text:
Why is colour use in academic writing disapproved?
This question involves only wary use of ≤ 3 readable colours (e.g. an author used 3 colours: black for text, green for quotations, and blue for headings). One benefit is immediate distinction of an author's, from others', writing.
Drawbacks
The use of multiple colours by many textbooks substantiates both drawbacks as conquerable.

Colour printing costs feel paltry and immaterial, as readability ought be prioritized. A reader of a PDF can always choose to print in black and white.

The visually impaired who are harmed by colour, can again print in or convert to BW.

Others may feel that the minimal impact of color to portray textual information that already has standard ways to delineate (like quotes) is not a good trade off for, say, the significant number of people with color blindness.

I’m not sure I agree with the premise. I use color all the time in papers. Overuse of color is potentially problematic, but I think that is true in all formal writing, not just academic writing.

From recent experience, one reason to avoid colour is that it makes it really expensive to print out your thesis! (at least if your university, like mine, reckons that a colour page costs 5x as much to print as a black one...)

@Flyto Nowadays most institutions don't require many print-outs of your thesis because you also submit it electronically. Most theses are a once or twice in a life-time occurrence and that puts these cost considerations in perspective. Most theses have colored graphs anyway.

@Roland that differs to a very large extend from country to country and university to university

@roland this year, in the UK, I was required to submit three copies prior to my viva, plus I needed my own copy to take notes on.
After corrections, I must submit three more printed and bound copies, plus any for myself and my supervisors.
In total, I think the supposed "value" of all the printing will come to at least £500 (fortunately I didn't pay for it all).
I think this is still fairly standard in the UK.

And if we're talking journal publication, including a single colour figure  can cost an author more than a thousand US dollars. See e.g.: https://journals.aps.org/authors/color-figures-print

@GeoffreyBrent Who cares about printing fees? Just use the Colors Online Only option. I don't know anybody who still gets journals in print.

Because then all readers need to bleach their eyes, which comes with significant health concerns.

Green for blockquotes is fine to me, but I see no need for blue headings when huge bold font already properly typeset them.

People who are good at doing research aren't necessarily the best graphic designers. In fact most are pretty awful graphic designers. For good reason: learning to be a good graphic designer takes a lot of time and practice. So most good researchers do not have time to also become a good designers.
So if I see a researcher trying to be fancy in his design (e.g. use colors) I will automatically assume the design is going to be awful and most of the time that assumption will be correct. So I don't have a aversion to colors in academic writing per se, but it is an extremely reliable warning sign for me that some bad design is coming.
So my general advise to students is to focus on the content and keep the design as minimal as possible.

Most journals and book publishers follow a consistent house style, which authors have to implement. This leaves authors very little discretion over design choices (probably for the better).
When it comes to colored figures, which are usually allowed, each additional color costs money. With xerox printing, this is now less than ten years ago, when for each primary color, the page had to run through an additional stage of the offset printer, but it still adds considerable costs. Of course, this only applies if the text is printed at all.
Some textbooks use colors and other graphic design elements. If well done, this can help to convey information rather than distract from it. But in order for it to be well done, it needs to be taken care of by a professional designer.
With respect to individual manuscripts, you can of course do whatever you want. But unless you have a talent for design, it's easier and more efficient to use a standard template and to follow "less is more" as a rule of thumb. It is also safer, because aesthetic judgement is quite subjective, and because more people overestimate their design talent than underestimate it.
Moreover, academics are a conservative bunch when it comes to scientific conventions; and they tend to suspect that "eccentric" form only serves to cover up weak substance.
Finally, one remark about color blindness. Colorblind people can see colored objects quite well, they just can't tell the difference between certain colors (mostly red vs green). Therefore, colored text doesn't hurt them (unless you use red type against green background), nor does it help them to print a colored document in black and white.

I believe color still requires multiple passes per page, so that's why many journals allow "color online" options and then print in black and white if the authors don't pay for color in print.

@aiesmail yes, but I think it was more costly back when offset was the only norm. Big xerox machines, printing on demand, are now becoming more common.

A researcher SELDOM has time for proper graphic design. The one who tried to do this in my environment ran out of time during his PhD.
Certain publication venues ask that publications remain intelligible when printed in black-and-white.
Certain publishers charge (or charge more) for every colored page. The employers (universities, research institutions) might not wish to support this in addition. At home, a researcher doesn't necessarily get support for such a kind of spending.

"A researcher SELDOM has time for proper graphic design."  Skipping graphic design does not actually save time.  One of the most common comments I put in a peer review is "The labels on the figure are too small to read."  So the authors have to do the work over again when it would have been faster to do it right the first time.

The real question is rather: do you have actually any real evidence that your use of color improves readability in any way? It seems to be your main argument, but I don't believe it holds any water.
How does writing quotes in green improve readability? I don't see how. Quotes do not need to stand out from the text, otherwise we would already write them in italics, for example. Similarly, headings already stand out from the text: they are usually in a bigger font, in bold, and/or separated from the rest of the text by white space. Does writing them in blue achieve anything at all?
You also say that your goal is to stand out from other authors. You say this as if it were a good thing. My gut feeling is that most people will rather think: "Why does this author want to stand out by coloring their paper like a children's book? Is their research so weak that they need to stand out in another way?"
It is also rather inconsiderate to say "color blind people can just print the paper in black and white". You are requiring extra effort from people who already face some struggle in their daily life, for barely any reason.

Your sentence about the gut feeling is very interesting. Indeed, I also have the impression that many people look down on good designed graphics and feel the research can not be good. This is a shame, as many papers and textbooks could be improved by better graphics and adding colors (but in a different way as the user "Greek - Area 51 Proposal" discribes).

From the design aspect an academic paper holds intense information and the reader will spend considerable time reading it. You do not want to have too many colors on anything that the user will spend long hours interacting with it. It is tiresome for the user(reader in this case).

In text I agree. In graphics color can make a huge difference and help with understanding.

@DSVA, true, but even here it's important that the figure still "works" in black and white.


text:
Price difference between master's and phd programs
I heard from a friend that master's programs tend to be more expensive because master's students don't have advisors or as much university funding for their time in academia. However, sources online seem to only indicate to me that the PhD is more expensive. Can someone clear this up?

What do you mean by price? In which country?

In the US. There's tuition payments associated with attending university for a master's or a doctoral program. Anecdotal evidence tells me that a master's program has less aid available for tuition, and so a greater net price, than a doctoral program.

Kenny, people upvote comments they think that are relevant. They are not sending to you a message through upvotes. Everything is clear now.

I have often heard “You should never have to pay to get a PhD.” This may be due to my field (mathematics) though... Most college students take at least one math class, so almost all universities are willing to pay for many PhD students to teach their lower level math classes. I don’t think the same funding is as readily available to math master’s students.

Can you clarify which field? STEM PhD positions are almost always funded (full tuition + a few thousand per month for expenses); whereas humanities positions are more rarely funded.

What sources are you looking at?

Masters students are often unfunded. That is, they have to pay (most of) the tuition fee. Against that, PhD students are typically funded. That is, they are paid to study. Here's an example. The student here is not only paid a monthly stipend of $2000/month, (s)he doesn't have to pay tuition fees.
In other words, yes, it's often cheaper to do a PhD than a Masters. Caveats apply: it's possible you may not be offered funding (in which case a PhD is also more expensive). Also, since a PhD takes longer than a Masters, if you graduate with a Masters and then get a well-paid job immediately, the extra income might be enough to compensate for the price difference.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
VAP or lecturer?
I'm coming off of a 1 year visiting position. I'd like to focus more on teaching than research, but to still keep research active if possible.
Two positions open to me are a 1 year VAP (possible 2 year) at a liberal arts school or a lecturer at a large public school. Both are similarly ranked in their respective categories (~top 40).
The lecturer position is essentially a permanent position, but there is a higher teaching load and not much room for research. I have to admit however that I don't want to be on the market forever, and given the cost of living there I think I could still be comfortable. Additionally, even without research I imagine it would be helpful for teaching-oriented positions if went back on the market. On the other hand, I have the impression that the nature of the VAP, (2/2 or 2/3 load, with research potential) would be better looking for more blended potential tenure-track positions.
I know the decision is mine based on what's best for my particular needs (for example, the VAP is much closer to family) but objectively for a career trajectory, does one make more sense than the other? Just trying to get ideas at this stage. Any similar experiences, anecdotes, cautionary tales etc. would be helpful!

My experience (based on chairing four search committees for tenure track and lecturer positions in mathematics in the last four years) is that full time lecturers tend to very rapidly become non-competitive for tenure track positions due to a lack of research productivity.  If you want to compete for a tenure track position at an institution where research is expected then you would probably be better off staying in VAP positions with a lighter teaching load for another year or two while you continue to search for a tenure track position.

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


text:
Are there journals in science communication (STEM field) that allow technical notes?
I've written a small piece of software which allows users to gain easy access to nice visualization of computed chemical reactions. It's great having such videos in a presentation in a professional environment but it's also nice for teaching or just science communication, even simple videos get quite a lot of views on youtube and they can be used for sparking interest in STEM careers.
I was thinking about writing a small tutorial about how to produce data to visualize using freeware and how to handle the software to make such videos in addition to providing the software. Since I'm already producing a manuscrip I thought I might be able to publish it rather than just putting it on a preprint server.
However, it's out of scope for the chemistry journals I've looked at and also the chemistry education journal. I thought about science communication journals (terrible search phrase) but all that I could find are reporting on research regarding science communication and tools helping with science communication don't seem to fit.
Any idea where such an article could be published?

For physics, I'd say the American Association of Physics Teachers has a journal going back quite some ways (at least the 1960's). It looks like the American Association of Chemistry Teachers (teachchemistry.org) has recently launched a periodical and would probably love some content.

This might be off-topic, but: in Astronomy & Astrophysics there are sections 12. Atomic, molecular, and nuclear data, and 15. Numerical methods and codes. If you can connect/find applications (even remotely) of your work to astro, you might consider submitting there. Or, if you find it unfeasible, maybe some info in the link will give you some ideas about how/what/where to look in your field. In the worst case, my comment will be just useless (sorry).


text:
Should I pursue a PhD if I am clearly not qualified for it?

I know this board isn't meant to answer deep personal questions, so I try to keep this rather general as it is kind of related to this and this.

I pursued the goal of getting a PhD / doing research for a long time. Mostly for personal (/ego) reasons.
Now, as I am about to finish my master's degree, it becomes more and more clear, that I am probably not qualified for a doctorate. I prolonged the time on both of my degrees. My grades are average at best and I rarely enjoyed sitting in lectures. I am particularly bad at writing anything scientifically like my thesis, papers or even emails (which leads to massive procrastination and delay on this tasks). Researching on theoretical topics is often difficult for me as I tend to skim most of the papers. And, to be honest, I enjoy practical tasks like creating, implementing or improving algorithms, the most.
Soon I have to decide if I find myself an industry job or a PhD program. But should I even pursue a PhD with this kind of flaws?

I find this a very strange question. If you're clearly not qualified to do PhD studies, you won't be accepted in the first place, so the question shouldn't arise. Besides, if you know you're not going to like doing PhD studies, why even apply? There's an off chance you'll hate every single industry job even more than you hate doing a PhD, but that's very unlikely.

It seems, that the advertisement industry which has the obligation to sell a phd-title to the ordinary student has failed in your case. Healing the shopping resistance can be done with a talk with your supervisor, watching advertisement from your university and imagine yourself what the benefits of a phd are.

Nothing has said that you're not qualified to be a researcher—getting good grades and being a good researcher are not entirely correlated, and having the skills for one is not necessarily a guarantee of success for the other.
What your comments suggest, though, is that you would likely not enjoy the process of getting a PhD. Given how long it takes to get a PhD, that's an awfully long time to spend being miserable.
So ask yourself:

What is it that I enjoy about research? Is it enough to justify all the drawbacks it would bring?

If you can't justify getting a PhD to yourself, don't make yourself miserable by forcing yourself to do something you don't want.

Thank you for your reply. What concerns me more than my grades is my limited ability to read and write scienfitically. I am not sure if I can learn this skill.

No one is innately born with those skills. They are learned over time. But jobs in industry certainly don't require the same level of writing as academic jobs do. So it might be a matter of "swallowing one's medicine" to get through the degree if a non-academic research career is what you want.

@Hendrik that is a skill you normally learn DURING your PhD!

Whether or not to enroll in a PhD program is a decision only you can make.  You can lay it at our feet, and some people may even feel tempted to point out that this or that thing you've written appears to point, logically, toward one or the other choice.  But let's suppose some respected stranger, or even someone you respect and are personally acquainted with, provides a bit of steering in one direction or another.  Are you ready to give up your free will to another person, and abdicate your ability to decide?
What we can do is mention some possible avenues you could use to collect more information to help you in your decision making process.  For example:

It is possible to do "career exploration" in both industry jobs and in academia.  You arrange a shadow for a day, in which you follow someone around as they go about their typical activities.
It is often possible to try out working in industry over the summer, or by taking a semester off school.  This would allow you to get your feet wet and find out more about what working in industry is like, in practice.
It's also possible to study one or two semesters of a PhD program and then reevaluate.  In other words, you wouldn't be signing a contract that would obligate you to keep going if you're no longer interested.

You like writing programs, it sounds like.  Well, there are PhDs that use the student's coding skills to great advantage.  Perhaps you like working on applications.  This can become a thesis if you immerse yourself in the field of application.
Note that the first step to working on improving one's study skills is to realize where one's weak areas lie.  Regardless of which direction you decide to go -- the realization you came to, and wrote about here, can spur you toward making progress with those shortcomings.  Becoming a better technical reader and writer would stand you in good stead in both environments.

Thank you for pointing out shadowing. I was able to work in several companies as a software developer while being at university and enjoyed it most of the time. I am quite confident that I could find a job in the industry if I wanted, because of this. Academia on the other hand fascinated me since childhood, but I can not say I ever got much hands-on experience other than my thesis and a few research oriented courses.

I wanted to write a comment - but it just becomes too long, so I'll use an answer instead.
I think there are an awful lot of cultural ifs and buts in this, so adding your location would help. I can look at it from a UK/EU angle and this might be quite different for other regions on this planet.
When I was in the UK, we had people come "back" to university at a later date for their PhD. One guy worked at a company doing programming/numerical modelling, another was in some way involved with railways I think.
This was in an engineering department at the university.
The term would be "mature student", which exists also for undergraduate and postgraduate degrees and is not particularly uncommon in the UK.
In fact, the classical route for many people in the UK is BSc (first or 2.1) and then a PhD IF they carry on to obtain a PhD.
The Masters is something people either get later in life or people from outside the UK obtain within the UK before continuing with a PhD.
Part of the reason being, that you'd have to self-fund a masters in the UK...
(Incidentally, a UK Masters is 1 year, while in the rest of the EU it is 2 ...)
On the other hand, I think it is rarer for people in the rest of the European Union to return to academia later and the Masters before a PhD/Doctorat is pretty much standard. There are people who return to academia post retirement as they find they now have the money and time to pursue their interests and some people do return to academia later, to, in a way, "make up for previous mistakes" (e.g. not caring enough about school, etc.).
So it does happen, though I don't think normally at the PhD level.
If you are in the UK or a country where it is not uncommon to return to academia later, it may be an idea to go into a "research & development" group at a company after your Masters degree. While the work there is very different from academic work and generally more applied, it will give you an idea whether you enjoy "this kind" of work.
If you do, you can consider returning to academia - maybe even with the support of you employer - and possibly work on an industry funded PhD which is generally more applied than the research council funded fundamental work.
Some countries/universities also allow "staple theses" (the UK does not I think), which basically require you to only add an introduction and effectively bind a number of papers together. (Whether this is good or bad is a different discussion...)
Implementing and improving algorithms is are "tasks" that can definitely be appreciated in research.
If you are good at doing this, then I'm sure groups that work on algorithms will appreciate the work - as will companies with in house code development.
Short of trying, you will never know whether you can obtain and whether you enjoy obtaining a PhD.
The type of supervisor will incidentally be also very important in this respect.
And be warned that your area of expertise may very well change during the PhD (at least in the UK). The guy who was programming? He ended up doing some experimental combustion work... - And I somehow arrived in chemistry and programming despite coming from (applied) mathematics...


text:
Is it a valid concern that a PhD student runs out of research ideas?
A PhD student "Alex" has a few years to impress their research lab advisor and then their dissertation committee.  During these years, I imagine that Alex will come up with some great ideas that can be modeled, simulated, and perhaps validated with physical experiments, etc.  It might feel that all of Alex's work "belongs" to the lab, and namely, to their lab director / advisor.  Then after several years of working at such a high-energy pace, does Alex have to worry about running out of ideas, and that they gave all their ideas away to their advisor?  Or does Alex have so much more to gain from sharing all of their best ideas and then receiving crucial feedback in return, and that the benefits far outweigh the 'costs'?

If "Alex" is a good and capable PhD student, I would not be worried about running out of ideas. If "Alex" isn't such a good student, and all his idea were really just ideas from someone else at that lab, or extensions of other peoples ideas, then he might run out of idea once he leaves that environment and nobody else is going to provide suggestions to him.

Research ideas tend to grow exponentially.

At the beginning, Alex is a student who doesn't know what's already been done -- no ideas (though maybe some interests)
As an undergraduate, Alex will start to have ideas based on what he reads and his experiences. Many of these will be off-topic, already done, or impossible.
Then Alex will spend time doing research "at the cutting edge" -- usually on someone else ideas (i.e., his advisor's). He'll now start to understand where the gaps are and what ideas could be developed, adapted, or applied to plug these gaps. Some of these ideas could be valuable.
As Alex continues to read the journals and perform his own research, he'll identify more and more ideas. The limiting factor is time: having ideas may be fast, but taking an idea from conception to publication always takes a long time, so Alex normally has a long list of ideas in the back of his mind.

So yes, Alex will gain by discussing his ideas with his advisor. In most cases though, students start by work on their advisor's ideas, which they gradually make their own and begin to supplement with their own ideas as they mature.

This is a straightforward and general outline of a researcher candidate. There are also cases where students by themselves have feasible ideas and even tries to write projects themselves mostly. In that case, and as I understood from the question, "Alex" worries that advisor might just take all the credits of his ideas and when Alex, presumably, runs out the ideas of his own, he will be left with nothing and his career collapses. I have seen such people, I have seen such advisors, please elaborate this side as well.

I like this answer because it doesn't mention any other title than graduating, which means one could be on point 4 without doing a PhD or a master.

Is your answer "No, it's not a valid concern, because things usually work out like this", or is it "Yes, it's a valid concern, although things usually work out like this"?

To add to this: Too many ideas, not enough time, is probably a good reason to want to supervise one's own students!

@GürayHatipoğlu: I'd say that someone who already as a student has ideas on their own will be even less likely to run out of ideas. And students with ideas on their own and able to write their own project proposals will have better chances to get away from bad advisors. OTOH, anyone may run into mental illness.

The same holds true, if you leave after any academic level (bachelor, master, phd) and start working in industry. Usually you will start again at the first stage, as you will work in a new subject, but progress much faster. Addionally to time there is another (connected) constaint: reality. Whatever you do has to solve a problem that is usually related to a customer, and therefore money. Hence most of the cool stuff will be done by students or interns, who have the luxury to spend month on a new idea/project.

Absolutely this. My rate of idea generation in various areas outstrips by at least an order of magnitude the time I have available to pursue them.

I am now at my 5th year as post-doc, and I do have much more ideas than time now. I share them with PhD students and coworkers, and try to make joint papers, as it is beneficial for both of us.

Ideas are cheap -- usually free. (Or even cheaper than free, having negative values - in many areas creators of ideas have to pay people to attend to them, like paying agents to plug their music and books.)   Most people already have far too many of their own ideas that they don't have time to do anything with.  It's unlikely they would get any benefit from stealing any more from anyone else.  Actually doing stuff is hard and involves money, time, effort and reward.

This sound reassuring, but in reality, I find that ideas gets stolen all the time. Ask around. If you lost an idea people will sympathise and tell you their own stories. Why do people steal ideas even though they are abundant? Not sure, maybe an idea sounds nicer when you hear it from someone else. Kinda like the kid who takes the toy a smaller kid is playing with even though he has his own

@Asdf Because humanity is diverse and abundant.  Some people are jerks. Others think you're over reacting (and sometimes you are). Nothing you can do about it.  More often than not sharing ideas is a net benefit to everyone.

Ideas are a dime a dozen. Really good ideas are not quite as common. And, while it is true that sometimes it is difficult to convince people of one's idea, people are less stupid than one gives them credit: "nostrification" of good ideas does happen - people hear them, they forget they heard them and they come up with them "independently".

Yes so the point is that the only way to demonstrate that your supposedly brilliant idea is, in fact, a brilliant idea, is to get the money, time, and other resources to implement it and show that it works. When you have finished doing that you can quickly publish and/or patent it then everyone will know that it was your idea. Unless you have made such a proof it's 99.9% likely to be another worthless random pub-talk idea.

The asker seem to be asking two questions: 1) will an active researcher run out of ideas and 2) should you share your ideas freely. For 1), the answer should in general be no. For 2), I will depart from most other people in this thread and say no. A good idea obviously hold a lot of potential value. If you share it prematurely with the wrong people, the cost of getting scoped is high.

Moreover, bad ideas have significant opportunity cost attached to them. Sometimes you have to pursue a bad idea even though you know it is bad, either because of sunk cost or because your advisor told you to do it. You can chose to argue with your advisor (this is not always wise), but they may also be tied up by promises made to colleagues or funding agencies.

The asker seem to suggest that they are providing their advisor with ideas rather than vice versa. If ideas grow exponentially, then it would be expected that advisors posses the most ideas. However, this does not seem to be the case. On average, I think advisors are a bit too far removed from the science part of academic work to have a lot of ideas. For example, it seems that they have stopped reading the literature. So if an advisor is mainly the receiver of ideas, in a sense they are the buyer, and therefore it would appeal to them to adopt the notion that ideas are cheap.

On the contrary, if the student is the provider or seller of ideas then he should adopt the notion that ideas are valuable. In sharing his ideas, the student is part of a transaction and should attempt to gain a good selling price. Here, a student is asking professors if ideas are cheap and they say yes. But as a student, this is not the perspective he should adopt, it is bad advice.

I suppose a good ol' cost-benefit analysis couldn't hurt. "Alex" should ask himself the following questions:

Could he have graduated anyway without sharing his idea? He might already be working on a promising thesis project and should focus his attention.
Could he have pursued his ideas without the infrastructure, funding, and support of the lab?
Does the lab in fact deserve most of the credits solely because of the infrastructure it provides? If he has followed through a research from ideation to funding proposals, to equipment purchase, to hiring and training support staff, to experimentation, to failed experimentation, to multiple failed experimentation, to data analysis, to conference events, to publication, he might agree that having an idea is perhaps the easiest part.
Without sharing/sacrificing his idea, could he have achieved the academic standing necessary to find funding to support researching his own ideas afterwards?
Without sharing his idea and pursuing it now, would the idea be discovered independently by other researchers easily?
Are the odds of discovering newer and better ideas as a result of pursuing this idea now worth more than losing some credits to his adviser?
Is there a way to timestamp an idea in his field? It is typical to keep an audited research logbook in postgraduate. Sharing his idea, by exchanging emails with his peers, can also serve as a means of attribution. Or by publishing a letter to a journal instead of an full-blown article. He might even burn some bitcoin to lock his discovery in the blockchain forever. If the work is important enough that historians will look back to the original research notes, losing attribution now may not have mattered.
Could he have framed this idea as a side project collaboration with another trusted P.I., such that at least his own lab cannot claim all credits?
Did he receive any peer feedback from within his own research area that his idea is indeed novel and practical and of academic interest and not done or proven false before?
As @cag51 accurately mentioned, he will have more ideas than he has time to pursue them.

I had various ideas for my PhD which I was sharing around, including with people who could make use of them.
One day, one of my fellow PhD students came to me mentioning that he read about neural networks (a very, very niche and theoretical area at that time) and that, maybe, this could be an idea I could think about.
I ended up with a PhD 70% around the use of neural networks, as an innovative way to approach some problems. I would not have done it if people around were not aware of my thoughts and did not come back with some feedback (for which I profusely thanked her in my thesis, she was I think right after my advisor and before the girlfriend, friends, parents and dog)

research

A PhD research is (in my mind) not like working for a company. You are doing research, science. At least in the past, science was a shared effort amongst all of humanity.
My suggestion (and I do think you are asking more for a "mindset", not law and regulations) would be this:

If Alex is in it for the long term, i.e. teaching and science, then he better get used to the idea of sharing more or less everything immediately. The question goes away then.
If Alex, instead gets the PhD simply to get a better post in the industry, later, then he doesn't need to worry anyways, because what he did during the PhD wouldn't matter that much, or at all, anyways (except for building up a network of possible company contacts to apply at).

That said, a smaller part of your question seems to be about burnout.  That, indeed, is something which not only Alex, but everybody working in a "brain-related" area needs to worry about a lot, these days. He most definitely wants to pace himself such that he stays ahead of the stress curve. This has little to do with the other parts of the question though, i.e., it does not matter for this whether his ideas "belong" to someone else.

Yes, sharing your ideas is the way to go in research. Your advisor is not your enemy, but a future colleague. People that keep ideas to themselves miss the point : get other people to adopt your ideas, and spread them.
It's a measure of your own success when people get to the point of saying your ideas as if they occurred naturally.
As for running out of ideas, don't worry, it's a kind of have or don't have situation. Some people have the creativity to do good research, and for others it's hard to find a semi original contribution. Experience helps, but people that have good ideas don't run out of them.
It's ok for many exchanges in research to be a bit asymmetric, let one partner be the wall against which you bounce ideas. A good wall (a good advisor) brings precious feedback, don't underestimate it, even just by bouncing the ball (your own idea) back with an unexpected spin. Finding a research colleague interested in what you do and collaborating with you is not a given in all contexts, enjoy it through your thesis. You'll get to write papers alone (mostly after your phd:D), but it's not usually all that much fun to do stuff alone.

Depends, maybe Alex has to work with PostDocs which give no ideas or input back. Instead they notice everything whenever he tells something during a presentation and later take these ideas or even the preliminary results to publish without Alex. Maybe some PostDocs also fake results or struggle and run to the institute leader to delay Alex own papers. Later when Alex runs out of time they just finish what he has in the pipline. Or maybe, the supervisor is a micro manager and his students have to follow his projects even if they know it will not work out, instead to do something useful.
I think, there is sometimes really the possibility that someone runs out of ideas which can be followed in some institutes.


text:
Shall I apply again after all my PhD applications are rejected?
I am 29. I've had informative, goal-driven, well written SOP, I'm guessing good recommendations. I have a masters in the related field (Computer Vision) with tier 2 publications. I'm in a research engineer job which can not add publications to my profile. I have been rejected by 13 US universities (all not Stanford, Berkeley). I had contacted the professors. Many did not respond though.

How do I ask for recommendations again if I try next year?
What can I add to my profile in this scenario?
Are younger students preferred?
Will there be sufficient opportunity if I complete my PhD after 35?

Yes! Age is just a number.

Age is not a discrimination in your age range, there will be opportunities when you complete your PhD but you should ask yourself what kind of opportunities are you seeking by completing a PhD.
If you stay at the same job your LOR will likely be the same in one year, so you have to change something else. I would suggest you reach out to 1-2 professors whose work is closely related to your job and see if you can be involved in one of their projects, and see if this can also benefit your company. I am afraid if you don't build a more direct connection with academia/research your chances will stay low. Otherwise you have to aim lower, less prestigious schools, but then we go back at WHY you want to do a PhD.

After so many rejection it seems to be more important to do the PhD. But I need to go to a highly prestigious school for that. I collaborated with some Profs last year, but I needed better school. How do I reach good professors for collaboration? Is there a standard proposal method?

@sud_ is this US based question?

@sud_ There are literally hundreds of universities that offer PhDs in CS, not all of which are “highly prestigious.”

+1 for the final question: Why do you want a PhD?

@SSimon, Yes and no. I had applied to all the US universities. But now I am checking for positions in Europe as well, but the main problem is asking for LORs again.

@sud_ that is kinda wierd and strage, until now you should had an offer... at least partial funding, but since you have expirience!

How do I ask for recommendations again if I try next year?

By asking. This may be awkward, but it's perfectly straightforward: "Dear Professor, Sadly, I was not accepted last year. Would you be willing to resubmit your letter to some additional schools this year?"

What can I add to my profile in this scenario?

How would we know? All you've told us is that SoP and LoRs were likely good.
What do you think the weak point was, and how will you fix it? Clearly 0/13 is not a fluke, so you need to either improve your application or apply to worse schools. Showing your application materials to a trusted professor may help.

Are younger students preferred?

No. In the US, this would be illegal. Beyond that, plenty of older students are admitted each year.

Will there be sufficient opportunity if I complete my PhD after 35?

Sufficient opportunity for what? In any case, most new PhD holders are 27-30, so 35 is only a few years older.

In some countries there are age limit for govt. funded entry-level positions, such as assistant prof.

Which is why it is a good idea to specify the country you are interested in :-) From your list of schools, I had to assume you were interested in the US.

Einstein once said that it was stupid to repeat the same thing and expected different outcomes. Try to think clearly what was possible problem in your applications before applying again.

Age is definitely not a problem.
Tier 2 publications: overqualified for many universities. You did not submit to the top 5, but maybe you still aimed too high? The strategy is: some schools in top 10, some in top 20, some in top 30, .... Submit all your applications to, e.g., top 20 universities might not be a good idea.
Well-written SOP? Did you use the same SOP for all universities, and only change the names?

In order to have a better chance to get response from professors, you need to do some homework. Consider:

"Dear prof X, I'm very interested in your awesome research", and
"Dear prof X, I'm very interested in your paper on learning kernel
for support vector machines"

You can guess which one has higher chance to be replied.
Finally, all places I know, e.g. NASA, SRI etc, research engineers are included in research papers. Maybe you need to challenge your boss about this.
Good luck!

I know, I applied to professors mostly I am familiar with by reading their papers. NASA, SRI are rich.

Don't do it. If 13 institutions have rejected you, there is likely a consensus that you are not suited/fit for getting a PhD. And even if you make it in, it may be difficult/impossible to finish the PhD. The GRE is an awkwardly good predictor of grad school success. If your GRE is bad, nothing else matters.
Can't speak for computer stuff, but my program has (previously) admitted people over 60. Different fields vary on ages, as they vary by both admissions age and time to completion. (Average for a history PhD is now 10 years...).

how good or bad is a GRE score of 315?

The GRE publishes percentiles. Max is out of 340 (170+170).  Assuming a 157 for each score, you are 67-75th percentile. But many programs select based on on sub-scores--I had a 165 on verbal (95th) and a 155 on analytical (59th).

"there is likely a consensus that you are not suited/fit for getting a PhD" No, there is a consensus they had better applicants for the space available.  Fitness is rarely the deciding factor.


text:
Write "ongoing research projects" in a CV
What is a neat way to include "ongoing research projects" in a mathematician's academic CV?
By this, I mean something that is narrower than a generic "research interest", but not quite as defined as a "paper in preparation".
One colleague of mine uses the following notation:

Cubic Nonlinear Schrödinger Equation
main objectives: study of such and such properties;
in collaboration with Dr. X and Dr. Y

I think most people don't do this because they don't want to "tip their hand" and invite others to scoop them.  When you list a paper as "in preparation", you're asserting that you're either confident that the paper will be finished sooner than any competitors could get there, or you're desperate enough for CV entries that you don't care.  But "ongoing research project" seems to incur all the risk with none of the benefits.

In particular, if this CV is going to be publicly available, I think you ought to get permission from your collaborators Drs. X and Y before including this.

It's not a standard practice to list "ongoing research projects" (from which you don't yet have any papers) on your CV.  I wouldn't even say it's standard to list papers that are "in preparation" (some people do, some don't; I personally am not a fan of this).
The point of a CV is to give a summary of your academic history, accomplishments and experience.  It's not a place for people to get to know your hopes and dreams.  And I think it will look strange on an academic CV, so I would recommend against including listing ongoing projects.
If you're asking about this in the context of job applications/promotion/etc, the place to write about this is in a research statement (and possibly a cover letter if you think it's really relevant).  If you're asking about this in the context of grants, the place to discuss this, if it's relevant, is in your proposal.
Two things you can do, if you really want to, is have a line about "research interests" and have a section listing collaborators.  (On a related note, some people also group papers by research topic, making research interests clear, though I personally don't like this in most contexts.)  These aren't typical, but they won't look so strange to make people think you are weird for including them.

You can list these as "projects/studies in data collection phase" or "current research projects" but as Nate said above, it's a risky move and is probably best left off your CV until you're at least preparing a manuscript for submission.


text:
How far in advance of applying to grad school can I ask for a reference letter?
I'm currently finishing the last year of my undergrad degree, and plan on applying to grad school in about 7 years. I'm taking a year off to work, then completing a 1 year graduate certificate followed by a 2 year diploma program and 3 more years of work experience before applying for a masters program, which requires 2 reference letters from relevant profs. I know I can ask instructors from the grad certificate and diploma programs instead of relying on professors from my undergrad courses, but that's still a 3 year gap between my last course and application. Do I need to wait until I apply for my masters to ask for references? Or can I ask in advance before graduating my grad/diploma programs, after explaining my plan to apply for a masters in 3 years? My concern is my profs might not remember me...

As far as you want... However, in 7 years, they might not remember that you've asked...

Will a reference letter from seven years ago really add anything to your application? Especially after working, getting a cert and a diploma?

Why are you doing all those other things before a masters degree? You certainly seem to have a plan, but I'm wondering if you have a goal. If I was writing your reference letter today I'm not sure how I'd write it without saying that, which would not be positive.

My daughter is now a senior in college. At her college, they will take a recommendation letter from a professor, archive it, and provide it to graduate schools in the future upon request. She has done so for a professor who is not in great health (i.e. multiple emergency room visits over the past year), but would be a great reference. Perhaps this is an option at your institution as well?

I think if you're seven years out, the reference letters won't be as relevant. I would check with the master's program, but sometimes if you've worked for a certain amount of time you can provide one academic reference and one work related reference. I would try to keep a relationship with at least one professor - keep them updated, visit for coffee, etc. but wouldn't use a letter from seven years ago to apply for a Masters program. Maybe through your diplomas which will be more recent, you will find a more recent reference.

No, you do not need to wait, you can certainly ask in advance. There is no rule against it. However, if the readers of the recommendation letter notice that it is from several years ago, then they may react negatively. On the other hand, they might not. Admission committees typically process many applications, so do not read any particular letter that carefully. It is unlikely they will check the date.
The concern that professors will not remember you when you ask for a letter years from now is very reasonable.
After doing other things for several years, you may ask people who know about those things to write letters for you. This would give a more up-to-date picture about your qualifications. However, you can both ask for letters now and after completing the years of other activity.

It is quite normal for students to ask their undergraduate professors for letters of recommendation, years after leaving the institution; this is especially the case for students like you who plan to work prior to graduate school. Many programs encourage some time off after undergraduate education because of the possibility of "burning out" (amongst other reasons), and thus many professors are used to the process of writing a letter for their student, years after the student has left the institution. Though 7 years might be a rather large gap in time (and some of these professors might retire or change institutions by then), what is important is that they are made aware as early on as possible that you will eventually want this letter from them.
Prior to leaving your institution/graduating, establish extensive rapport with those you are interested in receiving a letter of recommendation from and inform them of your future graduate school interests. Gauge the extent to which they are on board with writing you a letter, and ask if you can meet with them to discuss this letter at a later date, after you have been able to assess some sort of scope regarding what your application for graduate school will look like. Though this depends on the discipline, many professors do not want to merely be asked for a letter, but wish for you to present them with an early form of your statement of purpose and/or research interests first prior to asking for a letter.
After a professor agrees to write your letter, maintain email communication with them with updates, when relevant. There is no need for an inundation of emails with every little update, but it is helpful to check in with the professors. Keep a copy of your transcript on hand; this will be useful come recommendation time, because you are reminding the professor of the classes you took (with them and in relevant courses that they can speak on).
Though beginning the process for a letter of recommendation is subjective and you could ask the graduate coordinator of program(s) you plan to apply to about their personal stance on getting letters x amount of years ahead of time, to be safe, continue maintaining that contact with the knowledge of what each of your 2 letters of recommendation are asking for. Does professor X want a copy of your statement of purpose and your CV? Does professor Y instead only care about any updates after your certificate program? Each might have their own way that they like to go about the letter process.
Finally, when application time arrives, I would drill in the letter dates. Visiting the professors in years closer to the application cycle might be helpful, for meeting in person allows them to put a face to the name and CV; this part is completely up to you but does not hurt.
In sum, there are many ways to approach this, but approach those important professors early on while you are still fresh in their minds, check in with them as appropriate, and (if applicable) inform them of professional/academic updates that could affect their letter to you. 7 years is enough of a gap that your academic, research, and/or work goals may change in a manner that has you shift interests or consider changing who you want as your letter. Many changes are very possible of happening, so I would not stress about it too much.. just ensure that if someone agrees to write your letter, that they know that it comes with the asterisk of being a few years down the line, and hold them to it. There may be times that professors are far too busy with their own work to answer your check-in emails, but that does not mean you should not be adamant in keeping somewhat of a connection with them over the years through which you are no longer their student. The last thing you want is to have great people offer to be your recommenders, only for them to forget (since 7 years is a while away); of course, as mentioned earlier, many professors are used to writing letters years after their student has left an institution, but that continued communication will likely provide a stronger letter in the end, since you have been diligent in keeping yourself somewhat fresh in their mind.
Best of luck!

Your concerns about not being fully remembered are quite valid.  If you know (or even strongly suspect) that you will be requesting a letter of recommendation in several years, then I would encourage you to make the request now rather than wait several years as others have suggested.  Talk to the professor and let them know what you are planning and explain the timeline. If she is willing to write you a letter of recommendation, then she will likely appreciate the opportunity to collect her thoughts while you are still fresh in her memory. If you wait until 7 years out, then I would expect that the chances of them saying "no" or writing a weaker letter would be much greater.
I was just recently asked to write a letter of recommendation for a Masters program for a student that graduated 10 years ago. They asked me because the program they applied to specifically requested a letter (or letters) from an academic setting and the former student has been working in industry in the meantime. While I distinctly remember the student, I couldn't tell you what classes we had together, what their grades were, or what departmental activities they were most active in.  Had I known this request was coming, I could have either written a letter back then or at least jotted down some key facts that I would use in such a letter in the future.

For undergraduate work it is reasonable to ask for a letter as soon as you complete the work, and it makes sense to do this while the memory is still fresh. A diligent professor will even keep the letter on file, in case a hiring committee requires that the letter be sent directly.
As you acquire experience it will become less likely that you would use the letter, since usually you will have more recent and more pertinent recommandations to provide.
As a rule of thumb, the longer you work with the professor, the further in the future the recommendation is pertinent. I still write background recommendations for my former doctoral students, a decade after they have defended. Obviously I am not the only one providing a letter.


text:
How to stop a former collaborator from (re-)publishing joint work
Let us assume that my prior coauthor plagiarizes our common work and is going to re-publish parts of it under his/her sole name in a conference.  I see a preprint of the work on a well-known preprint-site; the venue has not yet taken place. I ran  free plagiarism tools; they show between nothing and 20% (tool-dependent) coincidence with public sources that the tools are aware of, whereas typical "new" papers show up to 2%. The rate would go higher if the 20%-tool were aware of our latest commonly published work before the collaboration broke apart. The author made some textual  substitutions (variable XXX -> variable YYY, function(object) instead of object.function, etc.) and set-theoretical replacements (functions into powerset instead of binary relations) so that the text formally looks different. The author added a tiny bit of new (though, frankly, mediocre) content.

Does the prior coauthor commit plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or both?
I would like to prevent the prior coauthor publishing the paper. Moreover, I'd like the paper to get off the preprint site. The prior coauthor and me don't speak to each other, so, contacting him/her is unlikely to help. Is it possible for me to actually reach my goal, and, if so, how?

I don't understand why you are trying to block someone using your results if you already published them. They just have to cite you properly and be clear what is novel and what isn't. Whether their new additions are sufficient to rate a new publication is up to the conference, not you. Has the prior paper you co-authored not been actually published anywhere yet?

Contact the editor and provide all the evidence that you have to support your claim.
Do not keep going back and drip-feeding the editor with bits of evidence over time, make sure it is a complete package.
Also, consider the possible effect on you and your reputation for the future - if this goes the other way, how do you look...

In this case the editor is the PC chair.


text:
Took an Incomplete Letter Grade, and Now Professor Asks Me to Write a Longer Paper
I'm a sophomore in college, and during finals week I got sick and couldn't get out of bed. After submitting an Incomplete Work form to my English professor's website, she agreed to let me submit a 2-page long reflection paper after its original due date only to, later on, write me a second email saying I should instead, write a 4-page paper. She argued that since we didn't have a final exam and a presentation of said paper was required, it was only "fair" that I wrote a longer essay. My question: is this even legal? I believe what the professor did is not ethical. I feel like she's trying to teach me a lesson the hard way. Another thing worth mentioning is that I went to the head of the department and made a formal complaint stating the very same professor was playing favorites. So, I assume she initially gave me a second chance with this whole ordeal out of "fear" since she's currently seeking tenure within the English department.

This question is outside the scope of Academia, which is devoted to graduate and professional academic issues. However, my personal feeling is that you could probably have written out two more pages of "reflection" in less time than you've spent thus far worrying about it.

The Venn diagram of legality, ethics and university policy does not necessarily intersect.

@DaveLRenfro: This question could just as easily have been posed by a graduate student.

@aeismail: I just upvoted your comment, as it's right on the mark. I don't know why I overlooked doing this two years ago.

The prof tries to compensate the lack of an exam and presentation by 2 extra pages. Calling this "Not ethical"/"even legal?"/"trying to teach me a lesson the hard way" is a complete overkill and a massive assumption of bad faith from the prof on the side of the student. This is a very mild compensation requirement. Starting to suspect this is linked to a "tenure case" is really making unfounded insinuations. If OP is ill, this is understandable, but it's also understandable that the prof will want a level playing field for everyone else.

We don't have any idea what the laws are where you are, so there's no way to know whether this is "legal".  I very much doubt that it's against any law, though, or even any university regulation.
If other students were required to give a presentation on their paper, then it's reasonable to expect that you also do something beyond simply writing the paper.  You could ask that you be allowed to give a similar presentation directly to the professor, though that's still not quite the same, since presenting to a class is a different experience and would generate a different level of discussion.  It also presents some logistical problems since you and the professor may not be on campus during the summer.  So I think it's reasonable for the professor to ask you to write a longer paper instead.
For a college sophomore, writing an extra two pages is a pretty minimal assignment - by now you should be accustomed to doing much more writing on a regular basis.  If she'd said twenty pages, I might have agreed with your "teach you a lesson" theory, but this is really too minor.  While you might be able to get a different assignment if you really push, I think it will be a lot less trouble to just write the paper.
I really doubt that this has anything to do with the professor's tenure case.  An issue like whether one student has to write two pages more or less is far too trivial to be a factor in a tenure case, which is about the professor's total academic accomplishments over 5-6 years.

If there is an agreed-upon and signed "contract," that should be upheld by the professor.


text:
Professor put me in cc when sending recommendation letter to college I am applying to?
As the title says, I received an email yesterday, presumably I am in Cc of the email that my professor wrote to the university I am applying to. In my understanding there is always some mystery about the letters. But what exactly is the norm here? Does anyone care?

Was it "cc" or was it "bcc"? You say "presumably"... The recipients might care if they can see your name, but they won't see it if you were "bcc"'d. Please clarify.

bcc. but I thought sender and actual recipient always see everyone in cc and bcc, only bcc don't see who is in cc? I am confused....

Everyone can see who is 'cc'-ed. Only the bcc-ed recepient knows that (s)he is bcc, other receipients have no information about him/her. So you have nothing to worry about. :) Good luck.

just tested it out in the same email system, you are correct. apologies. i can't personally see if its cc or bcc but i she confirmed it was bcc

Please see the explanation of bcc.

I always provide a copy of my recommendation letter to the person I’m recommending. This is in the context of post-docs in the group applying for jobs, so slightly different, but not that different...

I was confused because when I try to test bcc in gmail I can see my email address that I put in bcc. So I wrongly assumed the school's system is similar.

Please don't try to "delete" your questions like this. It doesn't work.

It is becoming more widely accepted that people have the right to be aware which information is kept on them by various organisations, to request access to this information and in some cases to request this information to be deleted (see e.g. FOI for UK, GDPR for EU). So by cc'ing you in, you professor acknowledged your right to access the same information about yourself that (s)he is sharing with the third party.
No, it does not reduce your chances — it is perfectly reasonable for professor  to show the recommendation letter to the candidate, if they wanted to, and in some places it is even required.

In some "jurisdictions," maybe? Seems like an unusual use of "legislations" to me. Maybe it's a Britishism?

@AzorAhai No it's just me being dumb. Thanks - corrected.

Hell, in many cases the recommendation letter is written by the candidate ;-)

@Flyto Well, I wanted to mention this, but at least sometimes people to grumble on it.

In the U.S., people have, as you said, the right to see their recommendation letters, but they normally waive that right. This practice is so standard that a recommendation for which that right has not been waived might not be taken very seriously. So the OP would have a good reason to worry if this had been a cc rather than a bcc. With a bcc, there's no problem.

@AndreasBlass The fact that the student was cc'd into the email does not imply that he had not waived his right to see the LoR. Logically, I mean.

Your comment clarifies that you were blind-copied (BCCed), not open-copied (CCed).  That means that the college you are applying to would have just received a regular letter-of-recommendation with no apparent CC in the list of recipients (i.e., the do not know that this professor copied you into the message).  As to whether this is normal, there is no standard here; it is a matter of discretion.  Professors sometimes give a private letter-of-recommendation without disclosing to the student what they wrote, and sometimes they copy the student into the letter, so he/she can see what they wrote.  When copying the student into the letter, some professors do this via blind-copy, so that the college does not make a negative inference about the candour of the letter.

I would say NO, it does not reduce your chances.
Why would you think it would?
A letter of recommendation is no secret.
Even though it seems from the comments you were in BCC (so nobody can know).
Maybe think about it this way: You have certain qualities or capabilities. You professor obviously thinks that these qualify you for what ever he is recommending you. So there are no secrets anyway. You and your professor knew your capabilities and now the receiving party knows as well. It should not be a surprise to anyone, that you know why you are recommended.

As to why it would: The committee may think the professor did not write a wholly accurate letter of recommendation because they also sent it to you (e.g. did not fully describe your flaws; overly praised you, etc.)

I agree with you, but I am not sure if adcoms do, so I was curious. In the end I don't really care either way


text:
Double major workloads?
I am entering Hofstra University this fall as a mechanical engineering student, and I am curious what the workload would be like if I took a second major in mathematics?
To clarify my situation, here are some points:

im simply considering it and dont have to make a decision until, at the earliest, my second semester
I am fascinated by how things work, and I have been told that math is the "purest" science in that it explains everything. I am operating on the assumption that this is accurate
while I have a passion for engineering and hands on work, I would also very much like to participate in research
math is one of my weaker subjects, so I would have to devote extra time to study, though it still fascinates me
Im a hard worker, and plan on using summer and winter class sessions to get as much out of college as I can
i intend to continue college through my masters degree at a minimum

Additionally, MechE is 131 credits and mathematics is 124. My university allows credits to apply to more than one degree. Please feel free to ask for any other clarifying info you need, and
Thank you all for your advice in advance!

This depends a ton on the specifics of your school's requirements, so it would probably be wiser to use resources at your university -- such as undergraduate advisors and the like. That said, I would suggest seeing what you think after actually taking some uni-level math courses to see what you think of it.

I am fascinated by how things work, and I have been told that math is the "purest" science in that it explains everything -- I suggest to have a look at George Hazelrigg's work on engineering as decision making and how the various fields of mathematics are the frameworks we as engineers use to make decisions.

while I have a passion for engineering and hands on work, I would also very much like to participate in research -- Engineering and research are not mutually exclusive.

Don't overestimate the availability of summer and winter classes.  Such offerings are usually limited, and are mainly introductory courses.  By your second or third year, it's quite likely that there won't be any summer/winter courses that you need.  So this may not be much help in speeding up your progress.  You might like to look at recent course schedules to see what's been offered lately.

I did a double major is physics and mathematics at a US university. Therefore, I think I can give you a somewhat accurate answer from my own experience. I hope you are coming to school with a lot of AP or IB credit, or some other way to get out of general education requirements. You are going to need the space in your schedule. I took a look at the requirements for the ME and Math majors at Hofstra, and there are four classes that overlap, and (if you choose the engineering math option) an additional nine hours of engineering courses count toward the math degree. That's a total of twenty-four overlap credits. That's pretty good, but it leaves an additional twenty-four credits dedicated to the math major to fit into your schedule. The total number of hours for your double major will be 155, or about nineteen hours per semester if you do eight semesters. That is quite a lot, which is why I hope you have some outside credit or take summer classes, or in some other way reduce the workload to sixteen to eighteen credits per semester.
If you are able to fit these classes into a reasonable schedule, the workload will not increase too much. I do not think that undergraduate math classes require all that much work. Most do not require essays or large projects. Furthermore, if your university's policies are like mine, you can drop out of the double major at any time, reverting to single-major status, so there is little risk in applying for a double-major. If you do double major, and find that your engineering classes are suffering because your math classes are taking too much time, I strongly advise you to drop out immediately. Having one strong major is much better than two weak majors.
Here are a few things to remember:

Neither employers nor graduate programs place a lot of weight on a double major. If you have a strong GPA in an engineering major, and have several elective mathematics courses on your transcript as well, that is just as good as a double major.
If you do get a graduate degree, employers will care way more about that than a second major.
Unless you have a full scholarship, you are paying for this. I do not presume to know your financial situation, but I feel fairly comfortable in saying that the joy of taking math classes simply because you find them interesting is not worth $40,000 per year. So do not delay graduation to get a second major.  Especially when you can check math books out at the University library for free.
I would even be hesitant to take summer classes in order to double major if they come at the expense of an internship, REU, or some other career-enhancing opportunity. A double major looks good on a resume or a graduate school application, but not as good as work and research experience.
As with all choices, there is an opportunity cost to double majoring. If you have time to double major, you could also use that time to take graduate level classes, or learn another language, or get a minor in computer science, all things that employers and graduate schools will see as valuable.
Finally, it should be noted that a double major may be viewed by future employers as a sign of a lack of focus or of scattered interests. I do not know if this is a prevalent opinion, but I have heard it before. It may even be true in many cases.

I may be misunderstanding something: are you suggesting that 19 hours (of lecture?) per semester is a lot...?

Yes, at my undergraduate school, one could not take more than 18 without special circumstances. At Hofstra, it appears that full-time enrollment is considered enrollment in between 12 and 17 credits per semester, though you can pay more tuition for each additional credit hour (past 17).

One credit is one hour? I don't get it. The idea of having 18 hours of lecture per semester sounds insane to me. When I studied, it was more than that per week!

Sorry, the language is so ingrained for me I didn't think about the literal meaning. Taking X credit hours in a semester usually means that during that semester, one attends X hours of lecture per week.

In the US, courses that include a lab component (STE), will often have a separate 1 credit hour lab that you sign up for. That's usually 2-3 hours per week in a lab running experiments.

The engineering program you are entering has a lot in common with other US schools, including the one at my institution. Note: I am in electrical engineering, but I interact enough with the mechanical engineering program to have an understanding of the key issues involved here.
As far as branching out into other fields goes, minoring in math is fairly common for mechanical and electrical engineering students, since these students take a lot of math. Engineering students who already take a lot of math can typically minor in math and graduate in the same amount of time as not minoring at all.

I am curious what the workload would be like if I took a second major in mathematics?

Students who double major generally fall into two categories: those that want to graduate in the shortest amount of time possible and those that don't mind stretching the degree progressions out over another two or three more semesters.
The corresponding workload will depend on which of these two categories describes your situation. Other factors might come into play; e.g., suppose you take too many courses in a particular semester, then you fail or drop a few of those, and then have to retake them later. And so on.
You should also be aware, though, too, that not all courses are offered all of the time, so, if you really need to complete your degrees in a certain time frame, you need to be mindful of the actual course offering frequencies.


text:
Why do publishers still print a 'Half title' page?
Isn't a Half Title redundant, when the Title page already states the full half Title?   See Wikipedia:

I know why books must have blank pages, but why not leave this page blank?
I instance The Happy lawyer. The front cover contains the full title The Happy Lawyer: Making a Good Life in the Law. Then the first Half title page states only 'The Happy Lawyer'. Just after p. xiii (The Foreword), but before p. 1, is another Half title pages that states only 'The Happy Lawyer'.
Another instance is Better Never to Have Been. The front cover contains the full title 'Better Never to Have Been: The Harm Of Coming Into Existence'. Then the Half title page states only 'BETTER NEVER TO HAVE BEEN'.

Why not?
It purely a stylistic choice.
Why bother having a title page at all when all the info is also on the cover/spine?
I think it is a nice stylistic choice since it gives an uncluttered first impression of the book

Why bother having a title page at all when all the info is also on the cover/spine?

To be fair, there is a practical reason for this: covers/spines wear out and are routinely replaced by libraries for old, well-worn books. Plus, in the digital age, having a title page saves archivists from having to scan the cover when digitizing books.


text:
Can we actively ask an editor to take a decision?
I have submitted a paper to a Taylor & Francis journal. I received two constructive reviews and one negative, together with an editor’s request for major revision. My coauthors and I didn’t agree with the third reviewer and wrote a polite rebuttal. After major revision two referees accepted our work. However, a fourth review was provided and contained 3 pages of new issues, probably raised by reviewer 3 but it could also be a new first review. The editor now requested for a revision. Again we did not agree with the changes proposed by this reviewer and submitted a second polite rebuttal. This can go on and on. Can we actively ask the editor to take a decision if we are of the opinion that requested changes do not improve our work?

You can ask. However, if the editor is not satisfied with the situation, it means that they will ask for another opinion. Perhaps Reviewer #3 and #4 are just nuisances, but perhaps they have a point. We cannot guess the editor's view.

If Arxiv was used in your field, you could just post your preferred version there, and follow all referee requests in the journal version.

I agree with @SylvainRibault Taylor & Francis  can be tedious for cooperation

@SylvainRibault This is terrible advice! Please do not be one of these people who have different versions on arXiv and the journal! It is simply awful for people who want to actually read and cite your work.

@NajibIdrissi: No problem, people in my field rarely read journal versions. Still, the idea of having an immutable version of record is artificial, and one advantage of Arxiv is to be able to easily improve articles at any date. This can admittedly be confusing to readers, but it is the price to pay for having small mistakes corrected, and explanations improved, sometimes long after publication in a journal.

@SylvainRibault According to gossip, someone was passed over for receiving the Fields medal because he followed your philosophy (no "immutable version of record"). You are not writing for yourself, you are writing for your readers, and if your readers have to check every day whether you silently corrected mistakes since the last time they read your articles, well, they just will not read your articles. There is nothing artificial about telling readers "that's it, I'm done, if I have something more to say I will write a new article".

Yes, you can ask for a final decision after this rebuttal. However, I would suggest a slightly different approach: Communicate to the editor, that you will not undertake another revision for this paper.
In that way you don't ask the editor to do something, but say what you are about to do. The implication for the reviewer is the same, but it is their decision what to do. I think it would be good to explain why you think that another revision would not improve the paper anymore (or any other reason you have to not revise the paper another time). Keep in mind that multiple rounds of review-revise do happen. A colleague told me that he was up to seven rounds of review, and he was willing to go through the whole process as this was a good journal and the reviewer comments were always constructive (the paper was published in that journal in the end).

You can, but there's no guarantee the editor will make a decision. It's her journal - until she's satisfied nothing gets published.
A few things to think about:

I personally find it pretty unusual to invite a fourth reviewer for a paper that already has three reviews. I might invite more reviewers if the reviews I received were poor or if I didn't have enough reviews to be confident the first time round, which doesn't seem like the case here. Hence I suspect the "fourth review" was written by the third reviewer.
It's true that this can go on and on, but it's more likely that you're already at least halfway to a final decision. My experience is that very few papers reach four rounds of revisions.
If the paper-to-editor ratio is high, then it's possible the editor is operating on autopilot. If you ask the editor to make a decision quickly, your paper could come under greater scrutiny. This could e.g. lead to the editor inserting some comments of her own or challenging some of your revisions that the 1st/2nd reviewer has already approved of. Conversely if the paper-to-editor ratio is low, then your request is much less likely to change anything.
People don't like to be told what to do, especially in this situation where the editor is the person in charge of the journal. If you decide to ask for a decision, write something non-accusatory, e.g. "we've been through two rounds of major revisions. When can we expect a decision?"

If you truly think you are subject to unnecessary hardship due to the review process, you might consider appealing to the editor in chief.
This might be particularly applicable if your first round revisions were nearly there, then a new reviewer requests unreasonably extensive revisions (eg, a new experiment). Sometimes you simply need to call attention to the situation to get a more thorough assessment. You shouldn’t try to ‘force’ a decision but you can ask whether or not it might be better to pull the submission and go elsewhere. That will get the point across.

It might be best to contact the editor and explain politely and concisely (a long letter won't help) why you disagree with the proposed changes. But asking the editor for a decision might be a bit too much.

Thank you @George. Actually I did write a (sorry, long) personal letter today. Me and my co-authors also submitted a strong response letter in which we oposed the reviewer’s views, expressed reaching the point of withdrawal and requested a final editorial decision. I got a kind and balanced response from the journal (not the editor) to my personal letter. The outcome is still uncertain. So you may be right. We will see. Implicitly we already consider this paper as rejected and we want to move on to more fertile soils.

I wish you all the best @Alice! After all, there are many top tier journals where you can submit your work.


text:
Incompetent student
I am a PhD candidate and I have recently received an undergraduate (Bachelor degree student) to work for a short duration. For purpose of discussion, the work is mainly mathematical in this project.
I have chosen this student based on the classes he has taken and works he has done. They were prerequisites for the work that should be done for me. So, he has the knowledge required.
However, since he has started working on the project, I see that he makes very "silly" mistakes or takes too long to perform some calculation. I have told him several times to check his math and I am suspecting that he does not put enough effort into the project. My friends have told me that it may be that I expect too much and not all people understand stuff as quickly as I do, given that I have been working in this field for so long. I took their approach and started detailing everything to the student. I gave him small lectures, codes that I have written, and told him to come to me every-time he has a problem. However, I see that my lectures come to deaf ears. When I discuss with him about material covered, he still cannot answer. When confronted about it, he told me two years have passed since he has taken the prerequisite courses (which is true) and that he has hard time to get back on track. Still, the knowledge is there and he should be able to use it.
We are almost half-way through the project, so I cannot dismiss him. However, my biggest questions:
Is he just being lazy or is the topic too difficult for his level of skill?
I suspect that he is being lazy and giving up because he may be overwhelmed.
If anyone has any idea on how to encourage the student or make sure that he puts more effort without lowering his motivation. The followings are options I am considering now:

Use fear. I will let him know somehow that he got to put more work and I am not impressed with what he has done so far. Hence, anything that he does now will be reflected in my future references for him.
I have already told him to send me some works that he has done previously to this project. I told him that I want to see the level of math he is used to.
Stop helping him. I will stop supervising his progress and if he needs help he will come to me. Otherwise, it is as if I do not care about the output of his project. When he will come to meet with my supervisor about his progress (we have weekly meetings), my supervisor will be able to see what I am seeing. However, this approach does not suit me as I do not want to involve my superior in this mess.

Any comment is appreciated.

Oh boy, you seem really underwhelmed by your student. However, please bear in mind that bachelor students are very young and might lack the attitude for such projects. Try to see yourself more as the guy who has to teach them how to approach such big projects. This needs a lot of patience. But it will make the difference for him between "I learned nothing during my thesis" and "My supervisor really showed me how to do this".

@Ian Yes I do agree with that. However, I do not want to be taken advantage of. If he is really struggling, I will do my best to show him the way. However, he is getting paid for the work (not by me, but by a scholarship of a sort) and I think he may just be freeloading... I will admit, it is hard for me to tell  "incompetence" and "freeloading attitude" apart.

I feel it is good that you are aware of that shortcoming as a supervisor. Being able to tell when a person lacks a certain skill to be successful versus lacks the motivation to be successful will allow you to better rectify the situation as a supervisor.

Is the undergrad being paid to do research? (I have found that paying undergrads to do research is not as effective as one would hope it to be.)

I agree with Mad Jack, I have seen many undergrads paid for working in a certain project in a laboratory, and they just went there to get some money for wasting and a couple of months later gave up, not a good incentive, for undergrads "credit for effort" is the best way I guess or simply better grade in a certain course.

@MadJack, yes they are paid for this research. They are not paid by me but I am annoyed with this kind of mentality.

@GürayHatipoğlu, Yes I agree. However, it is the case here. I used to work in a program like that before and had a mentality where if I get paid I will dedicate my time to show work. This is in fact what I aiming for in my question. I want them to understand that getting paid for the work means they should take it seriously.

I suspect you're simply a highly competent person who is unused to dealing with 'average'. Did you change countries for your PhD?

@TheMathemagician To your question, no, I did not. To your remark, I am not sure what is the issue here. I asked  for your opinion of whether the student is lazy or not. I am not putting myself above anyone I just want to make sure people put effort into their work. I have been a student and known many students, lazy and freeloading students do exist... the exact reason I am opening up in this question is to get a check on myself. So no, I do not see myself as better than other people. I am trying to be practical.

So I think I can chime in here. I did research as an undergraduate sophomore while pursuing my Bachelors Degree.
I think something you should realize is that research is very different from academic schoolwork. I was extremely overwhelmed when I started doing research. Instead of finding an answer in a few minutes on stackoverflow or a tutorial on a website: I was working in such a niche field that I could not find any resources online to aid me. Apart from getting help from my grad student (who was very forgiving and understanding and guided me well)- I felt like I was completely alone and the stress definitely got to me.
Chances are the student you got is quite smart- but is not prepared for research. Schoolwork does not really prepare one for research.

Use fear. I will let him know somehow that he got to put more work and I am not impressed with what he has done so far. Hence, anything that he does now will be reflected in my future references for him.

Using fear will most likely result in less progress because you will be stressing out the student. You can hint at wanting more work to be done but by demanding more work and saying that you're literally not impressed: I don't think anything good will come from that.

I have already told him to send me some works that he has done previously to this project. I told him that I want to see the level of math he is used to.

Previous school work does not mean that they will be super capable of applying that knowledge to research. Have they done prior research before? If so you can ask to see that. If not- then they are not used to the research setting which helps explain why they aren't being as competent as you hoped.

Stop helping him. I will stop supervising his progress and if he needs help he will come to me. Otherwise, it is as if I do not care about the output of his project. When he will come to meet with my supervisor about his progress (we have weekly meetings), my supervisor will be able to see what I am seeing. However, this approach does not suit me as I do not want to involve my superior in this mess.

This will not only make the undergraduate student frustrated with you but it may cause them to stop pursuing research if their view of higher level academic research is one of a toxic community where they cannot receive help.
You should not be looking at opportunities to criticize an undergraduate student whenever you can. They are new to research. You should be guiding them on the right path- helping them as needed- giving them that extra push in the right direction. If you are not willing to do this then you should not be in charge of an undergraduate student- learning how to work well with people who have a lower skill set than yourself is a vital skill and I suggest you work on improving that skill rather than blaming the student.

made a wonderful connection that is often forgot. Classroom ability is correlated with research skills but not in the absolute. A student who makes an A in an advanced course is likely a better research candidate than someone who failed. That said, being a good student does not equate to being a good researcher.

A poor workman blames his tools.  You picked him.  Did you interview him or just pick the resume?  The point is you're the manager here.  If you hired someone who couldn't do the job, that's on you, not your employee.
So, step one is to take responsibility.  This is your mess.
Step two is to fix it.  Students often show up with transcripts that suggest they should know things they don't.  Railing against this is unhelpful.  The adult response is to decide, okay, you're the teacher, you think they need certain knowledge and skills, so teach them! If you can't do that, perhaps you need to be a better teacher.
Sure, it's possible this student simply isn't capable of the work you want done.  Not everyone has the same gifts.  So back to step one, take responsibility for your mistake in hiring, try to make the relationship as productive as you can, and learn from your experience.

I appreciate your comment and I do see it that way too. I guess if made a mistake in my evaluation it is up to me at the end. But there do exist times where a student simply does not put the effort. And this is what I am trying to differentiate. I want to know for sure that it is me exclusively.

I always err on the side of patience with undergraduates.
I am concerned about your relationship with the student, and its ongoing climate due to your instinct on using fear and assuming the student is lazy. This seems like a very inappropriate use of your authority over a much more junior scholar. I worked with a group of undergraduates on a technical project wherein the background knowledge of the undergraduates extended to only their prereq classes. I think, that as experts in our respective fields, we can forget the periods in our academic careers when things were not so clear. For example, I have forgotten that to someone who has never used R, setting up your WD and reading in a data file can be a daunting endeavor. For me, it is something that is trivial that I do not put thought towards.
My options were, when the undergraduates struggled with basic programming tasks, was to either ignore them, abuse my position of authority (e.g. use fear), or take the time to work with them.
In the end, I found that setting aside some time to assess their abilities and then put them into tasks where they could be successful based on that assessment was a far more productive use of my time and their time throughout the semester.
In summary-

you are the senior academic, you hold the power, and thus the responsibility. You can either abuse your position by belittling the student or you can own up to your own shortcomings as a supervisor and work to rectify what seems to be a worsening relationship.
assess the students abilities and give them tasks that they can be successful in. In you were "had" and the student is not fit for the tasks you have in mind, then so be it. Gaining a reputation as a phd student who is abusive to undergraduates put in their charge is a quick way to not have the responsibility of overseeing an undergraduate again.

Again, I cannot stress how you need to reflect upon your own actions as a supervisor and the importance of this in being a good supervisor.

Thank you. Well, so far I did mention to my student that I am expecting him not to make the kind of mistakes he did and that he should pay more attention to his mathematics. Except of that, I am quite lenient. Although, I do not want him to think that he can do whatever he wants because I am not more demanding.

Perhaps the student does not have the conceptual understanding of what you are asking the student to do? I am still very confused by what you mean by lenient? Do you mean that you do not always have tasks awaiting for the student?

By lenient I mean that I am trying to be easy. I understand mistakes may happen and I am not bothered with explaining stuff to a deeper extent if required. However, from the experience of his work in other institutions (he did have a couple of research-related jobs before coming to work in my lab), some mistakes are just too weird to gloss over. There are always tasks for the student, and I do not require a specific pace.

Is he just being lazy or is the topic too difficult for his level of skill?

There's no way we can answer that question without being the student. What is required is a talk with the student and tell him ths issues you're seeing in his work and then create a plan to resolve the issue.
I wanted to address some of your comments:

...I have recently received an undergraduate (Bachelor degree student) to work for a short duration.

The situation of how he came to work with you could matter on his motivation. Is he doing this as part of a course requirement? Did he approach your professor and ask to take part in research? If he took the initiative to help, then you can be fairly certain he wants to be there and that his mistakes are likely from lack of experience. If he's required to assist you as part of coursework, he could be not invested in the work and only submitting what's required to receive the grade. Many undergraduates at my school who take part in research fall into those two catagories.

They were prerequisites for the work that should be done for me. So, he has the knowledge required.

I would also take into account that passing a course, even with a good grade, does not always translate into a person understanding the material. There are courses where someone can pass by rote memorization of formulas, values, etc without understanding the core concept.

If anyone has any idea on how to encourage the student or make sure that he puts more effort without lowering his motivation.

Again, I encourage you to sit down with this student and talk about what you're seeing in his work. Find the reason he's working with you and come up with a plan together to improve his work.

Very helpful! he took initiative to come to me but, at the same time, it is a program that pays undergrads. So I am still not sure about his true motivations. I think I will follow your last advice in any case.


text:
Should PTAs be allowed to mark exam scripts?
PTA - Postgraduate Teaching Assistant
Because I love information (I'm at university, right?), I was looking through some manifestos of my department, and came across a proposal to allow PTAs to mark exam scripts. I can't remember the resulting vote (but if anyone wishes, I can look it up), but I got me thinking along the lines of "should they really be allowed"? At my university, every exam paper is written by whichever lecturer teaches us that module/part of the module, so it is down to their bias of what questions they want to put in there (which is then of course checked by some staff), and they are the ones who will know exactly what is the right and wrong answer.
However, having PTAs mark exam scripts could lead to some inconsistencies when marking scripts (even more apparent with group assignments), as they may be more lenient than the exam setter (lecturer), and some can be more harsh, even with the mark scheme provided. It may well be the case that the lecturer verifies every single exam script to see that they marked it correctly, but even then they may miss some markings here and there, and may just be too busy to even verify them.
What are the pros and cons behind this scheme? Is it unfair for the students?

This site generally doesn't take questions that are a matter of opinion, which this is, as currently phrased.  You could ask about the pros and cons that should be considered.  You could also ask whether this is considered acceptable as a general matter of academic standards and ethics, and the answer will be "yes, it's extremely common".

In large courses, it is impossible for one person to be able to grade all the exams—it takes far too long to grade hundreds (or thousands) of exams. Even a class of 70 students typically would take me 20 hours to mark up a single exam.
However, if a single person is assigned responsibility for devising a rubric for and grading a problem across an entire exam—a “latitudinal” approach—it should be fair, because it treats all students equally. A “longitudinal” approach in which graders are responsible for completely grading a portion of the exams is tougher to make fair, since then grader bias becomes a possibility. To get around that, you’d then need some system to “equate” grades between the graders, such as ensuring their means and standard deviations are normalized to the same values to reduce the impact of bias.


text:
How to cite the US Federal Register in Harvard referencing style?
Please advise how I should cite the US Federal Register in Harvard Reference style.
As an example, I have seen this part of the Federal Register referenced as:

2012 Planning Rule (77 Fed. Reg. 21161)

However that's not in Harvard style. How do I reference this within the text (author, year), and in the reference list?

I'm not sure why this is being down-voted. If you don't like the question, why not leave a helpful comment to say why, rather than anonymously and unhelpfully down-voting? If you can't be helpful then move on to another question.

Maybe people are tired of seeing the umpteenth iteration of "how do I cite my microwave oven's manual using the university of Sarajevo style (v2)?". Almost all of the time, the answer is "like anything else", and the true answer is "it barely matters".

The Harvard reference style is slightly more widespread than some presumably fabricated style you've just made up to try to sound clever. Helpful comments only please.

My approach would be to give an in-text citation as:
Federal Register (2012)
The end-of-paper reference could be given in one of two ways:
Federal Register (2012) National Forest System Land Management Planning. Federal Register Vol.77 No.68, 21161-21276. Washington D.C.
or....you could cite the online pdf version as follows:
Federal Register (2012) National Forest System Land Management Planning, Federal Register Vol.77 No.68, 21161-21276 [pdf] Washington D.C.: Forest Service. Available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-04-09/pdf/2012-7502.pdf [Accessed 27 June 2018].
I think it's important to remember that the purpose of a citation is to help the reader to be able to access the document in question.  In my examples above, even if there may be potential disagreement over authorship (is it the Federal Register, US Govt. or Forest Service?) or location of publication, the reader can easily find the document you are referring to (especially the second option, which takes them directly to the online pdf).

Go to Google Scholar, and type  source:(federal register)
Pick any convenient publication from the resulting list.  Clicking  the quotation mark underneath it will show all the formats.
For example: