?

An approach is a description of your methodology. A contribution statement describes how your study advances the literature. The approach could be the 98% the same for two studies, but the contribution could be very different.
People read an approach to see how you technically did something. This is probably very long. A contribution statement is typically short (probably something like 10% or less in length compared to the approach) that is sort of an "elevator pitch."
For example, let's say a lot of research on concussion and depression has been done in male athletes1. You could do the exact same diagnostic, imaging, and questionnaire batteries in college football athletes and female soccer athletes, but add in another questionnaire that better matches depression symptoms that women report vs. men.
The approach sections would be very similar, but the contribution of the second study (an understudied population, a more psychometrically valid instrument) is greater.

1 This is a made-up example but not one I think is totally implausible.


text:
Is it wise to convert from full time to part time master by research
I supposed to finish my master at the end of this year. However it looks like I'm going to extend for another semester, which mean my scholarship will also end and I have to self sponsor myself for the tuition fee. Research grant also will end and I have no allowance for next semester. I'll not have any financial source after that.
My plan is to convert the mode and apply a job near my college so I can afford to live and pay the tuition fee. However if I apply for part time mode, the time for graduation will be extend to another 1.5 years.
Further planning is I'll try hard for another 1.5 years to get my master converted to PHD while working.

Don't convert. Stick with this short term pain. Full-time has its own value.

Have you considered trying to get a loan to pay your tuition and living expenses for one more semester of full-time study?  This may also save you money in the long run, if one semester full-time is less than three semesters part-time.

Agreed, get a loan.  You should be able to pay it off pretty quick once you start working.

Loan. Ok I never think about that because I really want to avoid any debt since I already got one (degree loan). But it looks like a better option compare to converting to part time mode. Thank you everyone.


text:
Saying thank you to professor & asking for a reference at the same time?
I would like to say thank you to a professor for a conversation we had when I was not in a good place. However, this is > 2 years ago now. I also have not been in touch, so I'm not sure he will remember.
Lastly, I will need a reference at some point in the future, and I am going to ask this professor.
I am worried that saying thank you now will look like I am just getting in touch because of the reference (which I will possibly have to ask for in already a month or two).
Could it be interpreted this way, and should I maybe just leave this now? I am worried it will look very fake and like I am only emailing now to secure that reference. At the same time I would like to say thank you, which I was not ready for before.

Since you mentioned that you don't immediately need the recommendation letter I would recommend the following:
-Get in touch with the professor in a casual way: perhaps you saw an article online that reminded you of him/her which you wanted to share, perhaps you just wanted to catch up a little bit. Don't mention the recommendation letter, but do mention your future plans (let's assume you need a recommendation letter for graduate school)
-Use this opportunity to reminisce of the time you talked with him/her and use this as a platform for your apology.
Then, if the professor's answer is positive in tone (and perhaps even inquisitive regarding your graduate school plans) you might use this opportunity to ask if it would be possible to get a recommendation letter. If you sense brevity or negativity, it might not be a good idea to ask for the letter.
Personal Experience:
I found myself in a similar situation not so long ago. I needed a recommendation letter for a manager for whom I had previously worked for. Luckily it was around January so I used the opportunity to send my New Year's wishes. Unfortunately, he was on vacation and replied a month after. At that point, I didn't need the letter anymore. But his answer gave me a reassuring feeling that in the future it wouldn't be awkward to come back to him and ask him for said letter.

How about if you put it the other way around? Ask for a reference first and add later something like "I'd also like to take this opportunity and thank you for ..." and explain your situation. Then it at least seems less suspicious, since you are asking for something first.
Alternatively, ask for the reference in one email, and if you get a reply, thank him/her in a second email.


text:
Whether or should I ask for a reference from my advisor who I believe does not like me?
I have good reason to believe that my academic advisor does not like me. However, I will need a reference if I am going to apply for graduate study.
What can I do now? I got an excellent mark in my dissertation (I do not know if she marked it, or how exactly it works here in the UK), but I am pretty certain she does not like me very much. Assuming my judgment is correct, what would be the best course of action? Shall I risk asking her for a reference and hope she will be fair, or rather ask somebody else?

Being direct is always the best option in these matters, I think. You are graduated. Therefore, you have no official advisor-student relationship. You could just ask something like "because of these reasons, I think I am not your favorite student. However, I might need a reference for my future academic life. Would it be too much to ask?"

It's interesting that you don't know if they marked your dissertation. Did they supervise the project, or are they just your adviser for general/ pastoral matters? Furthermore, are you still a student, or have you graduated?

@NatalieHogg I do not know simply because I do not know how it works here. I got the mark but nobody told me who looked over it. The person was my supervisor for the project though, not a general advisor. I have graduated, I am not a student anymore. (but I feel very dependent on this person, I do not have many other options I feel)

If your advisor doesn't like you, they will typically just say they won't write a letter for you when asked, rather than write a poor letter and sabotage you. The amount of effort to do the latter is much better spent on other things.

Yes, it is unlikely that an academic will agree to write anything but a positive reference letter. It is not a guarantee, of course (nothing in life is ever guaranteed), but usually an agreement to write a reference at all is an indication that the reference should help you.

While I don't doubt your judgement of the situation, I think it's best if you put your doubts to one side.
Let's consider the best case scenario: you contact your adviser and they agree to write a strong reference letter for you, based on your excellent performance over the course of your dissertation. Great!
Now let's consider the worst case scenario: you contact your adviser and they refuse to write you a reference. What then are your alternatives? I would suggest contacting your personal tutor from university, or another lecturer who you knew well and have fewer doubts about their attitude towards you. As a last resort, you could ask someone in your place of work e.g. supervisor, line manager. Explain to them that the letter needs to emphasise your potential to succeed in graduate studies.
Finally, let's consider the most likely scenario: you contact your adviser and they agree to write you a reference. They remember that your working relationship was not the most positive, and this may be reflected in the tone of the letter. However, after six months or a year, this impression may have faded. The excellent grade in your dissertation, however, is concrete evidence of your ability to achieve, and they base their letter on this. The reference may not be glowing but it will be an accurate reflection of your potential.

As an aside, I would hope for your sake that your adviser is able to put their professional judgement of you above their personal feelings. Good luck!


text:
Is it possible to pursue a PhD while working full time and living in another country?
I work full time as a Chief Operating Officer for a company and would like to pursue a PhD and study the population I am working with (women workers in fisheries).
I have been researching different programs in Gender Studies centers, mostly in English speaking countries.
I want to know if it is possible to pursue a PhD while working full time and living in another country? And if there are universities that are more flexible than others?

Some (most?) PhD programs have residency requirements. Look for that at specific programs you are intersted in.

I did see a CV once that showed that the person had earned a remote PHD, but with some onsite visits.  Don't remember the name of the institution.  It might not be very rigorous to go that route.  Why don't you just take remote classes, and look for a mentor to help you with doing the study you have in mind?  Do you really need the doctorate for your long-term goals?

Thank you very much for your answer. I have been working with women in this field for a long time and if I want to make a real change in the whole region, it starts with a solid base. I can do a study alone but a PhD will give it the autority it needs for officials and other companies to take it "seriously".

Also, you will need advance approval from your university before you begin any research with human subjects.

In regard to living in another country, at least in the US, most universities have a residency requirement (for example, Cornell's) that means you have to live there for some amount of time.
As far as working full-time, sure, it can be done. It will be extremely difficult and it may be a challenge to convince an advisor to work with you. A PhD is hard enough doing it full-time. Part timers seem to take 7-9 years in my field and finish with fewer publications.
Something that a potential advisor will ask you is why do you want a PhD if you already have a job and are going to continue working in that position? A PhD trains you to do research but you aren't really doing research as a CTO are you? If you just want knowledge in the field, then take some classes or study on your own.

I do some research but it's linked to the production so it's a whole different thing. It's because I'm going to keep working in this field (maybe not in the same position) that I want to do research. I have been trying to develop a management system that is different from a traditional one. I'm spend a lot of time around these women, trying to find the best answers to their needs, but I think that most of what I did until now is experimenting and guessing. It's time to go deeper into things.

I would say that it is almost impossible to pursue a PhD while you are living in another country. It would also be impossible to pursue a PhD while working full-time. PhD's require full time dedication because you will be required not only to work on your studies, but also contribute to the university's research advancements, and perhaps even being a TA for undergraduate courses. I highly doubt there are any accredited universities that would be that flexible with you working full time and living in another country.

The part about PhD students having to work full time is only relevant for some countries like the US. By contrast, in Germany unfunded PhD students (it is reasonable to assume that the topic starter can self-fund his studies) don't have any obligations neither do they have courses to attend.

I’m doing it. It’s rough. I work very long days and am publishing, but it’s quite painful and I’m afraid it may be hard to compete with others with teaching experience. Don’t do it if you can avoid it. Do one or the other and give it your all.


text:
What should a lecturer do when an international student plagiarises and the student claims it was unintentional?
A student has plagiarised her assignment. The lecturer gave all students a lecture on plagiarism at the beginning of the semester. The student maintains she was absent that day but the university does not keep records on attendance. However a copy of the lecture is on BlackBoard. Her excuse is that she didn’t realise she was plagiarising.  As she is an overseas student a fail in a unit means she risks losing her visa.
What actions should the lecturer take?

What is university policy? Can you be more specific about the nature of the plagiarism? What exactly did the student do? Quantifying the degree and extent of the plagiarism is often important.

In addition to @JeromyAnglim's questions, what policy, if any, was laid out in the course syllabus?

Academic dishonesty is about the biggest violation of scholastic principles you can make. I would argue for the full penalty, whatever is allowed by school policy. Country of origin and visa status should not make any difference. Prediction: You will have to deal with it from this same student again the future.

I thinking cheating is universally a no-no in every academic setting I can think of. So regardless of her status, discipline should be no different.

@DanielR.Collins Almost every day there are around the world episodes of academic dishonesty committed by faculties which are punished in much milder ways, e.g, to save a university's reputation (and we had episodes described here). Don't punish a student who committed academic dishonesty for the first time in a way that can dramatically change their life, if, as a system, you're not able to deal with dishonesty in a fair way at all levels.

@MassimoOrtolano: I refer you to the works of Harry G. Frankfurt.

@MassimoOrtolano The actual punishment is likely to be carried out by a committee, where the student will get to make an appeal and defend themselves. Depending on how rock-solid the evidence is, it might not be enough to get them to impose these "life-destroying" consequences. I don't know of a university where one professor can unilaterally impose official academic dishonesty punishments. And it sounds like you're advising that the solution to institutional dysfunction (which isn't established in this case) is to actively encourage and spread it.

@DanielR.Collins It's twenty years that I deal with international students and with cases like the above: generically referring me to a philosopher won't likely change my mind on this.

In my opinion, not being at the lecture where plagiarism is explained is no excuse to allow to plagiarize (in that case, students could just skip the first lecture so they can get away with it later?). Meaning: There have to be some rules and you even explained them. Stick to those rules yourself. Treat her like you would have treated any other student.

@zibadawatimmy Procedures for evaluating and punishing academic integrity violations vary significantly between universities. At my university, the punishment is not carried out be a separate committee, but by the individual instructors, although there is a multilevel appeals process with its own committees. I have personally failed students for plagiarism, causing them to lose their visas. (And I slept well afterward.)

@JeffE The point, of course, is not about whether one can sleep well or not afterwards.

@MichaelC.: "I thinking cheating is universally a no-no in every academic setting I can think of." - as far as I can see, the OP hasn't yet specified in what way plagiarism has occurred. I think everyone can agree with your statement, but as soon as we'd start looking in depth at what is "cheating", we suddenly realize that people from different institutions and places may have vastly different ideas about that. I've realized that after reading here on Academia SE for a while, and coming across some (in my view) totally acceptable actions that seem to count as "cheating" in some places.

I like the idea of starting out the semester explaining clearly what is plagiarism and what isn't.  (I used to do this too.)  That would be a day to take careful attendance.  There should be a mandatory assignment based on that day's class, in which the student explains what's allowed and what's not allowed; by "mandatory," I mean that if this particular assignment is not turned in, credit for the class will not be given.  Of course, if a student is absent that day, s/he should be permitted to visit office hours to get help if need be on the plagiarism topic.

@aparente001: While in theory that sounds nice, the problem is it implies that every course in every discipline loses a day for the parallel "what is plagiarism" lecture. And (at least at my institution) someone also recommends a day's lecture on classroom behavior/civility contracts. And also a day on accessibility/disability/UDL awareness. And maybe an intro diagnostic test. And how to read a text in one's discipline. And someone else recommends getting into meaty material ASAP to hook interest. There just isn't time for all of it.

@DanielR.Collins - I didn't give this intro in every class I taught.  I gave it in a class that taught technical writing for mathematics undergraduates. // Does the diagnostic test take the full period?  Could you farm it out to the same office that does placement tests for incoming students?  Is it possible to combine disability awareness with another topic, and/or incorporate it into multiple classes?

@aparebte001: "Could you farm it out to the same office that does placement tests for incoming students?" - even if there is such an office/placement test (depending on the university system, there may or may not be), there is always a couple of students who got in differently - via another institution as a regular part of their studies, in a year when the office still had different procedures, via some exchange programme whose participants do nit run through that office, ... You'll always end up with a couple of students who somehow never even learned that there is such an introductory ...

... information session on plagiarism for (in theory) everyone.

@DanielR.Collins Spell out your academic integrity (and classroom behavior, and accessibility, and other) policies in your syllabus, which is of course posted on your course web site; then you only need to cover highlights in class.  Even if you do spend significant classroom time on those policies, having an easily google-able written policy document is helpful for everyone.

@O.R.Mapper - Sorry, I didn't mean farm out the plagiarism explanation, I meant farm out the the diagnostic test.

If your institution keeps a record of academic misconduct, be sure this gets into the record.  If you don't do that, you enable serial cheating.
Do not allow a "do over."  The message you send is that there's no penalty for for misconduct, even if one gets caught.  Misconduct must have some irrecoverable penalty, however small.  It need not be a grade penalty; it could be extra work, but see below about setting a penalty.
Follow University policy if there is one.  If you have the opportunity to set the penalty, and I hope you do, consider the magnitude of the offense.  A single un-cited paragraph from a work listed in a bibliography is far less egregious than a substantial part of the work copied with no attempt at attribution.
It is not your problem that the student missed the plagiarism lecture.  Do not allow the student to make it your problem.
It is not your problem that the student might lose her visa.  Do not allow the student to make it your problem.

Misconduct must have some irrecoverable penalty, however small. It need not be a grade penalty; it could be extra work... - I'm not sure what you mean by "extra work" that would be an "irrecoverable penalty."  (I agree completely with all your other points.)

@Kimball Well, once the extra work has been done, the time spent doing it cannot be recovered.

@TobiasKildetoft True, but I don't think most students would view this as "irrecoverable."  I would also argue that they skipped the work they were supposed to do the first time around by plagiarizing, so in a net sense they are not necessarily irrecoverably using more time.

@Kimball  Although I didn't make it clear, I had in mind a lot of extra work; something like writing an entirely new paper on a similar subject plus an essay about the importance of citation, with citations and a non-trivial minimum length, all to be graded and with a grade of A necessary to escape further penalty.

Just to offer a perspective on the background of international students, especially those from underdeveloped countries from Asia, the concept of plagiarism is virtually non-existent. More precisely, students graduating from high schools in those country will probably have never heard about how plagiarism is a serious offense in developed countries like such as U.S. Like, they would not have the faintest clue about the gravity of the whole plagiarism issue.
I was one of those students and know for a fact that every single student in my high school never knew how much important citation and biography are when they were writing a paper in high school. This was literally the biggest "culture" shock I had experienced in my first year of studying in the U.S
However, I am not saying that you should not penalize the student. But if a single academic misconduct on plagiarism automatically means the student will lose his/her visa and if the student happens to be from a similar place that I was from, then maybe it would make reasonable sense to arrange something so the visa stays untouched.

It's hard to imagine a better learning opportunity than this.  And anyway, do we want to destroy her life, or help her learn a very important lesson?
Be creative, be effective.  For example, in addition to giving her an incomplete and having her re-do the assignment, you could reduce her final grade by one letter (i.e. from B to C), and you could have her write a separate research paper describing three famous plagiarism scandals of her choice.
To quote a classic story:

At a certain school in [your region here] some girls were beginning to use lipstick, putting it on in the school bathroom. After they put on their lipstick, they pressed their lips on the mirror, leaving dozens of little lip prints.
Every night, the maintenance man removed the prints, but the next day,
  the girls put them right back. Finally, the principal decided that
  something had to be done. She called all the girls into the bathroom
  along with the maintenance man. She explained that all these lip
  prints were causing a major problem for the custodian, who had to
  clean the mirrors every night. This inspired yawns from all the little
  princesses.
To demonstrate how difficult it was to clean the mirrors, she asked
  the maintenance man to show the girls how much effort was required. He
  took out a long-handled squeegee, dipped it in the toilet, and cleaned
  the mirror with it. Since then there have been no lip prints on the
  mirror.
There are teachers… and then there are educators.

As a graduate student instructor, I encountered these problems occasionally.  In one case, as an example, of a student who had not done his own programming, the end result was that he had to take the class again in the summer.  He learned to write simple programs, and he learned to hand in his own work, not someone else's.  And he got a Bachelor's degree.

@Roland - There are worse things, e.g. cheating in a final exam; and this mistake has a remedy: redo the assignment, and do an extra project.  Is our function as teachers to go around judging and punishing, or helping students understand and improve?  At least now she's paying attention.

@aparente001 The only scenario in which you are doing the judging and punishing is in the one you advise. In the official procedures there would be a committee weighing the evidence and situation to decide the appropriate course of action. You, as the professor, would be a witness; not judge, jury, or (metaphorical) executioner. Plus as a professor you have administerial duties to the department and university, as well.  You're not a pure teacher. Not to say I haven't seen many professors take things into their own hands and avoid the official procedures, but your analogy is rather mistaken.

@zibadawatimmy - Which analogy? // The student already admitted to her guilt. // How is the young woman expected to learn from the experience if you take away her visa and kick her out of the university, and the country?

@Roland - I see no reason OP should not collaborate with department administrators about the problem.

@Roland - As a graduate student instructor, I had students who cheated on homework and attempted to cheat on exams, and I've had students who plagiarized.  In all cases, I worked with the department administration to address the problem.  Administration invariably sought the solution that enabled the student to learn the lesson.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

@aparente001 And what would other students learn from the experience? The more severe the personal consequences would be, the less severe the official ones will be? So actually, the worse my offense is for me the less I will be punished? That is not a good lesson to learn.

@skymningen - Please see my response in chat.


text:
Faculty job search (one year from graduation/starting postdoc)
I am reaching out to get a piece of friendly advice on the search process for a faculty job worldwide.
I was awarded a PhD in Pure Mathematics from a Russel Group university in July 2018. I started a postdoc during my PhD, and it is has been now one year and a month of my postdoc. I wrote the grant for my postdoc and my doctoral advisor secured the funding.
My research interests are in analysis on quantum groups and noncommutative spaces, contractions of Lie groups, geometric quantisation.
I have 12 preprints and nine are published, and more are coming. There are 48 citations of my papers in Google Scholar.
I have put my best efforts in the application materials.
At the moment, I have applied for 145 faculty jobs mainly in the USA (  both tenure-track and non-tenure-track).
My references for the applications are the tenured recognised professors and heads of the departments in Europe.
Could anyone in the community share a piece of friendly advice on what I might be doing wrong?
My sole aim is to improve and suit the faculty search.
Unfortunately, I have not been given any constructive feedback so far (cold, formal e-mails mostly).
The time scale is from mid-November 2018 - up until now.
I followed up with 6-8 e-mails and received cold written official rejection e-mails (eight overall).  The rest are keeping silence. I have not had any interviews yet.
Many thanks to everyone who replied!

You don't say enough about the results of your 145 applications. Nor about the time scale over which they were sent. It sounds like a pretty good CV to me, actually. Have you had interviews? I don't know the current state of the employment market in mathematics, but in the past there have been times when it was just that bad, actually.

6-8 emails? Can you clarify? You didn’t send 6-8 emails to each department, right?

Did you mean tenure-track and non tenure-track instead of tenure and non tenure?

Sure @Dawn. No, I only sent one e-mail to 6-8 departments.

There are lots of applicants with qualifications similar to yours applying for positions everywhere.  You might not be doing anything at all wrong, but the job market is so competitive that you still might not end up with a position.  Thus the premise of your question- that you're doing something wrong might simply be incorrect.

You are not doing anything wrong, at least not more wrong than many of us here.

One cay say that is is wrong that research and education are so under-funded and under-appreciated in modern society.
One can say that it is wrong that academia sometimes is such an unwelcoming and tough place. Providing zero feedback to unsuccessful candidates is a norm in academia, but would not be appropriate in IT industry sector, for example. This is extremely discouraging and damaging for people at the start of their careers. Another example is visa fees, which would be compensated in industry, but usually not compensated by universities, making international  scientists essentially to pay for the privilege of working at a university in a first-world country. This is wrong, but academia goes away with it as there are always enough people who wants the job bad enough.
One can say that over-production of PhDs, driven by managerial approach to tenure and promotion in academia, is wrong, as it makes young people to spend many years and a lot of money pursuing something which eventually may not increase their chances for successful employment, but instead make them overqualified and unemployable in many "real-world" jobs.

I wish you good luck with your job search and future career.

In principle not all STEM phds are supposed to stay in academia. Some will work in industry to participate in technology transfer or develop proprietary technology, and there's plenty of industrial positions where phd is good to have. I guess, it is a bit sad when a phd graduate has to take a generic IT or office job, but that does not happen to everyone who leaves academia.

Thank you, @Dmitry, for your wishes. Your remark is valuable to me,@Alexey. I am keeping my eyes open for research positions in industry.

I have three suggestions:
First, it is possible that your application documents are not hitting the right notes. You could consider a document review service for this.
Second, you may ask your post doc supervisor or any of your letter writers to personally reach out to their contacts at a few departments on your behalf. The best would be departments where you would like to be but that are only moderately competitive. The idea is to signal your sincere interest and their sincere endorsement.
Third, make sure you are networking in the US. I would suggest presentations at as many conferences as you can swing. Make sure to go to talks and ask smart questions. Be very open about the fact that you are on the market. Good luck!

Documents need to be not only grammatically correct, they also need to be clear, persuasive, and strike the right tone. There is a company that I have used called The Professor is In that provides this service, and they also have a book about improving your materials. I dramatically improved my documents with this help.

Thanks for sharing your advice with me, @Dawn. I reached to five professors in the US and Canda and three of them encouraged me to apply. I have not yet been to the conferences much. I will do all these things as soon as possible.

I would say if you are getting encouragement to apply, but you don't make it past the first round (no interviews), you really need to look at the quality of your documents. Capturing your work in a sound bite (just a few sentences, making it catchy to those outside of your subfield) is an art.

Dear @Dawn. How much was the book you used? Could you please share more details on your experience with the Professor is In?

Dear @Dawn. Did you get a faculty job after improving your documents with the help of the book?

Around $13. I have less than the median number of pubs in my field and I got two TT faculty offers at R2 schools. I had 8 flyouts at R1 and R2 schools.

I have also received both of the grants I have applied for since reading the book.

Thanks for your response. I will try to get the book. Just confirming, you are mathematician, right ?

No I am an economist. I think the principles apply, although you will have to translate to your field.

Dear @Dawn. I should thank you for suggesting the book. I received it, and it is helping me right now. I also reached out to Karen and waiting for her response at the moment. Would mind sharing average waiting time and what documents are the top priority to review and edit? I am grateful to you for sharing your experience.

Chances are you're not doing anything wrong, but in your area few good academic positions are available, and you may need to wait for your CV to build up and also for the stars to align right. People I know would get a permanent academic job (in the UK or Continental Europe) after up to 5 years of postdoc, less if they wanted a teaching-only position, without doing research.

I will give my perspective

I am also ahead of the publication curve for peers in similar career stages as me in my field.
I applied to a broad range of institution for tenure positions ranging from elite R1's to R2's.

To me, the application process felt like it had more to do with luck than anything else. I was interviewed and offered a position at an institute I wanted to be at which was very nice though. But as far as the other institutions, there was no rhyme or reason. It felt like playing a numbers game.
I thought, 'is my research not really exciting?', 'should i have funded grants', 'was there something wrong with my letters of recommendation?'.
In short, I did not really have an answer. All I could do was keep applying and publishing.
I also found out that not only was I competing against my fellow doctoral graduates, but also faculty looking to move up.
I also found out that my CV sent the wrong signals to universities without as strong research records. A graduate with a strong research record is going to want to go to an R1. R2's and R3's are going to know this and might not want to have to go through the hiring process again when a research orientated faculty member moves up the academic ladder.

It's probably mostly just an issue of competition and your profile versus presentation.  However, your question here had a few examples of grammar mistakes showing non-native English (e.g. omitted article).
I would make sure all your documents have flawless, native-seeming English.  After that, of course, it is still a competitive situation on the merits.


text:
How long do university libraries keep old copies of dissertations?
How can I get a copy of a dissertation that I need for my research?

Go to a good library and check what they have on offer...

Libraries generally try to keep them forever. My PhD thesis is entirely digital and available online, but it was required to print one copy for long term preservation as a last resort in case pdfs go extinct.

In the US, many universities required (and may still) that dissertations be catalogued by Proquest, which used to use the name University Microfilms: https://www.proquest.com/products-services/dissertations/. You can order reprints from them. But they aren't free. Libraries may be able to get you a temporary copy for free.

Disagree with "hold".  The question is a little awkwardly written between title and question, but other than that seems very on topic.  General academic question.  Good one.  Buffy's comment in particular is the core of a good answer.

The latest edit makes the question unclear. Are you interested in how long a university library typically keeps copies of theses? Or are you interested in how you'd go about getting hold of some old thesis?

I suspect that that differs from university to university, and country to country, but I would not be surprised if the answer is "for as long as they can preserve the paper". I remember finding the master's thesis of my (fairly old) teacher when I was a high-school student.
On the other hand, it may be the policy of some university / library to digitalize them  (or in the old days, to put them on microfilm) after a given amount of time to save space in the library. This depends on how much money / time they have for that effort, and how much space they have in the library. It is easy to imagine huge differences between universities and countries in these different costs, resulting in different policies.
Regardless, you should expect that people will be able to find your dissertation for as long as you live (and afterwards).

There are digitizing programs going on in many libraries to prolong the existence of many documents... And just been to the British Library to locate the thesis of one of my Professors - done in 1987 and it is there...

In Germany: Forever, unless the library burns down, and since you have to hand in many copies you should be able to locate an issue. Use worldcat.org to locate copies worldwide. And yes, please re-open the question.


text:
Should I compare my proposed work with my implementation of the previous related papers or the reported result?
In computer science, I need to compare the accuracy of my proposed method to the previous ones. There are two possible options:

Implement the methods described in related papers on my own machine
Use the claimed results of the authors

Sometimes, when I implement the other papers, the results are different from the claimed ones, because of a lack of details, parameters and hyperparameters. What is the correct decision? Should I compare my work with the implemented one?
In addition, sometimes the reports of the previous works are on a different dataset and I have to implement the code. Is it the correct way?

Related reading: How should I compare my algorithm to others when their code is not available? and What should you do if you cannot reproduce published results?

I'd say, as a rule you just rely on the results provided by the authors of the papers you cite. You aren't really supposed to reimplement their algorithm just to confirm their results.
Let's dive a bit deeper, especially from a reviewer's point of view. When a reviewer sees that your method in a certain way superior to a previously published work, this is exactly what is expected, so everyone is happy. If you can't prove that your method is better because you use a different dataset, it's quite a problem (for both you and the reviewer), and in general case it would be very advisable to get the same data. Perhaps, this is the first step to take.
If you can't get the same dataset and try to reimplement the algorithm, of course it opens the whole can of worms, since the reviewer might rightfully presume that your implementation is somehow different (due to different parameters or possible bugs) and thus incomparable. I'd say that a common valid scenario for such a venture is when you doubt the original paper's conclusions and want to confirm or disprove them.
As a side note, I think one should decide on the evaluation strategy before designing and implementing own methods. If you want to advance the state of the art, it's reasonable to check the existing papers first and make sure that you can get the same dataset as their authors to show that your method is more accurate on the same data.

1) Comparing with results that other authors report is in all likelihood acceptable.
2) However, published results shouldn't by uncritically believed, so it is better (in the sense of being a better service to science) to replicate other authors' results. Also, who knows, in case reported good results do not replicate you have another argument against a competitor and in favour of your method.
If information to do that is not sufficient in the paper you're citing (which reviewers of that paper should have criticised in my opinion), the most reliable way of doing that is to ask the authors for their code (if it isn't available anywhere anyway, that is).
3) If the authors don't share their code it is a good thing in my view to try to replicate their results using your own code (although in case you can use published results it is not mandatory for your publication, see point 1). If you find differences, it's best to contact the original authors about this, but you are also well within your rights to say in your paper that these results deviate from the original ones despite making your best attempt to replicate them. In any case you should acknowledge that this is your implementation, and list any decisions made by you for the implementation that are not obvious from the original paper. Once more, this is more work than just using their reported results and in all likelihood not required for publication, however the reward is a certain chance to find something that you can use against a competitor (I of course mean this in a purely peaceful way, but implicitly assuming that you want to write a paper and readers and reviewers may want to know what makes your method worthwhile compared with XXX).
I add (belatedly) that apart from the value for the specific publication you may have in mind, I learned a few valuable things trying to replicate other people's work.
4) The other respondents are right about only comparing what's comparable, see their answers.

Computational complexity is a useful tool for measuring performance and comparing results. For instance, sorting algorithms are compared this way. But, what is appropriate for you really depends on what it is you're solving.

This would depend on how you are measuring things. If the results are simple timings then machine speed/architecture can matter (a lot). But if you are, for example, counting comparisons, then the result is independent of machine speed.
Be sure that you are comparing apples to apples and not apples to peanuts.

I need to compare the accuracy of my work to other papers and it is independent of the speed and architecture.

I don't know all the parameters, of course. But "apples to apples" was the important part.


text:
exam/teaching culture, possible abusive supervisor, research gatekeeping
Apologies for the length, I don't know how to make this shorter. I also don't know where else to turn for advice. :(
I've recently started an MA in what promises to be a brand new humanities discipline that is not yet well established, and (critically) expects and requires a profoundly interdisciplinary approach. I have a BS, although my undergraduate program of study was effectively interdisciplinary as I took a wide range of classes from various humanities departments, far beyond what was necessary to complete my BS.
I'm now living on a different continent and the cultural expectations around exams and teaching here are... weird. Essentially, the exams test almost exclusively for recall rather than understanding, and there is little critical reflection about this amongst staff nor students. It's not uncommon for students at master's level to cram 50-100 pages of summary just in case the exam asks for flawless recall of one particular scholar's jargon-heavy wording of a discipline-specific concept. Students who have grown up under this culture find it to be entirely normal and seem confused when I bring it up as an issue.
To make matters more complicated, I get weird vibes off the department head. Being around him there's always a sense of danger. Fellow students talk about being scared of him. His exams are known to be especially nasty even within this culture of recall instead of understanding (an engaged, motivated classmate left his last exam in tears after 15 minutes, and is now convinced they should drop out because they feel like are a bad academic and will never make it). He has some concerning teaching habits and attitudes:

instead of teaching, he simply reads out dense jargon-heavy essays (to a class of 20, many of whom do not come from a humanities background) and doesn't check if we understand (we generally do not)
doesn't let us ask questions during the lectures (likely because he won't get through reading his essay if we do), reacts derisively if we suggest he slows down, does not want us to record his lectures because otherwise "we won't learn to take notes"
deliberately makes his slides cryptic to (in his words) give an advantage to people who attend the lectures
sets entire books as related readings, rather than chapters or papers
appears to take pleasure in setting particularly difficult recall-based exams (a summary we prepared privately ran to 100 pages and the exam had multiple questions testing pure recall of single lines from the pages)

His course is compulsory and effectively gatekeeps the degree. This seems fundamentally at-odds to the interdisciplinary, "paradigm-challenging" verbiage that the staff associate with the program. He has a follow-up course in the second semester which he claims is "even harder". I have approached other staff in the department, but they seem to be confused about my issues with this culture of teaching and examination, and see little fundamental problem with it. It's reached the point where I'm considering quitting the program even though it is the only one of its kind with a 500 mile radius of where I live, and it is likely the only chance I have to get an MA without going through a BA undergrad (I'm an autodidact and have read broadly in the 15 years since completed my undergrad; based on my ability to understand and assimilate the theory he's been throwing at us so far, doing a BA would be redundant and a waste of my time).
The result of all this and of my conversations with staff is that I no longer trust that the program staff nor the director have my interests at heart. The bad lecturer I describe above would be the only person in the university qualified to supervise the thesis I want to write, but his interpersonal presence raises red flags that bring to mind abusive and/or passive-aggressive people I have worked with in the past. The discipline has a well-known history of small groups engaging in petty, sexist gatekeeping behavior in order to get their particular interpretation of the discipline established, and I start to view this program as engaging in the same pattern of behavior, consciously or otherwise.
My purpose for wanting an MA is to obtain access to the research community - on the one hand through socialization (access to people that will help me learn to write good abstracts, and to write and think at master's level); and on the other hand, to jump through an apparently-required hoop, as I have noticed already that some segments of the research community just won't take me seriously if I don't have at least a master's degree.
I know this is long but I also know that politics and abusive behavior and manipulation are wide-spread within academia. Concrete questions follow:

What are my options here? Have you been in a similar situation? What should I do? Common-sense would advise gritting my teeth and getting through it (it's only two years). Another common-sense would advise getting the hell out of there. Which should I listen to?
Would it be advisable to take the staff at their word and write off their odd behavior as evidence of ignorance of how things are done elsewhere (especially w.r.t exams)? At least one staff has expressed openness to my concerns, but I get the impression he is much sharper and more calculating than his cultivated "teddybear" persona would suggest, so I'm not sure if he's just saying that to make me go away.
How accurate is my perception of research communities, generally? Is it advisable to attempt to make a career as an independent researcher without at least a master's degree?

Can you specify the country or place of the world where this is happening?

@DmitrySavostyanov It's in western (continental) europe. Sorry I can't be more specific without revealing enough to identify the programme.

What is this program's reputation in the research community, specifically in the country/region where you want to pursue research yourself? The behavior you describe seems abusive, but more importantly(?), it also seems entirely unfit for purpose—research ain't about memorization.

Memorizing and authoritarian "teaching" style? Sounds like France.

Your experience is anything but typical. What you should do is leave, and find a better place that has a different philosophy and set of practices. It is hard to say what you should do if that solution is closed to you. The best I can say is to find a way to endure it in the short term and work with others in the longer term.
The fact that this person is head of department makes it especially difficult to stay, of course.
No, graduate education is, in general, nothing like what you describe, though some professors can be very demanding. But "demanding" and "supportive" is vastly different from "demanding" and arrogant.
And independent researcher doesn't need much in the way of credentialing, though it is much harder to build up an initial reputation without those credentials. It would be good to get an advanced degree, but not, likely in a situation like you now face.

Although I agree with your points in principle, they probably cover what is considered typical in the western world (eg. US, EU). The norms differ widely in Asian countries, post-Soviet stans, continental China, etc. Your advice may be good or bad, depending on where the OP is.

@DmitrySavostyanov, are you saying that abuse and arrogance is more common in Asia...? I have no experience in such places, though I know some who have "escaped" from the old soviet union and tell horror stories. Those were mostly ethnic abuse, though, not just academic misconduct.

@Buffy I am saying that the statements about HE in general are rather senseless, as the HE standards and practices differ wildly across the globe. Abuse and arrogance probably happen everywhere, but US/EU have developed better systems to keep abuse and arrogance at bay, while in many other countries they still go uncontrolled and unpunished.

@CJ59 the abuse refers to a general pattern of interpersonal and teaching behavior. the bad exam and poor teaching style are just aspects of this, and may not be being done deliberately. emotional abuse is unfortunately often very difficult to quantify beyond 'my gut doesn't like this'.

@CJ59, yes, grad school is hard, but the described behavior seems over the top to me. Nowhere does it sound like a valid attempt to actually teach.

I too has to agree that the work abuse has been somewhat overused recently and may or may not be appropriate in this case. It was not my intention to claim abuse has happened, I merely answered @Buffy's comment using their exact wording.

I think the word "abuse" is entirely appropriate here.

Just wanted to say thanks - i have moved to a different university and am much happier now.

I find this answer to not provide context of where it would be considered atypical or typical.

Sorry to hear that but sadly things like that are very common and practically the average norm around the world. At least I can vouch on such for latinamerica and for some asian countries where the value of memorization of knowledge is considered more important than understanding such knowledge or producing any useful research along the respect for the seniority and ego of senior professors that are normally in unions (and that can be considered real mafia, like in México) and have no incentives to improve but rather to keep the status quo.
You aren't there to learn you are there to be taught. That is how it's seen and academia is very stale. If you check around the academia exchange you will see that there are many people wondering your question around the world like:

At a loss after enrolling into PhD programme
One year into PhD, feeling lost and inadequate, Help!
Just started PhD, feel lost and abandoned
I am currently debating whether to leave my PhD program- any advice
How to cope with feelings of powerlessness on a PhD?

And way many more. If you see the answers and comments you will notice that its very unpopular when the reality of the situation is mentioned. People get offended when suffering cognitive dissonance about the realities of academia.
The question you should be asking yourself is, what do you want for yourself? If you really want to get a PHD then check your resources and decide on affordability and your own tolerance to this situations. On the good part it's only 2 years, but 2 years where you will have to remember yourself constantly that you are doing this solely for the paper at the end and the rest dont matter, OR if it does mater to you , you could try switching program, but you will have to remember that this kind of stuff does happens everywhere, so you'd have to be careful and research with previous PHDs on that program how it went.

You criticize me for not defining "typical" and yet you say "very common". Not the same thing, of course. But I entered grad school in the mid 1960's and retired as a professor more than a decade into this century. I never saw a case like this. And I worked for and with some pretty strange people at times.

And "You aren't there to learn you are there to be taught." is one of the strangest ideas I've ever heard.

@Buffy Could you provide info on which countries you have experience with and an proximate number and level of schools? You entered academia at a more...stable and less diverse time and you seem from perhaps USA or maybe western Europe. Also you retired years ago. You personalty never saw other cases, but your sample is too small to be representative of a population of statistical significance. For example, if out of all of America you mention only USA there is no way to have any significant average for the continent.

@Buffy  "You aren't there to learn you are there to be taught." Is in wide the prussian model of education still widely used around the world, remember too the 'La letra con sangre entra'. Not too long ago teachers were allowed to give physical punishment to students.


text:
How to address reviewer's suggestion for new experiments, the results of which have been communicated elsewhere?
I received review comments on a manuscript submitted about 6 months back. One of the reviewers suggested performing a few new experiments. But the same experiments were performed recently and the results have already been communicated elsewhere for possible consideration. How should I address the comment?

I think you should ask the editor. They may  decide to go ahead and publish your paper, or want to wait for the results of the new experiments to appear. In either case you should revise the paper to discuss the new experiments.

I have discussed the findings of the new results in the new manuscript. I am worried that discussing the same in this manuscript will amount to self-plagiarism.

It's not self plagiarism if it's cited/acknowledged; That's independent of whether or not the editor allows it..

I think @EthanBolker's suggestion is spot on: ask the editor. Additionally, if your field is permissive of preprints, you may be able to submit and cite a preprint of the work you've already submitted for review - check the policies of the journal you've already submitted to. Depending on the delays for review on each paper you may be able to update the citation before publishing or it may remain with the preprint, either is fine.

The journal does not permit citing articles under review.

@196104002 Including preprints? The preprint is not really under review. What is your field?

My field is Civil Engineering. What if I cite the preprint/manuscript under review and that gets rejected?

@196104002 Preprints can't really be rejected.

Sorry, could you explain what is a preprint?

@196104002 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preprint

Thanks. Both journals do not allow preprints.