text:
How should I not get in trouble due to my political views in academia as a student in my time left in my home country given these political conditions
This question has been in my mind for about an year. Finally, I am asking it here. I don't know I would be getting knowledge about it anywhere else. I think it is on topic here. Kindly help.
I live in a 3rd world country which has a fascist culture. I am not one of the communities that is marginalized due to it, In a lot of spheres my community has an advantage due to the system, but in academia my community is also marginalized. Blasphemy is punishable by law here. Freedom of speech is also limited. I am atheist, rationalist and advocate of freedom of speech. I haven't read much about communism but I think it might be better If people of my country takes some of it's characteristics.  I haven't told my views to anybody except my family. Communists are persecuted here.  Fascism is rising again since 5 years , despite being from an operessor community my heart goes to the operessed. Academia and media is absolutely dominated by operessors. Minority religion have their own fascist leaders and ideology.
I have depression and skizoid personality disorder since 8 years , along with anger issues. Psycaterist is fine and helpful. But therapy is  very poor. Health system in country is Kaput. This psycaterist which is good was found after I changed 3 other psycaterists. ( Greed in medical profession is very common in the country). I am in good mental health now. So, I studied a lot of self-help books myself.
My parents haven't talked to me since a year because of my illness. My father was very distant and passive and mother is herself in depression and my brother is so addicted to netflix and online games that he is twenty years old and despite that spends 14-16 hours daily on  mobile ignoring studies completely. No-one in family says him anything.

No-one in Academia in my country, talks about political situation be it STEM or humanities. Infact, a lot of academics that I know, regularly post on social media in favor of fascist leaders and their ideology.

I have done my masters in math and I am applying for Europe for PhD in session 2022. I teach school students part time and read advanced courses in math in the time left. I am hopeful that I will get a place if my health remains good and I don't become a target of fascists. I have worked extremely hard in my life till now given the scarce guidance that was available to me. I don't want to become a leader to bring a social change. I don't have resources or that much interest in politics. I am an introvert who never spoke even in an audience of 10 and have a very less social circle. There are at-least 2 -3 days in a week when I don't talk to anyone except students I teach. ( I work remotely). But when I read about history of my country and critique of social system, It really pained me that people are suffering so much and how deep fascism is in my country. I have stopped reading that and seeing tweets of recent hate crime incidents in my country  and stopped reading philosophy or history or about commnism as I already suffer from mental health issues and law is against the victim in case of speech against religions and state and leaders and there is very less privacy in the country. I love math and this is what I want to do all my life. Few Professor which speak against the system are marginalized very quickly.

I am not adding any news items or articles about any of the incidents mentioned above as I want to be discreet.

** Question :How should in this case in a conservative and authoritarian society, I not get in trouble in academia as a student due to my political views and what should I avoid in order  to continue my career? **
I think it is a really  good idea to avoid discuss politics, read philosophy, history , see news of hate crimes
There is no prof. or my parents or any well -wisher to guide me. This question was on my mind since a year.
I shall be really thankful for any help recieved.

It looks like you've buried your question in a blockquote; blockquotes are used for identifying text in your question that is quoting from someone else. You'll get better responses if you A) Edit your title to be a question, B) Edit the body of your question to make clear what the specific question is, and include only the necessary details for someone to understand your question; personal details about yourself may not be relevant if you're asking about other people, and C) Limit your post to one question only.

@BryanKrause I hope edit is fine now.

I still feel like there's a lot of personal details that aren't really relevant to the question, and further I don't think "how should I thrive" is really the sort of question that is well-answered here: it depends too much on personal factors and is vague/broad rather than specific (what "thriving" means is very different to different people, for example). SE Q&A should at least theoretically be broadly useful, rather than personal help. There are also still things in block quotes that don't seem to be quotes.

I'm not sure this is on-topic here, but I'll give a bit of background. In any authoritarian state (and they vary by degrees), academics, like everyone else, need to keep a low profile on any "sensitive" topics. That is just for their own safety. And, as you note, some people with a public presence feel the need (cooption) to support the regime, independent of their personal views. The book 1984 presents a pretty stark picture of this.
In free societies (and they also differ by degree) people are free (more free) to openly express their opinions and feelings as there are few consequences as long as certain taboos are avoided (racism, for example).
But, I would guess that even in an authoritarian state that academics are somewhat more open to others, since the nature of academia tends to push toward a sense of community and "openness" rather than separation and intolerance. That isn't true of everyone, of course, no matter the political climate. And, those with agendas and some power will push those agendas mercilessly. And some people will be open in one area but closed in another.
But, in your own case, if you manage to land a position in a country with more accepted freedom of expression, you will find a better environment, though there is, for example, religious prejudice everywhere. And, make sure that you keep vigilant about any mental health issues and seek professional help when you need it no matter where you are.
And, if you wind up in academia as a student in an authoritarian state, keep your views to yourself until you have a way to evaluate the local situation and what might be required to maintain your own safety - physical and mental.

It's indeed heartbreaking that academia - always looking forward to greater understanding - can nevertheless become embroiled in politics and agendas. We're still debating 80 years after the fact whether or not it's ethical to use Nazi medical research because it was willingly sourced from Holocaust victims. Personally I can't imagine what XaXa's going through - but he/she has my greatest condolences.

@JoinJBHonCodidact Thanks!

@JoinJBHonCodidact - I presume you meant "...unwillingly sourced from Holocaust victims."...?

@MrWonderful No, but I see your point. I meant "willingly" from the perspective of, "some scoundrel was willing to do that to another human being just to advance science." I suspect the back of my brain was assuming that it was obvious the Holocaust victims were unwilling subjects and that the point needed to be made that someone choose, willingly, to act with the lowest degree of morals and ethics. Unfortunately, what was actually written is, as you've discovered, not as grammatically clear as I thought.

@JoinJBHonCodidact - Ah, I see your point!  Perhaps 'forcibly sourced'...  Anyway, thanks for the response!


text:
I get better grades if I can find examples of solved problems. Am I cheating myself?
I am a fourth semester mathematics student. I have obtained great grades in Calculus/Analysis II & III. The first two semesters, I would say top 5%.
Have I cheated myself, as I did not use the notes from the professor, I used the books Calculus II & III from Gilbert Strang, that had many interesting examples. Thanks to this book I was able to ace my calculus exams. Examples give me the courage to solve the exercise sheets and proposed exercises. On the other hand, I have obtained mediocre results on my other modules where solutions where not "available" to me.
Now that more advanced modules are being taught to my cohort, the solutions are harder to come by, and this really demoralizes me, making me procrastinate more often than not, obviously leading to poorer grades.
Are amateur mathematicians that use this study method ie. that learn through examples and solved exercises, doomed to fail their mathematics career? Are we cheating ourselves? Mathematicians are supposed to be problem solvers, not plug and chug machines am I right?
What can I do to improve?
Thank you for your answers.

In a lot of ways you seem to be doing the right thing, and if the exams are sufficiently challenging then more so. I'll assume that your goal is learning, and not just grades in the following.
In math, doing a lot of exercises is a good way to learn, and eventually to gain insight into the inner workings of something like analysis. Doing exercises give you reinforcement, but there is always the possibility that you will reinforce the wrong things. That is why feedback is also important to obtain. Normally, instructors should give you that feedback on assignments so that you don't go off the track.
You ask about solution manuals or solved problems online. If you use them for feedback then they are fine, though not perfect. But reading solutions to a difficult problem is a lot less efficient for learning than doing it yourself, no matter how hard. You can delude yourself, actually if you take shortcuts to learning. Ask yourself, can you extrapolate your learning to solve other problems that aren't so similar to the one's whose solution you've seen.
You don't say why you don't use the instructor's notes, so it is hard to comment on that. They might be useful or not, and they might be more useful to supplement your thinking before you go to a solution manual.
If you ask the instructor for hints when you get stuck then you might move faster to learning. But a wise instructor will try to give you minimal hints to help you avoid wrong turns, but letting you find the path yourself. Don't ask for answers. Ask for hints. Try to explain your reasoning.
But, do lots of exercises, more than required. And get feedback on your solutions even if you have to ask for it during office hours. Especially when you think you have an insight, talk to the instructor about that.
However, if the exams closely follow the assigned problems and you need help to solve those, then, yes, you might be deluding yourself. It would be a shame to finish a course only knowing how to solve some relatively small set of problems that had a structure that you had prompting for. Eventually, problems will arise that don't have simple online analogues. So, while it is useful to have "training wheels" as a kid learning to ride a bike, you need to take them off eventually, even if it means skinned knees for a bit.

Well I try to do all the assignments, but when facing an exercise my first instinct is to try to find one similar on the internet, rather than trying to solve it on my own. Which I find shameful. I guess I don't have much confidence in my problem solving abilities.

You're comparing two different skills

On the one hand, you are expected to understand the nature of mathematics.

On the other hand, you are expected to understand how to research a solution.

I'm not a mathematician, I'm an engineer - and I do a lot of programming in my work, which I believe is a salient example of what you're talking about.

On the one hand, I'm very good and knowing how to express my needs in research to rapidly discover a solution to my programming problem.

On the other hand, I occasionally (and if I'm really being honest with myself... frequently) must re-research the same solution multiple times before I remember the solution because I'm not actually learning to better understand programming — I'm just finding a solution to my problem quickly.

But from a practical point of view, what's the difference?
These are two different skills: knowing the essential nature of your field of study vs. knowing enough about your field of study combined with great research skills to solve a problem.
If your intended career is in academia, you're probably causing yourself more harm than good because you need to know those gruesome details to effectively teach the subject to someone else. Why? Because the first time a student asks you "why?" you won't be able to derive an answer without depending on research.
But if your intended career is in not in academia, you're probably teaching yourself a more valuable skill — how to get to the correct answer as fast as humanly possible. Because, for example, in the corporate world, speed + correct = paycheck. How you achieve speed is often (perhaps too often...) irrelevant in the corporate world.
So it's important to understand that while your instructor may have a preference as to which skill he/she thinks you should be learning, both skills are valuable, both have their place, both have their pros and cons, and neither one alone will make you a good mathematician.
And to underscore that last statement: if your test scores are flagging due to a lack of good examples, that suggests you've been depending a bit too much on your research skills and not quite enough on your essential understanding. That's a valuable piece of information! and I'm glad you're learning it now rather than mid-way through your career when you can't do much about it. To be great at what you do, you need to be good at both skills.

I think nearly everyone does better if there are example-solutions, example-proofs available. Prototypes! So, I'd say that the reason you do better in courses where worked-out examples are available is that you learn the material better and more easily. That's desirable! :)
Yes, there is some traditional viewpoint that math students are supposed to solve lots of problems "in a vacuum", but that is very inefficient. Having examples that one can more-or-less imitate is much more efficient, and is a reasonable way of learning. The teaching component of that is choosing and giving the worked-out examples.
There is no reason for students to have to figure everything out on their own... Sure, it is very important to engage with the material (rather than thinking that it's adequate to "memorize" worked-out examples), but engagement does not entail working in a vacuum, trying to re-invent the wheel.
Still, yes, it can be interesting to "try to do it yourself", if you have the time and inclination. Even so, success is not guaranteed, and even if you succeed to some degree, your solution may be inferior to the "best" version... which could be learned from someone else.

You are not cheating.
It is nothing wrong in learning from examples or solved exercises. In fact in  some  courses like Probability, statistics , vector calculus(  applied mathematics course) a student has good chances of learning subject and getting good grades if he has gone  through examples and /or exercises. You are just putting your effort and time and there is nothing bad about it.
Also, let me tell you solving exercises and reading examples will always help you even if it is a pure mathematics course. Answers/ Proofs of some courses in Pure mathematics will take more time and effort to come by but that is due to abstractness, I am sure everyone goes through this. Mathematics is learnt by doing. Even if by solving exercises and reading examples you are getting good grades then what is the harm in that?
Probably, in you class there might be students who are able to get same marks as you  but by solving less exercises. Don't get discouraged, everyone has different way of catching knowledge. I also learn by solving exercises and examples. But, the problem will certainly arise, if you compare yourself with your peers by the amount of effort which you see they put. What you are doing is not teaching.
Also, your mathematics career can't be judged by this only.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What should I do about past academic dishonesty?
I graduated last year from a prestigious university where I was in general a very good student. I am now applying to graduate programs.
The class (upper-level undergraduate mathematics) had moved to an online format due to the pandemic; the first part of the class was in person. (This was 2 years ago.) The exam in question was closed to all aids, such as peer collaboration, the textbook, notes, and the Internet. Moreover, although the exam was available within a 36-hour window as a PDF file, it was stipulated that it be taken within 2 hours. There was no monitoring for compliance with the self-timing or closed-book requirements. These rules were laid out unambiguously, and I signed a declaration of academic honesty, in which I affirmed, falsely, that I had complied with the rules. I consulted the textbook extensively during the exam and took 6 hours to complete the exam (because I was quite literally studying the material during the exam period). I got away with it.
To be honest, at the time, it did not even occur to me that it was morally wrong to do such a thing. I was under pressure from my other classes and I felt that I did not have time to study beforehand. I made the following rationalizations, mostly subconsciously: (1) it was not particularly wrong since I was not copying answers or looking up solutions, but merely "refreshing my memory" with key theorems; (2) I had performed extremely well before, and I could easily have gotten the same grade if I had studied, so I was not obtaining anything that lay beyond my potential (I got a perfect score on this virtual exam just as I had on an earlier in-person exam of similar difficulty); (3) other students would inevitably break the rules; (4) the lack of enforcement was an implicit signal that they were more idealistic guidelines than rules; (5) my other classes had relaxed the closed-book requirement in light of the virtual format.
The incident has begun to weigh heavily on my conscience out of the blue; I had nearly forgotten about it between now and then. In hindsight, it was profoundly wrong for me to have done it. I feel enormously guilty about this incident and can only think of how foolish it was to have minimized it with those self-deceptions. Needless to say, I have no desire to ever again violate the norms of academic honesty. It may sound implausible, but I don't think I realized that what I had done was cheating, and how big a deal it is, until recently.
What should I do? In light of the severity of the infraction and my prospective plans in academia, is it incorrect to remain without raising the issue publicly, as I have until now?

In your university, is it allowed to change the grades of (or to file a case against) a student who has already graduated?

@JoelReyesNoche I can't find any available policy or guideline from my university's online resources regarding students who have already graduated.

Congratulations on holding such a moral code. It will pay dividends in your life if you surround yourself with honest people. What you did was wrong. And the fact that you regret it and worry about shows that you understand it.
Now do not complicate your life because of the mistake you made. Firstly, you got a grade, more than you deserved. So go back and revisit the course so that your real grades match what you have in your CV. Because this would be bad for your future in multiple ways. This by itself is a penance.
Secondly, there are ways in which you could fix it. You could give free tuition to deserving students. Help them so that they need not teach. This is especially useful as the world is standing back after the pandemic. Or dedicate a part of your savings to an African school. You can come up with many such ideas.
Thirdly, you are too young and you would see many exams in your life, university or otherwise. Much more crucial than this one. So forgive yourself and continue to work on maintaining this moral code. Life is long and mistakes will happen.
Finally, if you are someone who is so obsessed with this that it is mentally having a bad effect on you; then go and confess to your course coordinator. Most probably, he is going to have a laugh and will soothe your feelings and send you off. However, be prepared for any outcome.
Pandemic has shown the world a lot of ugly things. I am sure you can forgive yourself considering these circumstances and the weird openings they provided for such temptations.

Thank you for providing a larger perspective. I agree that the best solution is to maintain an airtight personal moral code in the future, both in public and in private.

"So go back and revisit the course so that your real grades match what you have in your CV." This. Do feel the guilt (you should) but don't overeact, don't go to diproportional self-punishments. Also, kudos for feeling the guilt; most of my university mates have cheated heavily on exams.

Reflect on it and, more particularly, on your justification at the time.
"Everyone else does that so this is the norm" leaves one with either challenging the norm, their own moral code or living on with the guilt. You might not always come up with the most idealistic answer possible to various questions the life poses - unless you are bent on dying a martyr. But do give it due consideration and figure out what is it that really matters to you. Find your core values and shape yourself into the image of what could exist in a world you would actually love to live in. Be that change you want to see in the world around you.

I certainly have reflected and will continue to reflect a great deal. It wasn't so much the likelihood of others' cheating that served as the basis of the impulse. It was the simple fact that I was taking the test alone at home, with the textbook a few inches away. I am by nature a moralistic, although perhaps not highly moral, person with little inclination toward stealth, so the lack of any sort of barrier made it feel natural and morally irrelevant, whereas it never would have crossed my mind to cheat in another context (nor will it ever again). Anyway, thanks for your comment.

(1) it was not particularly wrong since I was [...]  merely "refreshing my memory";
(3) other students would inevitably break the rules; (4) the lack of
enforcement was an implicit signal that they were more idealistic
guidelines than rules;

For all purposes, you could have been the only student taking the exams, so point (3) does not matter at all. Regarding the other points, they are rational externalization of your guilty feelings trying to look for an "easy" way out, since you claimed in the paragraph just above

(because I was quite literally studying the material during the exam period). I got away with it.
These rules were laid out unambiguously, and I signed a declaration of
academic honesty, in which I affirmed, falsely, that I had complied
with the rules.

So you cheated and you are already facing the personal consequences (most of the time we set rules to protect one from oneself, not from the others).
You have three choices:

you go full honest, and you contact a lawyer (to protect yourself) before writing to the university that you cheated in an exam, leaving them to set the bar about external, independently evaluated consequences;
you enroll in another but similar graduate program from another institution (you were a good student, so you can expect to complete your degree in much shorter time than), removing your "cheated" degree from your CV;
ignore your guilty feelings.

Thank you. I will not forget that phrase anytime soon: "Most of the time we set rules to protect one from oneself, not from the others."

IMHO, the first two choices are detrimental to OP's career and disproportionate to their mistake. Defy practicality.

@Sensiab it is an hard lesson we all learn, sooner or later! If I were you, the only concern I would have would be about time, "how long would it take to go through a degree again", but I am a senior and in my life I realized how unimportant truly is, to be "young", to finish your PhD as a 25 years old ... so I would go the first way, the worst it can happen is that you are stripped from your degree, but life does not end there, if your goal is to pursue a career in academia, you will find a way, keep your doors very open (both in front and on your back, no hidden skeletons)

@kosmos I am glad you are discussing practicality. Your suggestion of outsourcing guilt through charity, maybe even international charity, is in fact the most practical way. I am sure that a comfortable, quiet life can follow by taking that approach. Unfortunately, not everyone can afford that moral choice, good to you if you can/could!

@EarlGrey The OP can promise to do charity when he can. Which he would be able to if his degree is worthy. It is better than digging your own grave by taking the first route.

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


text:
Will a "Lecturer (Teaching)" in UK always remain a teacher without any opportunity for research and promotion like a "Lecturer"?
I am invited to an interview for a Lecturer (Teaching) position in a (very prestigious both research-and-teaching-based) UK institute. The duty and the responsibilities noted in the job ad clearly target teaching without saying anything about research, say,

Duties and Responsibilities
The Department of ... has an exciting opportunity to recruit a
Lecturer (Teaching) in ... positions to help support the teaching &
assessment and supervision of projects across both Undergraduate and
Post Graduate Taught courses with a strong emphasis on developing and
delivering innovative teaching strategies and enhancing the student
experience.
Teaching duties include organising and running taught modules,
lecturing, setting up and running laboratory/practical classes,
holding personal tutorials with tutees, the setting and marking of
exams and coursework, as well as supervision and marking of project
work.
Key Requirements
The post-holder should have a Degree in Computer Science or related
field, along with a range of teaching experience. They should be able
to demonstrate a good knowledge and understanding across a range of
core computer science subjects as well as demonstrate an interest and
understanding in scientific research.

As a general question, could such a Lecturer (Teaching) be potentially able to get through the same path similarly to a Lecturer to eventually become a tenured personnel who both teach and does research (promoting from lecturer, to senior Lecturer, to reader, and finally to professor)? Or a Lecturer (Teaching) is supposed to always be only involved in teaching stuffs?
You may say that I better ask this question from the panel in the course of interview. However, I am afraid if my question's answer is an obvious NO, they may already tag me as a not-the-best-fit candidate. So, I am essentially seek some advice on the potential career path of a Lecturer (Teaching) in that whether such a path can, at some point, intersect with research.

Regarding your last paragraph: Instead of raising the question during the interview, you could also wait until they offer you the job and then bring it up during negotiations.

A quick Google showed that the Uni in question has in its Computing Department at least two or three posts Lecturer (teaching) and also many Teaching Fellows and a few Senior Teaching Fellows. Can you find out anything about their career trajectories?

The university you are applying for should have promotion guidelines available on their website, where you can check the relevant criteria for being promoted to the various ranks. Keep in mind that tenure is not an applicable concept in the UK system. A lecturership would typically be subject to probation, which seems shorter and milder than the tenure-track requirements at US universities. After passing probation, your position is permanent, but not nearly as protected as equivalent positions in eg the US or Germany.
At my university, both Lecturer (Research) and Lecturer (Teaching) can get promoted, and criteria for both involve both teaching and research. However, the demands in the focus track are much higher than in the non-focus track (and everyone needs to do some admin). Being promoted does not change you out of the track though - a Lecturer (Teaching) becomes a Senior Lecturer (Teaching), etc.
Changing track is possible, but only if it matches the needs of the department you are hosted in. And of course, for going from Teaching to Research you are subject to the classic Catch-22 that on a teaching position, your teaching load will be so high that demonstrated your research excellence for getting a research position might not really be feasible.

(paraphrasing)

Is there a standard career path for a Lecturer (Teaching) (in the UK) to transition to a Teaching+Research role.

Short answer: No
Long answer: In UK academia, 'lateral movement' is a very common approach to shape one's career. Academics focus not only on securing more senior positions, but frequently apply for (subjectively or objectively) better positions. "Better" in this context could mean a higher-ranked University, less teaching, better lab infrastructure, better alignment of research interests to a team.
While there is no standard path, I would consider applying for Lecturer (Teaching) position a legitimate option if your ultimate goal is securing a permanent academic (research + teaching) position.
Pros: You will have your "foot in the door" and the opportunity to see the system "from the inside". As teaching is still required in most research positions, you will also get relevant experience in this area. Not sure if the position you are considering is a fixed-term or a permanent contract (some teaching positions are fixed-term I think), but if it is permanent it provides job security and removes the time pressure to "find your next post".
Cons: As Arno points out, the teaching load can be very high (even for research+teaching posts, let alone teaching only). This will be especially so in your first year, as you will need to create lecture materials or adapt old ones to your delivery style. It will be difficult to find time for research, and a stale research profile wouldn't be the best thing when applying for research positions.

I'd also like to echo what Arno mentions about "tenure-track" in the UK - it does not exist. Lecturer (research) positions are permanent, and often include an "automatic" promotion to Senior Lecturer. However, further promotions (Reader, Full Prof) do not (only) depend on an academic meeting some criteria, but also on the availability of such positions within your institution.

" further promotions (Reader, Full Prof) do not (only) depend on an academic meeting some criteria, but also on the availability of such positions within your institution." This completely depends on the institution. We have definted criteria for Full Prof as well as for SL, and anyone who can demonstrate they meet them should (in thoery) be promoted.

In theory, theory and reality are the same. In reality, ...


text:
Are tenure-track positions in Sweden exclusively assigned to internal fellows?
I have been contacted by the search committee of a Swedish institute to whose (STEM-based) tenure-track position I had applied almost 8 months ago. They informed me that I will have an interview over 30 days after their invitation email. I found that a bit strange because, at least to my experience, search committees often don't postpone interviews more than 10 days from their invitation email's date. I then informed my supervisor and a friend of mine, who is a rookie assistant professor in another Swedish institute, to see whether I can get some useful information about the interview process.
My friend told me that job advertisements in Swedish academia are only pretexts for legalization of recruiting internal applicants. He said, most of the times, an internal applicant has already secured a big chunk of funding/grant, and the affiliating university would like to hire them. But since they can't do it directly, they open a position, and regardless of the other applicants who may apply and their merits, they finally pick the intended person. My friend had already done his Ph.D. in Sweden, and he told me he had 3 interviews with different departments of that university all of which ended up with nothing better than rejection. When I told him about how far the interview date is from the date they invited me, he speculated that "their internal favorite applicant" may be waiting for the finalization of his grant, so the interviews are postponed so that the committee's rationale to pick him will be available. My friend advised me to check the list of the postdoc fellows of the university, especially those who are under the professor who is the position's contact, to see whether there is anyone in the field related to the position. If so, in his estimation, I (just like any other external applicant) may have no chance. (I did what he recommended without finding any good match between the current postdoc fellows there and the position's research topic)
After I informed my supervisor about the invitation, he said he has a friend in the medical department of that university. So, he contacted that person asking whether he has any access to my application and the current opinion of external experts about it. That guy fairly reiterated my friend's claim about the internal recruitment of rookies in Swedish system, and he (mistakenly) even claimed that I am invited to an interview for a senior postdoc position rather than an assistant professorship one! (Despite the clear assistant professorship nature of the job application, I contacted the coordinator of the position, and he just confirmed that this is indeed an assistant professorship position.)
Now I am thinking whether or not what these two (independent) sources claim are really true. To be honest, one may rule out their opinions for some reasons. For example, I felt my friend was a bit salty because of his rejections, and that medical faculty member's experience might only be the case in their department, as he wrongly thought this position cannot be an assistant professorship position. However, its seems that (at least some degrees of) nepotism in Swedish universities to prefer internal applicants is a well-known fact, as one may read in various reports such as here, here, here, etc.
Overall...

Is there anyone from the Swedish system (or experienced in this topic)
who can shed some light on whether or not tenure-track positions in
Sweden exclusively assigned to internal fellows?

Update:
In the final ranking, I placed second right behind the internal applicant who is a postdoc in that department within the last five years. The only negative comment of the experts of the committee about my case (according to the public protocol of the committee shared by the department) was that I have not yet finished my first postdoc.

From my experience, the long waiting time between application and interview invitation is typical for Sweden, and is actually a result of their measures to assure fairness of the application process. One part are the external experts, which you already mention - they have to provide written assessments of the applications, which is naturally a quite involved task. Departments also tend to have relatively large and diverse hiring committees, which makes the scheduling of meetings more involved.

I'm also a bit puzzled by the episode regarding the person that claimed that you apply to a postdoc - that seems to have nothing to do with the question, and seems more like a rant.

This situation (an international search is required to be opened even if there is a preferred internal candidate) can happen anywhere (I've observed it in the US). If they are at all honest about it, they will at least seriously consider the external candidates, especially if you have better credentials than the internal candidate (in which case hiring the internal candidate would be harder to justify). As a candidate, you are probably won't be able to glean whether it is happening.

I am tempted to downvote because of the "exclusively" phrasing, which is making this a non-useful thread with answers like "No, because here is this single counterexample".

@Szabolcs: So far, three contributors have shared different counterexamples, especially xLeitix's that indicates something more than a "single counterexample" but a (university-level?) policy. So, that "exclusively" has not led to trivial answers.

@Szabolcs: By the way, we all know that the official policy of Swedish academia just reproves the nepotism in such selections. So, what other than counterexamples would one expect as answers? The existence of multiple counterexamples at least seems to exhibit a non-zero level of chance not to encounter those unfortunate scenarios.

Knowing sweden, if you can portray yourself as a minority, in fact any minority, do so. Get popcorn and watch the indecisiveness unfold.

@User The sort of counterexamples I would expect is simply the proportion of open searches that conclude with the hiring of an internal applicant. I agree this question seems to really want to know, "are open searches usually shams in Sweden", and not what was posed.

@Hasse1987: It seems you have missed the first link in the last paragraph of the question. If you get into that paper, there are some quantitative assessments.

@User you might want to check the results of past selections (some times the selections proceedings are public) , this way you can get a statistics of how much positions are granted to internals in your department of interest and better evaluate your chances.

My personal experience tells me that your statement, in general, is false.
I was interviewed for  a (permanent) Senior Lecturer position in a university in Sweden. I was not an internal candidate by any definition - I am from a different country and I did not know anyone in this University, even a "rookie assistant professor".  I was offered the position, which I had to decline in favour of another one.
In total, I attended 10+ interviews for permanent academic posts in the UK and EU, and the interview  I had in Sweden was perhaps the most transparent and pleasant experience, despite also being the longest and the most demanding interview I ever had.

I worked in Sweden, so I can answer that question. It  turns out that I also know some people who were involved in such a process.
While it is true that they may have an applicant in mind, they have to legally open a position and external people can apply. They also may not advertise it for too long...
However, the hiring committee does not only comprise people from that department, and the committee members will still evaluate all the applicants. In the department where I was, they opened a position for one specific person but what happened is that someone external also applied to that position, and this person got hired because he was a better applicant than the internal person. So, hope is not lost.

Are tenure-track positions in Sweden exclusively assigned to internal fellows?

I have joined Chalmers University of Technology five years ago on a tenure track position without having any prior ties to the university. So it's certainly not true that positions are given exclusively to "internal fellows". Moreover, thinking about our hirings since I joined Chalmers, I struggle to think of even a single case where we ended up hiring somebody who was already working at Chalmers in some form (we did internally "promote" some postdocs to teaching-focused faculty positions, but not to traditional research-focused tenure tracks).
That said, Swedish academia is a large place. I don't doubt that there are universities that are looking more at their current postdoc pool when filling tenure track positions, to the extent that external candidates do not have a meaningful chance altogether. But as a general rule about Swedish universities this is incorrect.

They informed me that I will have an interview over 30 days after their invitation email. I found that a bit strange because, at least to my experience, search committees often don't postpone interviews more than 10 days from their invitation email's date.

Again, be careful to make sweeping assumptions and derivations based on how you think things should work. Scheduling an interview next month (rather than next week) is nothing out of the ordinary at all, and you should not conclude that something fishy is going on based on this alone. Thinking back about my time on the job market, I would say most interviews I attended across Europe were scheduled with months of leeway. I can only recall a single case where people basically asked me to come visit them next week, and I was more than a little annoyed by that because it sort of assumes I have nothing else to do.

"Job advertisements in Swedish academia are only pretexts for legalization of recruiting internal applicants." I have worked as a postdoc in Sweden and from my experience this is to a very great extent true and not only about internal/external applicants, but Swedish/non-Swedish. At my department there are Swedes who start working as lecturers and assistant professors without a single published paper nor much teaching experience. Yet an international with more teaching experience and publications may have a difficult time getting their way through unless they use "Vitamin B"! I personally, and sadly, found Swedish academia, or at least my department, to work very much based on race and ethnicity rather than merit. Also, there's a white-collar/blue-collar devision within academia, meaning that a white-collar may be approached as a blue-collar based on where they from! So all in all, I think yes. Tenure-track positions are mostly reserved for internal(local?) applicants. One can also easily see that by reviewing the staff profiles on university faculty pages.


text:
What to do about this incident as a PhD student?
I am from a marginalized community in my country whose religion X is persecuted in my home country (which is in Asia). Now, I am in my first year of PhD study in math in a top university in Germany
But this incident happened on Friday: A professor from my country, Mr. Z (of religion Y, which persecutes my religion so that my religion is now  0.3% of population, religion Y is 90%) came for a conference in Germany at my university last week.
At dinner, with about 20 professors and 20 PhDs and postdocs were present (majority white), a professor from France asked why my religion diminished in my home country. I said due to persecution by religion Y. To this Z said immediately, it is due to persecution by another religion, which is absolutely false.
I have anger issues (and I take pills for depression) and I immediately said: Keep lying in front of these white monkeys and stood up from the chair and left the dinner.
I have not met anyone from the university until now. I don't have any hatred for white people. I don't know what happened to me when I said that. Persecution of my religion has been so bad (and it is ongoing) and has complete support and encouragement from academia, media, and all walks of government and private establishment. The religious system in my country is fascistic. I don't even  expect white people to understand this thing as this is far away from their land and why they should be bothered in first place. It was a terrible mistake and said in a fit of anger.
How much fallout will I have on my career due to this? And what can I do to amend this terrible mistake?
I actually want to become a professor in Europe and don't want to go back to my country due to violence and love math so much that I don't want to leave doing research in it.

Why downvotes? Can you please explain?

Hi user. I haven't downvoted your question but I did edit it a little to use more standard English (that may have attracted some downvotes), but we also can't predict what effect it will have. A more appropriate question for this site would be what to do about it, rather than asking us to predict the future

Also, white people are absolutely capable of understanding religious persecution and things happening far away (that line may have upset some people and attracted DVs).

This question is not related to academia.

People in Germany, in particular, spend a lot of time during their primary and secondary education learning about the danger that comes from persecuting a minority religion. That may not be quite the same thing as "understanding" it the way the persecuted do, of course.

Have you considered apologizing (either in person or via emails) to those who may have been "uncomfortable" with your statement at that dinner ? You could explain that you were overwhelmed with emotion at the moment and had no intention to insult anyone...

It's impossible to be sure of course, but it's not unlikely that some of the people at that dinner are now worried much more about your mental well-being than about any perceived insults.

This is a matter of poor anger management and that is how it will be seen.
I wouldn't worry about coming off as "racist" against white people. White people aren't a marginalized group and it is unlikely that you will be seen as a racist after saying something like that to a group of white people.
The reaction was probably more one of shock that you escalated so quickly rather than one of offense. The best thing to do is to apologize to the people who heard you say this directly, mostly the people in your immediate vicinity. Try not to overexplain, but with your apology maybe add something like "religion is a tense topic for people from my country". Don't place blame, take responsibility for your behavior, then move on.
There is a reason people tend to avoid conversations about politics and religion in polite society. I'd stick to that convention in the future and learn to deflect questions on inflammatory topics when you are in professional settings.

Yes, "punching up" (meaning to make rough comments to people in a privileged class) is not taken very seriously, whether or not it's sensible to try it in the first place. It's much different to "punch down" from a place of privilege, against people without those privileges. Still, yes, best to avoid allowing yourself to be provoked, even though you are reasonable to react. A calmer rebuttal will be listened-to more carefully by by-standers.

Nevertheless, randomly insulting your dinner mates' ethnicity when they aren't involved in the conflicts is a little bit different than "punching up." There was obviously some ethnic/religious tension between OP and Z, but OP didn't insult Z, they insulted everyone else. To me, this is a little bit different than making a white people joke in a causal setting.

@AzorAhai-him- well, sure, it's not a joke at all, so it's "kinda serious punching", but, even then, the privileged people are fairly immune to this, and will not see as much need to react as they might if they felt truly "injured", I think.

@paulgarrett I mean, I generally agree with your point, but I see a difference between "punching"/joking at a dinner and just straight-up angrily insulting people. I agree that it is different than if a professor said "black monkeys," but the OP's statement is pretty offensive even coming from a place of less privilege. Although I assume it was translated from German and maybe it doesn't have the same weight in German. My point though is that I don't think OP should assume their comment was "not taken very seriously." Their dinnermates deserve an apology, IMO.

@AzorAhai-him-, ah, well, yes, their dinnermates deserve an apology in any case, for the rudeness. Oh-so-true.

@AzorAhai-him- I also think I have really messed up.

@Azor Why would you assume the comment was made in German?

@user151413 Maybe "assume" was too big of a word. Read it as "if it was translated from German ..." if you like.

@Azor I'd say even an "if" is assuming too much, given that neither the visitor nor the OP are German, and they are in math, which is a rather international field. I don't think there's any good ground to assume this was being said in German. Furthermore, I don't see any way in which this would have less weight in German.

@user151413 You're putting too much thought into this. I was just adding a caveat that I found the language presented in the OQ pretty offensive, but if it was said in German, I don't know exactly how rude it was.

The only part that is really a problem is the "white monkey" part. I know what that means. If it was me I would want an apology and would be entirely satisfied with "sorry, will try to do better in the future."
The angry outburst is only a tactical issue. If you had remained calm and had the facts at the ready you might have been able to inform a bunch of people. Instead of maybe convincing some of the bystanders that there is a real problem they ought to have some concern for, you made people uncomfortable. And ended the discussion. You missed a "teaching moment."
It is massively unlikely you will convince Z that anything is not how he said. When somebody's income (prestige, position in society) depends on him not understanding a thing, it is very difficult to get him to understand it. But the people watching might well have been made to understand how things really are.
I have issues with being angry also. One thing that helps is this place right here. I find questions that are emotional and write answers. Only rarely posting them, by the way. I write 20 or 30 for each one I post. But it forces me to go get the facts, work out careful arguments, and keep my emotions in control.
So maybe you can notice the issues, questions, and situations that upset you. Work out, privately in advance, how you will approach such situations. Make plans for various ways the conversation could go. Have the exact facts ready, with the citations, names, and dates. Read online some of the discussions of related issues and see how other people have handled them. And "read the room." Meaning look around and see how your audience is taking it. If they are taking it badly then have a "not today" plan ready.

Okay, there are a few things to unpack here.  Firstly, with regard to the disagreement on religious persecution, there is nothing inherently wrong with the fact that you and Prof Z express contradictory views on the cause of the decline of your religion.  University is a place where people are used to hearing disagreements and opposing views, so the mere fact that Prof Z puts forward views that contradict your own does not mean that others will necessarily agree with him.  If you can learn to remain calm and put your own case forward in a clear and appropriate manner, you might find that people will be influenced by your own views.  Many academic topics elicit strong feelings, which is prescisely why it is valuable to learn to discuss and debate sensitive topics in a calm and analytical manner.
With regard to your reaction, yeah, that is not great.  For one thing you have accused this Professor of lying, and that is presumptuous --- unless there is evidence of bad faith, it is best to assume that people have a bona fide belief in the views they express.  Secondly, the "white monkeys" remark is also not great, and universities are pretty sensitive to anything that smacks of racial insults.  For what it's worth, I'm a white person and I believe you when you say that you have no adverse feelings towards white people --- we understand that people sometimes fly off the handle and say things they shouldn't when they're angry (and your anger seems to have been misdirected in that instance anyway).

How much fallout will I have on my career due to this?

This could potentially have some bad fallout, mostly depending on whether or not anyone at the dinner takes issue with it.  A remark like that could lead to a formal complaint to the university relating to racial discrimination or bullying.  Even without a formal complaint, it is likely to reflect badly on you to the people at the dinner.  The fallout will depend a great deal on whether anyone chooses to complain about your behaviour.

And what can I do to amend this terrible mistake?

We make amends by apologising for bad behaviour, so that is what I'd recommend in this situation.  I'd recommend writing to this Professor, and also to the organisers/attendees of the dinner, and let them know that you're sorry for your behaviour.  Let them know that you hold no ill-feelings towards white people, and also make sure you apologise for accusing Prof Z of lying.  As you say, it was a mistake made in a fit of anger.


text:
How to handle further meetings in academic career with a such a master's thesis "advisor"?
I completed my masters in mathematics from Asia in August 2021 and joined PhD in Germany in Nov 2021. I had to do a masters project/thesis in my 4th semester (April-August) and for that I asked a prof. in my country but a different university in Jan 2021 as no one in my university was specialized in Algebraic Topology and he (say Mr. X) agreed to supervise my master's thesis. One prof. (say Mr. Y) in my university  whose research interests align remotely with mine gave me a LOR to submit to X which he asked.
I visited X's university in March for 4 days. He met me on the 2nd day for about 20 minutes. He asked me 3 questions and I couldn't answer one of them because of difference in definitions (the term was not available in the book from which I studied). Next day he e-mailed me the link of a paper and said he was busy and didn't met me.
I studied the research paper and mailed him 2 questions which I had on May 15, 2021 and asking when should I visit him. Getting no reply, I e-mailed him again on May 30 and began reading two papers related to the 1st paper in spare time. I e-mailed him again on June 15 and getting no reply I realized he will not reply to my e-mail.
I was morose and for a week didn't attend any classes and only ate 1 time a day and didn't go out of my room, was really angry and depressed. I burnt my 2 books by putting them on fire in the room.  Then, I called Prof. Y explaining him the situation, and he said I should remove X's name from thesis and I should add his name as some prof's name must be on thesis due to dept. rules. I had no guidance for my master's project. I wrote an expository style thesis explaining what I understood and got 2nd highest marks in thesis out of 32 students.
I also e-mailed him once again in Oct 2021 to review my thesis but he didn't reply.
This guy is one of the senior profs and is at the top university in my country. Prof. Y is much more junior to him and so are the other prof.'s (say P and Q) who wrote LORs for me. I didn't complain about him in his university or my university as the culture in my country is fascist and it is ingrained in culture to suck up and respect elders and seniors. Also, I am from a persecuted group and the
ethnic group of prof. X (and Y, P ,Q) has absolute dominance in academia and society and are persecutors. People here belief in a lot of irrational stuff. It was unlikely that anyone would have supported me. This prof. X has a lot of contact internationally.
This incident had a  very deep impact on me. Also, I had to lose face among all 3 prof's who gave me LORs and my classmates. But I couldn't do anything.
I sometimes felt like verbally abusing him over a phone call or writing a mail filled with verbal abuses. But, this guy would have definitely called prof Y and my dept and that would have definitely badly impacted my career.
I think this guy has no conscience and shame and is absolutely filth of a human.

Now this prof. is coming to my university in Germany to give a talk in my dept. and my advisor is the only prof whose interests align with him.
When I meet him, I am sure, he would say that I was not good enough when he asked me questions at his university in March 2021 or that I lied to him about my qualification. (I had done 2 internships and 2 courses in topology before asking him for supervision).
The only thing that comes to my mind as answer of this question is "HECK yourself, you piece of filth" . I think I will be really angry in that scanerio. But, other people there will not be pleased and he will definitely tell Prof Y, P, Q who gave me a LOR.
When I imagine him in elevator alone with me, I think I might punch him or slap him, if he starts talking about how or why he didn't supervised my thesis. I will get involved with the law.

How should I engage with this person when I will meet him which doesn't harms my career?

Can the downvoter explain reason of downvoting?

I took the liberty to substitute the expletive word you had used with "HECK".

Is there somebody nearby you trust? Ideal would be a local prof or post-doc or such, that you feel comfortable with. This sort of thing requires a delicate touch and a lot of discussion. Hours and maybe some beer (or whatever is your choice). It's probably not something that can be appropriately dealt with here?

I tried my best but find it really hard to grasp what actually happened. A professor did not supervise you and now you want to punch him in the face for it?

@Sursula-they- He had promised to supervise my master's thesis but didn't even replied to my e-mails.

@user that is shitty, but no reason to punch anybody. And while it was not nice you still ended up with a PhD position in another country which is not a small accomplishment.

Just a well-intentioned comment based on this and your other post earlier. If you feel like you need some professional counselling, then please reach out. In Germany, and more specific at German universities, there are vast possibilities to get help. You may even find the contacts on your university's website/intranet.

I wonder if it's possible for you and Prof. Y to act as if there was a problem with email from you to Prof. X (e.g. accidentally sent to spam) or that Prof. X intended to reply but something came up and Prof. X forgot. Neither you nor Prof. Y would initiate any mention of this, but in case Prof. X says something to either you or Prof. Y that requires acknowledgment of emails in some way, each of you would be consistent in saying that time was short and because there seemed to be a problem with email, you and Prof. Y decided to avoid troubling Prof. X with it and took care of the formalities.

If you are feeling that you are losing control over your own actions and punch someone, you might want to see a specialist that can help with that. Anger management is important, and you will be disappointed a lot in your adult life -- please don't run around punching people for it.

Incidentally, the reason for the suggestion I gave is that "playing dumb" is safer for your career and better for your piece of mind. It might also irritate Prof. X if he thinks that ghosting you had little effect, at least if he was actually trying to cause you mental distress by ghosting you. As someone with a bit of experience in this growing up, sometimes the most effective response to someone teasing you is to act as if you don't recognize their teasing for what it is.

In this question, the OP states they "completed [their] masters in mathematics from Asia in August 2021" but in another question, they state that they "completed [their] master's in Math in June 2020 in Asia."

@Joel my different accounts were merged. I ask a lot of questions as I have no guidence. I was ashamed to ask all these questions from same account and hence made different accounts and changed a few details. I came from a poor family and live in a very corrupt country I had no idea that they will be merged. I apologize to everyone.

Given the long list of things which are bit too strong a reaction (burning books, for one!) - seek professional help with anger management and mental health in general. All is fine and dandy until it starts affecting your life seriously - and it is starting to.

Couldn't agree more to anger management part!

Physical violence will certainly hurt your career, so don't do that. Even "just" being verbally agressive is a very very bad idea, so don't do that either.
If he is a prof and you are a PhD student, and you don't trust yourself to remain polite, then just don't say anything, or at least as little as possible. Let the profs talk among themselves, and leave as soon as is politely possible. Start conversations with other PhD students, so you don't have to join the conversation with the profs.
Also remember that the fact that you have strong opinions and feelings about him does not mean the prof has similar opions and feelings about you. He may not even remember you. Which is probably the best case scenario.

I suggest a positive approach. X being top as you say is likely incredibly busy and maybe had something going privately you can’t know. It is perhaps an opportunity to discuss the results you achieved and/or future work. X may like you worked independently and be interested to collaborate in future. May I also point out that this close supervision model is new, X might be old school believing you should do it yourself


text:
What to do if "fake students" attending the teaching demo of a tenure-track interview do not react to planned active learning techniques of the demo?
I am reading about the importance of the exhibition of active-learning techniques in the course of teaching demonstrations of tenure-track interviews. This paper frequently stresses on the usage of various forms of active learning to engage the (hypothetical) students in an interview:

Effectively incorporating any of these active-learning activities into
your teaching demonstration can be impressive to the search committee.

The paper suggests various means of the realization of active learning, for example, by

Similarly, ask the audience to construct possible conclusions to be
drawn from the data rather than just telling them your
conclusions—interpretation of material is a key aspect of the student
learning process;

or

Job candidates will often stop periodically and ask whether there are
any questions, which in a real classroom can be problematic, because
students who are lost are usually reluctant to speak in front of the
class. A more effective strategy is to ask a question that will
diagnose whether the students actually understand the material.

However, authors automatically assume that an interviewee necessarily benefits from the co-operation of the audience as "fake students", say,

Regardless of the makeup of the audience, it is advised that you treat
them as though they were students.

''... when active-learning exercises are being used, as the faculty
need to give typical student responses if the exercise is to work
appropriately.''

In particular, in a real class, if a lecturer does not get that much of response from students regarding his applied active learning processes, nothing catastrophic happens and he can switch to other means of delivering his material and progression.
Now let's say an interviewee, in a 15-minute demo facing a committee whose members are all fake students (faculty members), plans to incorporate two instances of active learning in his demo (for example, a usage of clicker while asking a question from them, and a query to ask what they can express about the interpretation of a graph). Now, what should the interviewee do if his fake students do not properly react to the first planned active learning idea of the demonstration?

Option 1: moving on without any further try to keep them involved (as it would be pretty likely that they won't react to next engagement impulse of the applicant);
pros: there would no no more awkward silence there, and he can instead do some thing else
cons: active learning demonstration also flies out of the window.

Option 2: keep executing the plan and performing the next active learning strategy with the hope that this time they react more co-operatively; in this case,
pros: the applicant has, at least, demonstrated another instance of active learning engagement.
cons: the next silence, if not totally negative, does not convey any positive feedback from the panel.

Any experiences (and/or thoughts) about the proper approaches to handling such a situation are welcome!

The goal is to evaluate your performance in a class of real students. You state this is the case you would have no issues handling. Why would your approach with fake students be any different?

Broadly related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24461/things-to-focus-on-in-a-model-lesson

@Lodinn Most people are nervous in a trial lecture, and when things don't go as planned (e.g., with participants not "playing their part" as students) many people will get flustered, like penelope. I think it's a good question how an interviewee best prepares for this situation.

While this isn't a strategy I tried myself (yet), I was lucky enough to get very candid feedback after my last teaching interview (a couple of years ago) - and suggestions for how to improve.
The feedback basically focused around the lack of student involvement - active learning - in my teaching demo. While I did try to ask a question (and had in my head prepared nuanced sub-questions to help lead the "students" to the right answer step by step), after the "fake students" didn't respond, I got a bit flustered, and just couldn't continue addressing the committee as students. (Apparently they were not engaging on purpose, but hoped I would continue to try, to see how one would deal with a somewhat disengaged student body.)
For me, the main problem was really pretending that "fake students" really are students, the "role-play" element of it (as one of my friends describes it). The suggestion I liked and have been thinking about ever since was instead of role-playing, describe and talk your panel through what you would do.  I liked this as it allows you, the presenter, a full control of your demo.
In my head, this scenario plays out something like this (fake presentation script, the things I would actually say):

(Bla bla bla presenting a concept)
Here, I would make a pause, and ask the following question: "Now, based on what we just discussed, would somebody like to attempt intepreting this graph over here?"
Then I would wait for some 30 seconds *after waiting for 30 seconds*
If there were still no volunteers by this time, I would try to encourage them by prompting: "The topic today was finding best models, the ones with the lowest error. So the part of this function we are interested in are its minima...?"
Then I would wait a bit longer *waits for another 30 seconds* and if nobody still attempts an answer, I would indicate that I might select a student to offer an answer while giving further hints "Maybe somebody from... the left side? What we are trying to read from this graph is, which of these models is the best. You can see the errors corresponding to different models, so, which model would you pick based on this...?"
I do this "vague selection" first as I noticed somebody will often attempt an answer in this case, before I actually select any specific student to answer.
Still, if no one offers the answer, I would pick a student at random (from the left side of the classroom) and encourage them to read out the best model from the graph. If they still struggle, I would attempt to guide them there while highlighting the concepts on the graph *use a laser pointer* "So we are looking for the minimum of this function ..." *slide the pointer down the function to the minimum* "... and reading out the corresponding, best model..." *collapses the pointer down to the axis to read the value* "... which we can read here is...?" *circle the answer with the laser pointer on the graph*
At this point, if I am still not getting an answer, I would read out the answer myself ("our 35-th model!"). I think this incremental way of walking through the question not only offers the correct answer to the students but demonstrates the steps one needs to take to arrive at the correct answer.
And then I would go back to presenting the next concept.
(goes back to the presentation bla bla bla...)

You talk about clicker questions, which to my understanding require some type of technology for the students to submit their answers -- describing your approach in this way could also work in a demo where your "fake students" just don't have the technology you're considering at hand.
As I said, this isn't something I had an opportunity to try out myself during a teaching demo, but I hope to get an chance soon. I'm also very much interested to any other suggestions anybody else has.

"Apparently they were not engaging on purpose" yeah, or they were in fact just checking their emails and afterwards made this lack of engagement the candidate's problem (speaking as somebody who has been part of a few interviews).

@xLeitix Normally I might agree but a) there were only three panel members so I could keep a lot of eye contact and b) they were seated close enough to me for me to be able to see the contents of their desk - no electronic devices open, and nobody awkwardly staring at their wrist or crotch.

@xLeitix Also, having been part of several interviews myself at my current Uni, I know who are the listeners and who are the e-mail checkers (or even worse, reading the candidate's cv -- likely for the first time -- while they're trying to present). I make a point to avoid interviewing with the latter kind, and to not include them in any panels that I have any control or influence over (not many yet, but at least I have a 'naughty' list for the future). Also, knowing about the cohort (especially from 2-3 years ago), 'disengaged student body' was pretty much realistic for this position, sadly.

First of all thanks for your useful hints! Just a question about the addressing "fake students": My demo is supposed to be online over zoom, so I suppose if no one jumped in to answer, I have to then randomly pick a fake student because I don't have any room to first start from. e.g., left side of the class, because the order of presenters on my screen are the same of those on the others. If so, then I would lose one extra chance of "nudge" to grab their involvement. Do you have any idea for this case, as well?

@User I'm not sure I got my suggestion clearly across. I suggest to actually say all the things in the blockquotes. To talk the committee through what you would do instead of trying to play it out with them acting as fake students. I would actually tell the committee "If nobody still attempts an answer, I would indicate that I might select a student to offer an answer while giving further hints and saying something like 'Maybe somebody from... the left side?' " This whole script does not expect any interaction from the committee. Describe the situation, and what you would do or say


text:
Is "Territorialism" By Academics For Private Sector Funding Official?
Academics within the same university and/or department are responsible for their own research funding from both public, philanthropic and private sector sources.
But problems sometimes arise if two members of the same department (less frequently two members of the same university but different departments) are "courting" the same company for research funding in the same area of research. It often happens that the first to make contact with the company will complain to their Head of Department about "poaching" by the other member.
I can understand the basis for the complaint if either:
(a) the company concerned is small and has limited funds; or
(b) the research proposal put by the second academic significantly overlaps that of the first.
Yet I cannot personally see anything wrong with a Dr Y approaching Z Corp (who already provides some support to colleague Dr X and may well have a plant in the region of their university) and putting a proposal for support to them (whole- or part-funding) for some project compatible with Z's commercial objectives.
But (from personal and anecdotal evidence) often the Department Heads discourage Dr Ys from doing this - even when the second proposal is distinct and far better than the first.
Can any Department Head elucidate on the reasoning behind this extreme and practically territorial clientelism?

Please don't add superfluous new tags. It clutters up the place. Not every keyword should be a tag.

@Buffy  Which new tags do you regard as superfluous ? I thought searchability depended a lot on the specificity of the tags . . .

You can search for keywords. Tags are for things that are of interest to several users and apply to several questions. Just enter "private", for example in the search field and you will turn up this question. There are maybe a million keywords on this site. Tagging would be useless if all those were tags. [tag:funding] is enough here.

Tags that can be interpreted many ways and apply to many totally unrelated concepts are useless. Also tags that only make sense for a single question.

@Buffy Actually it's important to use "private" as well as "funding" here as this territorialism doesn't arise for public or philanthropic funding. Searchers concerned with issues arising with private funding would surely appreciate the "cut-down" achieved when posters applied the "private" tag to their posts when looking into similar posts.

You are confusing tags with keywords. Private can apply to private industry, private colleges, private communications, and a host of others. It doesn't stand as a tag. Sector is even worse. If you want to find questions about private funding, search "[funding]private" in the search bar.

@Buffy You are right - I didn't know anything about keywords in SE posting. I'd assumed that the tags were keywords . . .

Such internal politics are, of course, not unknown. The various profs think that if somebody else gets a contract it means that they don't get it.
Everybody involved seems to be treating this incorrectly. They should be presenting a "unified front." Meaning they should band together thus providing more expertise and more attraction for private contracts. Speaking from the point of view of a private company (which I am in) a university with several researchers in a field is much more attractive than a single researcher. Multiple people mean that, if one of them is busy or has slightly the wrong focus, then the contract can still go to the university. And when we want some more research done we come back to the university and ask around. A cooperating group of researchers gets many more contracts than the same researchers acting by themselves.
So when one prof does "left handed widgets" and the other does "right handed widgets" they can group up and do both. They can trade equipment and journal subscriptions back and forth. They can share funding of post docs and visiting researchers. They can support each other in grant applications to other funding sources. By the time they retire they can have contributed so much to the university they get libraries named after them.
Yet I do see this kind of thing from time to time. Sometimes it is "empire building." A prof may think if he gets the contract he can improve his position in his department, get more of other kinds of funding, attract more researchers in his speciality, etc. Sometimes it is personal hostility. The profs involved may have long histories. Sometimes it is jealousy.  I suspect that sometimes the "system" at the university makes cooperating difficult.
And sometimes it may be antagonism towards the idea of private contracts as such, possibly by people other than the profs directly involved. Department heads or Deans of Science or such may think that private money is suspect for ideological reasons. That can be bothersome.

Thanks for your view. I am not talking about inter-academic cooperation here, just the capacity of two academics to be supported by the same large (e.g. multinational) company without either excluding the other unfairly. (Not a cuckoo's charter.) Getting cooperation for the sake of research in academia can't be engineered from outside or inside their department. Individualism in perspective is part of the academic psyche and always should be. Relationships only work synergistically where they are congenial and complementary, so people must choose for themselves.


text:
Incorrect citation in a published paper: can I ask the journal to correct it?
I found an (already published) paper that cites a paper of mine, but without inserting even the arXiv link (the paper is still in press). In this way, I lose one citation.
Is it possible for me to write the journal asking them to fix the problem?

I don't understand the question. How exactly did the paper cite your manuscript?

@WolfgangBangerth my paper is in press and I still have not a DOI. So they cite it as Author, title, Name of the journal, (in press) without adding the link from arxiv.

That's the way it is done. You can't be mad at the authors.

@WolfgangBangerth it is the way? Not adding the arxiv link even if it exist?

arXiv is a construct of the last ten years. Before that, you would at the very best have gotten the citation you got. Twenty years ago, nobody would have known about your paper to begin with. So historically, you're already on the positive side. Now, that's not a good argument to make, but I think the authors did what they were supposed to: They helped their readers to find related literature. An author does not have a responsibility to provide other authors with citations. (Separately, though: Let it go. It's a single citation. You will over the course of your career accumulate thousands.)

I will start with this:

Moreover, the citations on papers on arxiv count as an effective citation?

The answer to this cannot be objective. Different people (senior researchers) will give different answers depending on their research philosophy. Similarly, different bibliographic indices do (e.g. Google scholar consider the citations but others do not).
There are no standard rules obliging authors how to mention their references but I think most of the publishers (big ones especially) are keen to link the references to their sources. For some of my publications, I got contacted by the publisher before publishing my paper to fix a reference input because they were not able to link it.
In summary, I think there is no harm to contacting the journal asking to link the reference to your paper but you cannot contact every bibliographic index to do the same thing (e.g. Google Scholar, researchgrate, etc). Note that each of these indices has its own algorithm of linking papers to their citations (e.g. Google Scholar consider them non-source items and you can add it manually but I am not sure about the others). On the other side, you cannot track every citation and I think it is much better to invest time in making new publications that are worth citing.
In the future, you can improve the accessibility of your papers by publishing codes, data, etc. and using public repositories.

"In the future, you can improve the accessibility of your papers by [...] using public repositories" like Arxiv, which OP did use?

I meant like github and gitlab. Note always we search for papers but for easy to use tools, codes and data

@Younes thank you for the answer. I know the author personally. If I say it to him (and he accepts to add the arxiv link) even if he can not modify the already published paper, can he at least modify the version on google scholar? And then I would have my citation?

@User1010 I am not sure but I think you can do it yourself in google scholar: You suggest linking a paper to its reference source.

@Younes yes. Do you know how to do this? Thank you in advance!


text:
Suggestion for websites which list open PhD positions in Mathematics in France, UK, Netherlands, Denmark only
I am a student of an Asian country who completed the 2nd year of masters last year  and I am applying for PhD positions in Pure Mathematics in Europe.
I know about this scholarship database website which list open positions for PhDs, but I don't think that the list is complete by any means.
Can you please let me know of some websites that have a list of open PhD positions in Pure Mathematics in Europe?

Europe is a continent and not a country. A lot of these things are organized nationally.

You should identify the departments/supervisors you are interested in working with and check their websites to see if they are advertising for PhD students. There's no global system.

https://web.math.pmf.unizg.hr/~duje/mathdept.html

Almost all open academic positions (including PhD positions) in the Netherlands will be posted to:

www.academictransfer.com

I would suggest having a look at the European Commission database of offers
https://euraxess.ec.europa.eu/
The filtering options are quite useful, although I would suggest you leaving them loose.
The site you listed is just crawling across this site, so better to go straight to the source of informations.

Almost all open PhD positions (in any field) in the UK will be on FindAPhD.com.

I don't think that's always true. The department I did my PhD in used to advertise one or two projects are year on there (usually the flashy ones with the big-name supervisor) but there were many other available projects and supervisors besides those directly advertised. Nevertheless, it's a starting point.


text:
Should I write a third e-mail to prospective supervisor?
I am a student from 3rd world Asian Country and want to do a PhD in Pure mathematics. I wrote to prospective supervisors of UK and France on 22 December, 2021 (I have never met any of them before). When I got no reply from some of them, I wrote them again on 15 January, 2022. Still I got no reply from these specific professors.
I didn't knew that it was a holiday season in these universities near this time.
Now, my applications from most of the other universities I applied to have been rejected and some of the professors which didn't replied are those with whom I really want to work with.( None of these profs are most sought after in their field, most of them are in 50- 150 ranked universities).
I am considering to write a third e-mail as I am desperate because I am afraid not to receive a funding offer. So, should I write them a third e-mail?

@Sursula-they- No, it doesn't . The question you mentioned is a very complicated one I think and has a lot of extra information. I have asked it a very simple and informative manner mentioning countries I applied to , dates on which I send e-mail.

Have you submitted a formal application for a PhD in those departments? In the UK, you don't need to have the support/approval of a supervisor before doing so (broadly speaking), and all admissions are dealt with by a department committee rather than individuals. This could explain the lack of replies.

@astronat Ya, I know that but still 1 has to fill application form in which one has to write  who is prospective supervisor and title of research project and research proposal.

Yes, write to them. You have nothing to lose. But don't make the email a flood of information. Say something about your interest and a short bit on your background. Ask if there is a possibility of joining them and also ask what additional information they might want to see. Save the flood for a follow up.
A long and detailed email with a CV and support material is too easy to ignore since it takes time and effort to digest.
If you have read any of their papers or other papers closely related to their field then you might mention one or two of them in writing about your interest.

What should I mention about my previous e-mails? Should I write to them that this e-mail is a remainder of previous one?

That is hard to say. Most people would do that, I'd guess. If you flooded them in the past, it might even be appropriate to apologize for that. But the goal is to get communication, not a final decision. Ask for a reply: "Is there anything else I can provide to help you evaluate my suitability?"

@Bufffy I have written two e-mails, will it be considered flooding?

By flooding, I mean sending long emails with large attachments. And, since other options are now closed, you have limited options.


text:
Why would a university permit a disabled student to Gmail with university staff, in lieu of her official university email (ending in .edu or .ac.uk)?
I ask  out of curiosity. I have never seen this exception before! I know I shall not ask any student about their disability. My university is in the Anglosphere.
Using their @universitydomain.edu, a Disability Adviser (from the university's Disability Office) — and the Undergraduate Chair  — emailed that one of my students has legitimate basis, and shall be expected to, email from her personal @gmail.com. All her instructors shall not expect her to email from her @universitydomain.edu. But we can still reply to her official @universitydomain.edu, that is set up to forward everything to her Gmail. I know that she's a full time four year undergraduate, not an exchange student.
What can this "legitimate basis" be? What would legitimize someone using their @gmail.com, but hamper them from their @universitydomain.edu?

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

It would help to know the country. Keep in mind that the ADA requires that the need for the accommodation be commensurate with the burden it puts on the institution. The need for using gmail is likely low (one could set up a relay that sends email sent from a gmail account to an .edu account to be re-sent from there), but the burden on the institution is even lower (you're not going to get very far denying an ADA request by saying "I prefer .edu addresses").

Gmail supports accessibility features such as screen readers. Possibly those features are not supported, or not supported as well, by the university’s in-house email system. Since the directive to allow the student to contact professors from her gmail account came from the Disability Office, a likely explanation is that the student needs to be able to use those accessibility features because of a disability or medical condition, and made a request through the Disability Office to be allowed to use her gmail account. Based on the university’s policy for disability-based accommodations, and related laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (or comparable laws if this isn’t in the US), the request was approved.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

I would hazard a guess that Gmail has accessibility features that work for her disability whereas whatever email system they use does not. I have seen some universities where the default email system is still ancient and my wild guess would be it's not screen-reader friendly.
It should, in theory, be possible for her to use Gmail on her end and none to be the wiser but either (a) your university doesn't want people to do that, or (b) the advisor doesn't know you can do that, since setting up forwarding is somewhat easier (this seems more likely).

To get her using Gmail linked to the standard system can require a certain amount of configuration in the standard system, with sysadmin privileges (e.g. total auto-forwarding is often blocked for users thoguh it seems to be enabled for outgoing here).  Really old university default email systems probably aren't the problem unless the user is tied to webmail for some reason - get the data onto their own device in a clean format (as traditional, standards-compliant email systems can do very well) and assistive tools can work from there

The answers given are the overwhelmingly likely ones. Though I would add that there is also a possibility of this being tied in to mental health. I have the opposite situation to the student in question: I struggle to open my gmail due to past trauma relating to emails I was receiving there. But my edu email is fine to open.
If a student has anxiety or gets easily overwhelmed, or maybe has chronic fatigue etc, it may take them a while/require support to go through their student emails (personally I get A LOT of emails every day) . They may be repyling more predictably on another email and wish to receive important emails, like from teachers and professors, there.
This scenario is pretty unlikely, but it can happen. I guess it is useful to bear in mind that when it comes to mental health, some people may have difficulty with facing very specific things. It may seem strange to others, but that's the nature of mental healthy disabilities.

Another possible issue may lie in email security protocols. Concerns about cyber-crime have led many universities to restrict access to servers via 'standard' routes. For example, my university has disabled IMAP and requires mail clients to authenticate using MS Exchange Server and two-factor authentication. I can imagine this could be problematic for users who rely on specialist software and/or hardware, which may not (readily) support the necessary protocols.

Going completely on a whim here: it may be that the university IT department prefers it that way, without forwarding. Some universities are pretty lax about that, some others [I just found googling] are not. Also, forwarded emails sometimes play nasty tricks either due to people testing it not fully understanding the system or just Gmail shenanigans with labels.
Seriously, this usually works but every once in a while, for some people, it does not. And instead of trying to provide IT support for a person with a disability, it is probably easier to not have to deal with this additional layer at all.

It specifically says that their university address is forwarded to Gmail.

@Barmar My bad, I've misread it. Pretty much the same logic applies to "send as an alias" though: technically possible, but IT department might have a different opinion.


text:
Listing GPA on resumes or job applications
When people list GPA on a resume, Linkedin or job/internship/graduate program application what GPA is it: the CGPA or most recent semester's/semesters' GPA? For some graduate programs only the last year/2 year GPA is considered but when it is not explicitly stated that the GPA for only certain semesters is relevant then what GPA would be typically stated?

Cumulative GPA. It might seem dishonest to cherry-pick the best GPA or only show a GPA from a single semester.

Agreed. I would assume cumulative.


text:
Can a research associate in UK supervise a PhD position in UK?
I have completed my master's from a country in Latin America in Mathematics in October 2021. I want to do PhD in Europe in Algebra.
I was looking at the profiles of Algebra groups of the Universities of UK.
It seems that the designation of professors in UK is different as compared to my country. I have googled quite a lot but I am still confused about this particular designation.
Can someone with a designation of Research Associate be principal supervisor for a PhD thesis in math?

Many of your other questions say that you obtained your master's from a country in Asia. Some of your other questions say that you have already started a PhD in Germany in late 2021. Which of these details are the true state of affairs?

@YemonChoi The question I asked by mentioning that I started a phd in Gremany is not true in the sense that I have not started any PhD. That question was asked from a seperate account of mine because I was overthinking and really stressed  about a possible confrontation with my master's thesis advisor who had abondened me midway in Future. These accounts got merged by the site.

Thank you for the clarification.

@YemonChoi I am really sorry for the inconvinience caused to you and other people on this site.

No, in general Research Associates are postdocs and usually a principal supervisor has to be a permanent member of academic staff. This normally means some research fellows, all senior research fellows,  Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, Readers and Professors. In some cases an academic can only be a principle supervisor once they have successfully supervised a student to completion as a secondary supervisor, but this varies.
It is, however, possible that you can have a member of the faculty as your "principal" supervisor on paper, but be supervised on a day to day basis by a research associate.

In general, "research fellows" and "senior research fellows" are also postdocs on fixed-term appointments.

For research fellows it depends. Some research fellows, such as those on a Henry Welcome, or EPSRC postdoctoral fellowship are equivalent to a postdoc. However others, such as those on a MRC CDF or  a Future Leaders Fellowship are independent group leader positions (generally also fixed term, but often with the expectation of proleptic appointment at the end). Senior Research Fellows are research only positions, generally for people with external funding that are equivalent to Senior Lecturers.


text:
Not citing the methods in the grant proposal
Last year, I wrote a proposal for DFG, a German body funding, with my colleague and we got money to hire three PhD students on my side, and two on my colleague’s side in another university. In the proposal, I had used some not very well-known mathematical methods to derive some results related to chemistry which was the main goal of proposal.
Now, one of my PhD students has reported me to the university authorities for plagiarism. My question is: How serious is the situation? Can they sack me for just not citing the methods that I have used? Can I call the granting body for correction and refining the proposal and updating the citations?
I had learned about these methods in some posters presented in a conference several years ago. But I had no clue that these papers are published and are available on the internet. (These methods are vital to obtain the main results of my proposal.)
Also, does any one know how these matters are handled in Germany? In my home country, in South America, it’s much more relaxed.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

If you describe methods in your DFG proposal without attributing them, you claim that they are your own ideas. It does not matter whether they are published in a paper.
So the very first thing you need to do is to contact the DFG, retract the proposal and return the money. Then you need to apologise and explain yourself.

@Ralf That's a weird thing to say. Other research projects that did not receive funding in that round might need the money ;)

@Ralf I am not really sure that you understand how serious this is. If you do not have a permanent position yet, this could easily end your whole academic career. This could even be considered fraud, although it is unlikely that the police will investigate this.

@Ralf In most other countries, universities will ask for references. If you cannot provide any from Germany although you worked there, this will look bad.

I think the first thing the OP needs to do is to talk with their co-PI, not contact the DFG.

As Buzz mentioned in comments, the fact that your own PhD student reported you for plagiarism is deeply troubling. It indicates that your PhD student is very unhappy with you as an academic supervisor. But you do not even mention why your PhD student reported you to the University, as if their motivation does not matter. I would expect a PhD supervisor to be better involved in academic life of their student to be able at least spot the problem before it hits you in the back.
The way how you describe the alleged misconduct is also deeply troubling to me. The methods are clearly potent enough to help you win a significant piece of funding, yet you did not care to research them properly and establish attribution in three years. Your attempts to explain the situation sound rather weak to me.

I had no clue that these papers are published and are available on
the internet.

In academia, when we do not "have a clue" about things, we research them. You had three years to find out and many ways to do so: to contact the author of the poster and ask her for references, to search online, to ask a colleague in your department or from a maths department for help. I expect a PhD student to be persistent enough to find proper references for their paper; I am shocked that an established academic attempts to brush it off with a simple "I dunno" comment.
To answer your questions:

Can I call the granting body for correction and refining the proposal and updating the citations?

Please read the definition of plagiarism or ask people from the ethical committee at your university to explain them to you. Plagiarism is an act of passing someone else's intellectual work as your own.  By default, a funding panel assumes that all ideas put in your proposal are your own, unless specified otherwise. The funding you received is a recognition of the strength and value of these ideas – and these ideas are not your own! You can amend the document, but it does not wipe the fact that your proposal have likely misled the awarding panel. And obviously you cannot return the funding because it is already spent on hiring the PhD students and staff for the project.

Can they sack me for just not citing the methods that I have used?

It depends on the policies and practices of your university, and frankly on how much support your head of department is willing to offer you.  If this information is passed on to the funder – which your university is probably obligated to do – it is likely that you may be banned from making further applications for several years at least. Your university may not be pleased with it.
I am shocked, however, that you are concerned with your own safety rather with making things right. The real problem is not that your PhD student reported you, but that you clearly do not understand the ethical standards of the environment you chose to work in. Your real concern should be not to fix the proposal, but to fix your own misunderstanding of how academic research works.

Not to mention that even if there were no published papers, one could and should cite the poster presented at the conference.

"It depends on the policies and practices of your university, and frankly on how much support your head of department is willing to offer you." - I don't think either of these statements is particularly applicable in Germany. Whether the OP can be sacked mostly depends on the type of their position. And heads of department are often not particularly powerful in Germany.