text:
Should cheating be expected to be more common in Universities in India, and if so, how could any provided credentials be evaluated for authenticity?
I was a bit surprised to see the extent of cheating going on during state matriculation exams in Bihar (one of the states in eastern part of India). Looking at the images posted at twitter, it looks like large amounts of people do not have much respect for the exam process. My experience from different countries have generally been that cheaters attempt to cheat discreetly, if not so much for any other reason expect to avoid getting caught. In this example in Bihar it seems that getting caught was not a major concern for those cheating.

In this other article about above situation, an individual is quoted as saying:

"Any examination of this scale in any part of the country has similar complaints."

I had earlier read about corruption being quite common in India, it is just that I did not expect it have led to this type of behavior in public. For example I had an Indian friend who told me how he had obtained his car driving license years earlier without any kind of tests or qualifications by just paying a clerk at the driving license office. This sort of stories are present also in articles like this one from Reuters that says:

(Reuters) - Mahesh Kundu paid $45 for a driving license, Rupam Bhatia $110 to be admitted to hospital and Vishrant Chandra $130 for a marriage certificate. These are the commonplace bribery stories experienced by middle-class Indians who have poured into the streets to say "enough is enough."

For one reason or another I thought that this sort of requests for money always happened discreetly and money was always exchanged quietly, "under the counter". Looking at this rather public event in Bihar made me wonder, though, about what effect the level of corruption in India may have on any qualifications earned at their universities. How would you know whether a student has actually earned their qualifications?

I disagree with the close votes, the question is not opinion-based. If anything it's relatively broad, but the question could potentially be answered objectively.

Just a note - when my wife (from a relatively poor school in northern England) interviewed at a well known university in southern England, she was accepted.  She later learned from talking to other students (who came from rich schools) that the questions asked at the interview were the same as the previous year.  The expensive high schools in England send lots of students to these places, and debrief the students coming back from interviews.  Is it morally different?

It is still the same as ever.

This particular incident doesn't happen to be an university examination. This is the final grade 10h school exam that was conducted centrally by the government of state of Bihar, India. BSEB. The given situation is being highly criticized by Indian media and Indian people as well.
Coming to the question, Yes there is a lot of widespread corruption and malpractices prevalent in India. I can't guarantee you that there had been no cheating involved in passing a student in regard to any examination. However, in Indian universities especially the top ones, the aforementioned phenomenon is quite rare. Moreover, the admissions to these  top universities is quite competitive and often based on entrance exams. You can cheat to pass an exam but you can't score enough to get a rank under 25k out of 1.4 million candidates. (AIEEE)
That said, there are various other parameters to judge a candidate as well. Even let us suppose that a student has been able to cheat his/her way throughout, there is always an interview round to any job or any position.

Addressing your last paragraph, interviews aren't a great solution to the problem. For instance, for graduate admissions, US universities rarely require an interview. And for faculty positions, the cost (and opportunity cost) of interviewing an unqualified candidate is quite substantial.

@NateEldredge I completely agree that interviews aren't a great solution to the problem. But if that is the case then students can judged on other parameters. For example, US universities can screen candidates on the basis of research and recommendation letters (which they often do). They can then interview the shortlisted candidates.

"The given situation is being highly criticized by Indian media and Indian people as well." This has been relatively common-place in India now for some time, it is just that now with social media making it public people are starting to criticize it.

We do skype interviews of the finalists for doctoral admissions. There's been many cases where we felt that the students had 'help' in writing their statements and were coached for their interviews. Once we asked a question from a different perspective on their topic, they fell apart. This is not just foreign applicants but domestic as well.

AIEEE has been rebranded as JEE Mains.

Being a student who has seen the Indian higher education system from the school level to the postgraduate level and been part of lower tier as well as higher tier institutions, I think I can say a few words about this.

When I passed my matriculation and 10+2 level examinations, I did it from arguably a major school in Kolkata affiliated to the CISCE. Cheating was something which was near absent (ofcourse you could still find people who purportedly managed to share the correct option to MCQ 1(a) but it would probably be childish lies).
I went to a lower tier institution in my undergrads and I did see some amount of cheating there, but it was rarely an issue. I saw some in the initial years and it decreased at an exponential level in later years - college authorities began to penalize the students enormously if they were caught, which is how it should be. It had been reduced to negligible amounts by the time I was leaving.
At the top tier institution that I attended for my postgraduate degree, there was no cheating. The reason was simple, you couldn't cheat to pass nor did the students really want to.

Now I think the statement that any exam of this scale in the country has similar complaints is an unfair generalization or plain sensationalization. I don't think so.
I think it depends more on the student demographics. The school level exams that I gave had dead silence in the halls, similar to what I experienced during my postgraduate years. The crop of students matter to a huge extent I think, so does the leniency the institution shows. Both of the above would have merely cancelled the candidate's paper if they were found to be cheating, the undergraduate one as you might imagine would not be so strict, although they did reform tremendously later.
If I generalize now, I would tell you this - A strong application I think can be assumed to be fairly authentic in the sense that although cheating is a plague in this country, one cannot ace an examination by cheating through it, it is merely not possible - sure one can pass an examination but I think that is the extent of it.
Also, I don't think it is unfair to say that a hypothetical candidate who aced exams by cheating at an undergraduate level, would not be looking to get into further higher studies - I mean why would they? They already are acutely aware of their incompetence at some level or the other. Also, I strongly believe that the fact that such a candidate is not authentic will be clear from other sections of their application - they cannot escape without having any reflection anywhere in their application. TOEFL/IELTS/GRE scores, research statement, letters of recommendations, research experience - there will be something off, enough to flag a candidate.
And finally let me put all of my experiences in context by mentioning my reaction to the example you used - the matriculation exam in Bihar. I saw those same pictures on television and to say that I was appalled was an understatement - I had never seen anything like that before. To see the education system being prostituted to that extent made me furious and I am certain nearly everyone I know shared that view. Now, I again reiterate my point, these people will NEVER send an application anywhere.
So, yes I think you can consider most applications you receive to be authentic. If they are not they will be reflected somewhere or the other, enough for you to flag it - email communications, scores etc.
PS: Yes corruption is rampant in India but I don't think it is related directly to the example above. The authorities in the picture above are not exactly on the take I think - they are likely non-existent, or lazy, or just plain scared to do anything to the mob.

Looking at below article in Los Angeles Times, it seems that cheating is wide spread and even supported by criminal gangs who have made it to source of income.
How does it compare to other countries is hard to tell exactly, but most likely it is not this bad in e.g. the west or Japan.
India test cheating stirs outrage — then people start dying
A snip from the article:

Six years after Rai first complained to police that state medical
  school exams were being leaked, the extent of the cheating scandal in
  Madhya Pradesh has become outrageously clear. Whistle-blowers say that
  over nearly a decade, tens of millions of dollars exchanged hands to
  rig the tests that help determine university slots and civil service
  jobs, allegedly with the complicity of senior politicians in one of
  India's most populous states.
Colluding with the state examination board, known by the Hindi acronym
  Vyapam, rival test-fixing gangs helped at least 2,000 students con
  their way into coveted medical colleges and many more land police and
  other government posts, authorities say.
More than 1,800 people have been arrested — mostly suspected cheaters,
  middlemen and testing administrators — and hundreds more are on the
  run.
The scandal, colossal even by India's notorious standards for graft,
  has grown more explosive in recent weeks with the sudden deaths of
  several people reportedly connected to the case.


text:
For what reasons is a class expunged instead of dropped?
Instead of having a class dropped, withdrawn or set as incomplete it is possible to have it expunged from your transcript record. Why does this happen typically?

It will depend largely on the institution. (I would guess)
Some things most will do.
For example if it was a data entry mistake by admin.
Some less will do:
For example a data entry mistake by you (Eg if you accidentally enrolled and didn't notice til you got your exam timetable).
Some none will do: Eg you withdrew because you have failed enough prior tests that even 100% the exam  will not let you pass.
I've heard friend of friends of mine got expunged (or possibly withdrawn changed to "With Drawn without penality") for medical reasons

@Oxinabox you thought enough to comment would you upvote so that i could please ask another question

What's the distinction between "dropped" and "expunged?" At my school, an undergrad who drops a course in the first half of the term doesn't have it appear on the transcript at all; would that be considered "expunged?"

@cpast Expunged is what they can do after the drop period, under special circumstances. It means that the class still won't show up on your transcript, even though you dropped it too late.

It depends on the institution. I had a class dropped as an undergraduate (my advisor told me that if I registered as extracurricular, I wouldn't have to take the final exam, I would just get a pass/fail based on my homeworks. I found out he was wrong about that 2 weeks before the final when they sent out the exam schedule and I was registered for the final exam in that class (turns out the changed the rules for extracurricular classes the year before). Fortunately, I had the conversation with my advisor over email, so it was declared clerical error and the class was expunged from my record. Another student in my class was hit by a car a few days after the last day to drop classes and hurt badly enough that he needed a semester off. All of the classes he was registered for were expunged from his record, and his transcript reads that semester as free for health reasons.
Most universities will expunge a class from your records if you have a good reason: typically clerical error or health (including mental health) reasons. Some universities will instead let you "withdraw without penalty" if it is for health reasons. The only way to know how your university does it is to check the regulations or ask your advisor.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is it legal to upload CC BY papers to academia.edu? Terms of Use are vague on this
There have been discussions regarding academia.edu's Terms of Use (https://www.academia.edu/terms) and some responses have stated that it is impossible to upload published papers to academia even with the most liberal copyright licenses is illegal (Why does academia.edu reserve the right to sell, modify, and "exploit" my papers if I post them there?). They have recently updated their terms of use and changed the paragraph "License granted by Member".
However, does this new agreement allow articles under CC BY licenses of open access journals to be uploaded? The new terms state that academia may modify and sublicense any materials, but that they will not claim ownership. Is this sufficient for legally uploading a document licensed under CC BY?
Edit: To further clarify, CC BY requires the citation of the original publication usually embedded in final PDFs. Do the current terms of use comply to CC BY by means of the statement that academia.edu will not claim ownership?

I don't understand why anyone would agree to the academia.edu terms: "you hereby grant to Academia.edu a worldwide, non-exclusive, transferable, sublicenseable, perpetual, royalty-free license to reproduce, modify for formatting purposes, prepare derivative works based upon, publicly display, publicly perform, distribute, and otherwise use your Member Content in connection with operating and providing the Services and Content to you and to other Members."

If you own the copyright of the paper, which is common for open access papers released under a CC BY license, then you can do whatever you want with it, provided you haven't signed any separate agreement not to do that.  The Creative Commons license is irrelevant, because it's not exclusive: you can distribute the paper under other licenses as well, so there's no legal obstacle to giving Academia.edu whatever non-exclusive rights they want.  (I would never give them the rights they ask for, but that's a personal decision.)
If you don't own the copyright, then you are stuck.  The CC BY license requires attribution for derivative works, and the Academia.edu license does not, so they are asking for more rights than the CC BY license guarantees.  Unless you are in a position to grant those rights (as the copyright holder or through some other agreement), there's nothing you can do.

What if I hold the copyright, but with this following condition: "Reproduction of all or part of an article is also subject to compliance with usual academic attribution practices, which must be scrupulously complied with in addition to the CC-BY requirements."

@embo You cannot own a copyright with a condition. Either you own it, or you do not.

That is also what I thought, however, OA publishers such as Frontiers and Plos One state this rule in their Terms... Is this restriction meaningless then?

You can hold copyright but agree to a condition that restricts what you can do with the copyright.  It sounds like this is technically incompatible with the Academia.edu license.  You could probably get away with just ignoring the incompatibility (as jakebeal points out in his answer), but I'd recommend writing to Academia.edu.  They might change their policy or offer you an exception.  And if they refuse to change or offer exceptions, then you know the details really matter to them.  In any case, it's good for them to hear that their current policy is troubling.

I started at this by trying to analyze the legalities, ended up in uncertain territory, and threw that attempt to answer out.  Let's take a step back from the question of legality and look at the question a little bit differently: Should you be worried about the exact legal terms at all?
Academia.edu is a startup with an vague and likely rapidly mutating business model.  In interacting with such an entity, you should expect the terms and conditions to change unpredictably and without warning.  Furthermore, since they are using custom license terms rather than standard, there are almost certainly legal loopholes and potential international issues (there's a reason the CC licenses have so much hidden complexity).
As a user of the site, you are then put in a position of trying to figure out the best spirit of compliance.  Regardless of the terms, Academia.edu seems to want to be sharing in the spirit of CC-BY (they seem to basically want to make research information really easy to discover), so it seems reasonable that you could in good faith upload a copy of an open access publication provided to you under CC-BY.
So, what are the likely outcomes of this situation?

The publisher and Academia.edu's license might turn out to be technically incompatible, but acting basically in compliance with CC-BY, and nobody involved cares about the technical incompatibility.
The publisher and Academia.edu notice their incompatibility and decide they care, and negotiate with one another to find an accommodation (either peaceably or via legal complaints), in which your action is insignificant, since they wouldn't bother unless a lot of people were doing the same thing.

It is highly unlikely that you would ever end up having a problem because of a good-faith upload to Academia.edu, since to the best of a non-lawyer's ability to reasonably discover, the intent of Academia.edu appears to be compatible with CC-BY, whatever their licensing terms currently say.
Thus, I'd say: it's close enough to be workable; don't worry about it and upload away.

I agree that despite the license terms, there's probably very little legal risk to the users (I'd be shocked if any user gets sued over this).  But I'd add one caveat, namely that if you take a cavalier attitude towards licensing then you should upload only your own papers.  I'd be unhappy if someone else uploaded a CC BY paper of mine under these license terms, even if they honestly felt the site's intent was good and no issue was likely to arise.

@AnonymousMathematician I think that's certainly a reasonable attitude to take, though I'm much more willing to see my work distributed in whatever form.

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


text:
Reply to a professor who said no open position BUT admired the work
I have asked a professor in Germany for a PhD position in his lab and I sent a mail with previous work experience, future research plan, and why I want to join his group within 8-10 lines, also attached a simple CV. He replied me starting with 'You are a strong candidate' and he admired my work and plan also, but he said presently there are no open positions.
But I want to work under his supervision. I have at most 6 months to complete my masters. How can I give a reply mentioning I have time and in that I mean time if he found any open positions I can join his lab.

Have you considered finding external funds (e.g. studentship) to support your PhD studies?

Nope..I didn't mention about that.

You can write something along the lines of "Thanks a lot for your last mail. If you happen to have an opening in the next 3-8 months, please let me know. As already written, I would love to work with you, so you could expect an application of me in such a case. Also, if there is a graduate school offering scholarships in your department that I happen to have missed, please also let me know."
Note that pretty much the only case that you could hope for is that the professor has a currently running application for external funding that may be granted within the next few months. In that case, there may be an opening for a PhD student position (it's not really called like that, by the way) coming from that funding.


text:
Should I review for a new journal whose publisher is unjustifiably listed in Beall's list of predatory publishers?
I received a review request from an open access journal, which is brand new. It has published about 10 articles so far. The articles seem to be of mediocre quality but do not seem to plagiarize other articles. The journal has all important sections and features in place (review/editorial process, ethics, editorial board, wave waiver policies, working DOIs and article metrics, etc.). However, the publisher of such journal is in Beall's list of predatory open access publishers. As it is the case of many publishers listed there, the publisher is unjustifiably included in the list. There are no posts (as far as I know) explaining why it ended there. Most of Beall's criteria for determining predatory open access publishers do not seem to apply in this case.
I cannot see the article text nor the author names before accepting the review request. However, by judging the name of the journal, the aims and scopes, and the abstract of the article, it seems that the review request per se is legit.
I looked at related questions, e.g., Should I accept review requests from dubious journals?, Is it a good idea to cite paper from publisher listed in Beall’s list, and How to identify predatory publishers/journals. The present question seems novel enough to me – it looks different from the one in the first link. Even though I am quite sure about what to do, I am asking this question with the hope that it (and the answers) will be beneficial for the visitors.

Well, Beall's list isn't per se a canon of bad research, and there can be mistakes. There's been some criticism on the list too.

I'm always looking for reasons (however flimsy) to refuse to do extra work. I don't see why you are so eager to spend time helping out a journal that even you admit publishes mediocre work.

@AndyPutman that is of course an appealing point of view :-) but it seems related more to the question should I review mediocre articles? My answer to that question would be yes because mediocre articles are still articles. They might come in handy for producing scientific knowledge in one way or another. Also IMHO, a fair review process is supposed to improve an article, hopefully to make it less mediocre. In this case, I cannot see the article text nor the author names, so I cannot evaluate the article upfront. I updated the question reflecting this.

Why not email someone on the editorial board about your concerns, especially if it's a familiar name?

Possibly related to http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5466/is-mdpi-a-reputable-academic-publisher. The fact that they are asking for reviews suggests to me a legitimacy that is absent from most predatory journals.

You are not able to see the paper before agreeing to review it? This might be a case of different fields, but for me (in math) that would be a huge red flag.

One thing you need to be careful about is the fact that most predatory journals publish just for money. If you are sure this is not a predatory journal, then there is not an issue. But if it is you might end up reviewing a complete junk piece of research, which might end be published against your decision...

If you're (reasonably) sure that the journal/publisher is OK, you should consider sending Jeffrey Beall an email, regardless of whether you take the review or not. (He's very reasonable.)

"Most of Beall's criteria for determining predatory open access publishers do not seem to apply in this case." I imagine that's the case for most of the publishers on his list. Obvious analogy: you don't have to break most of a country's laws to end up in jail.

@TobiasKildetoft in my field, it is quite normal to be able to read the paper text only after agreeing to review it. It is also dominated by single blinded peer reviews, while this journal appears to adopt double blinded peer review.

I am curious. If you cannot see the paper beforehand, how do you determine if you are qualified to review it?

@TobiasKildetoft abstracts are usually quite self-contained in my field. Of course, one is free to decline review also after seeing the manuscript text.

You need to ask yourself a few key questions:

What is the purpose of your reviewing any article? If it is to be listed in the annual acknowledgement of reviewers for Big, Prestigious Journal X, then don't review this article.  If it is to contribute to the scholarly process (and to pay-it-forward for the next article you submit somewhere) - then proceed.
What is your impression of the journal/publisher? They can't be entirely/purely dishonest, since they have, in fact, sent the article for peer review. (The truly bad actors don't bother!)

Form your own opinion of their offering, and do consider that it can take longer to review a poor manuscript than a good one.  Then, invest your time in what you value.

Welcome to the site! I like your answer. I hope you'll bring more :)

All answers are very valuable. I updated all of them, but I accept this one because to me it is the most simple yet balanced one. Welcome to the site, Marie!

If you are content that the journal is unfairly listed -- and I agree that seems to be the case, based on what you've said -- then I would say ignore Beall and decide whether to review as you would for any other journal. If it's in your wheelhouse and moderately interesting, and you have time, do it.

Also, if they send you a truly bad paper, then publish it against your recommendations, then you might decide that it is, after all, somewhat predatory, but gives itself a respectable appearance by having reviews... "assume good faith" first, but see what comes of it.

Your question presupposes an answer by specifying that the publisher is "unjustifiably" included in Beall's list.  If you are convinced that the inclusion is unjustifiable, then why should you care what Beall says?  And in any case, you are free to review for whichever journals you'd like, regardless of their status.  You are in charge of your reviewing activities, and all Beall can do is offer advice and guidance.
If you end up reviewing for a problematic journal, then it damages the community a little by supporting/endorsing that journal.  On the other hand, it also helps the authors and readers, and it's up to you to balance these factors in any given case.  And if you review for a journal that is unfairly considered problematic, then your impact is good on both counts.
It's worth keeping in mind that there are many ways a publisher can be problematic that may not be immediately apparent from their web pages.  For example, have they arranged for permanent archiving of their papers, even if they go out of business?  Do they send spam to try to recruit authors?  Have all the listed members of the editorial board actually agreed to join the board?  Can you detect worrisome patterns over several journals?  (For example, if a publisher promises a three-week review period for a math journal, then I'd question their competence and I wouldn't trust other journals they run, even in areas where that time frame might make sense.)  Evaluating a new publisher is not easy, and certainly Beall can make mistakes, but it's also easy to make mistakes in the opposite direction.
Your question comes across a little like a request for people to say "Yes, Beall is often wrong, and we should be reviewing more papers for journals he considers questionable."  I wouldn't go so far as to say that, and I'm generally suspicious of the publishers on Beall's list.  But I'm sure he is sometimes wrong, and everyone should use their own judgment.

You can find many examples of bad research in "good" journals, and good research in "bad" journals.  As a reviewer, you are ultimately providing commentary on the science that has been submitted for peer-review.  I don't think there is anything wrong with reviewing for any given journal, unless you have good evidence that the journal itself does not have a commitment to upholding the standards of the peer-review process.  In my opinion, you can learn many things by reviewing for journals -- but, every review you do has opportunity costs.
So, I would not be overly concerned about journal rankings.  It is better to focus on reviewing articles that fit within your domain of expertise and you have the time and motivation to do a proper review.  And, the standards for a proper review should be the same, irrespective of whether the journal has an ISI impact factor or is on Beall's list.  The most important thing is giving the researcher(s) a fair and honest review.


text:
How do I convince my school to allow me to double major?
I am currently a second-semester freshman. For the last several years of my life, I've been pondering over what to choose as my major. My last two years of high school, I took university math courses, and fell in love with math. I didn't just fall in love, I gained a deep interest in it. Working on math problems is one of the greatest joys in my life. I seriously considered choosing math as my career and was perfectly happy with doing so except for one thing: I want something more tangible as my career. Computer Science is also fascinating and interesting to me, as well as Computer Engineering. I decided on Computer Engineering, but I will not be satisfied if I cannot double major in math.
This semester was the first semester in 3 years that I did not take a math class, and as a result, there is significantly less joy in my life. I miss taking math classes. I just declared my major as Computer Engineering and am now working on gaining permission to petition for a double major (this is the procedure for the university that I'm at). The problem is the university that I'm at. It is a pretty good university, but it frowns upon double majoring. This university seems to want the students to come in, and go out. Almost like manufacturing graduates from the incoming students, in four years time. Even worse, the Electrical/Computer Engineering department especially doesn't like double majoring, unless it's in language (which majors are practically designed for double majoring). This department has not allowed a non-language double major in more than 6 years.
Even with all this, I'm not accepting no as an answer. I'm already halfway to a math major, and I'm going to continue to take math classes. Having read The Last Lecture by Randy Pausch, I'm taking inspiration from him that this is just a wall for me, to stop me if I'm not determined enough.
How can I convince my university to allow me to double major?

What's stopping you from simply taking all the math classes you want without an official double major? I guess the double major might be nice for applying to jobs, but in the meantime can't you just take those math classes you enjoy while continuing on with your CS major?

@RogerFan CE, and nothing is stopping me, and yes that's my plan. I still want the double major because I feel like it matters. There's a difference in being able to say that I majored in math.

Have you thought of graduating with you Comp eng degree and then continuing onto a Masters/PhD in Mathematics? It would be fairly easy for you to do and give you a wide range of opportunities later on(places like Seagate and Microsoft would probably love you)

@scrappedcola I have considered that. I don't want Math to be my Masters because that's not the career that I want. I would like to do Computer Engineering / programming as my career.

It's extremely beautiful, but I need to be creating something, not just studying something. --> Does the something have to be a machine or a program rather than a proof of a theorem? If so, it sounds like you are more into engineering

You can convince your university to allow you to double major by showing then a plan for the courses that you will be taking in the next semesters, so they can see that you have already thought about the future, and that you're not one more lost and undecided person. Also, as you said that you love Math, I would like to ask if you had good grades on those Math courses that you took. If yes, try to get help from professors, as they can make the path for the double major approval easier for you since they usually have more influence than a second semester student.
Since you said that your university sees itself as a box (the student comes from high school, enters the box and four years later leaves with the degree), you must try to find a way to show them reasonably that your plans are feasible. More than that, your logical arguments and plans for the future must be well designed and articulated. Furthermore, as I said before, try to get help from professors that know you and your joy for learning Mathematics.
As a double major student that recently gave up to other people's dreams and now is following his dream of studying Math and Physics, I wish you all the luck with your plans!

I have indeed had excellent grades for every course that I've taken.

Great answer.  As a double major myself (Business and EE), I'll add this: you might create a sequential plan where you complete one major first (Computer Engineering) and then do your remaining courses for your second major (Math).  I finished my BS in Business in 3 years because I took courses over two summers.  I then did EE in 1.5 years, for a total of 4.5 years.

+1 for trying to elicit help from professors--from both departments.


text:
Freedom of Information (FOI) requests: multiple questions or single question per request?
In England and Wales at least, Freedom of Information requests are a legitimate research technique to use for obtaining data on occasions when (a) they are applicable, and (b) other avenues have been exhausted.
If a researcher wishes to obtain answers to multiple questions, or to obtain multiple different datasets, should (s)he submit:

one FOI request providing a clear list of the requested items; or
one FOI request per item?

I would be especially grateful for links to relevant advice from trustworthy sources, and for advice from academia.stackexchange members who have either made or received FOI requests.

Does the law specify whether FOI requests have to be focused? It would seem to me to be a question of law, not of preference.

The only issue is whether there is some exemption the public authority can apply in order to refuse your request.  One particularly relevant one is the time limit. If you ask for too much they can say it will take them too long to find it. You could do worse than start reading here https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-freedom-of-information/refusing-a-request/ .

Under a single request, you can requisition multiple data that are related.
As a guide for FOI officers (the people who will process your request), the State Government of Victoria gives this gloss:

Practice Note 4: Multiple Requests for Access
Summary
Multiple requests arise where a number of applications for access are made by
  or on behalf of a person at the same or within a short period of time
  (e.g. within 2-3 weeks).
If there is sufficient commonality between the requests, they can be
  considered as a single request to determine whether it is a
  "voluminous" request under section 25A(1).
Each request should otherwise be treated individually, in the usual
  way.
If it is not reasonably possible to notify a decision to the applicant
  on each request within 45 days, subject to the FOI Act, take practical
  steps to consult with the applicant about priority of requests and to
  possibly reduce their scope.

Note: references in this Practice Note to sections are references to
  sections of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic) ("FOI Act")
  unless otherwise stated.

I have experience requisitioning such data (i.e., warranted by FOI) from commonwealth government law enforcement agencies.
The specific protocol (e.g., email, web form[s], and/or paper form[s] to submit) for filing a freedom of information request will depend on the agent or agency to whom you're submitting it.
Typically, the agency will ask you to state the specific data you want under a single subject heading so that the scope of their response is appropriate to your request.
See How to make a freedom of information (FOI) request by the UK Government Digital Service here: How to make a freedom of information request

You say, "Under a single request, you can requisition multiple data that are related." That goes some way towards answering my question, but I would be grateful if you could also include, in your answer, which of the two approaches I mentioned is best for requesting multiple data that are not related (except insofar as they are held by the same organisation). Thanks :)

Thank you for the reminder for precision. :-) I have updated my answer with precedent information from the State Government of Victoria to hopefully treat your targeted inquiry more directly and credibly.

Thanks. The excerpt you've quoted is from a different jurisdiction & doesn't answer my question directly, but I suppose its fundamental point (i.e. that FOI officers might combine separate requests if they refer to data with "sufficient commonality", whatever that is) may be applicable in other jurisdictions with FOI laws besides Victoria. An inductivist might conclude that therefore in general, if the data are related, it doesn't matter whether the items are requested singly or multiply per request. I'm still none the wiser, though, about requesting multiple data that are not related.

Common law precedents (whether in the form of findings of adjudication or legislation) will hold between common law countries. So, for example, Canadian courts will often look to law in the United States to help decide how to adjudicate in Canada. ‘Jurisdiction’ relates to a court's power to act, but law per se can be invoked as exemplary. This is especially true of countries that inherited the Commonwealth laws of the English system.

However, I think you're right to take this Act as a mere guideline rather than law.


text:
Can I hide the fact that I dropped a PhD program when I apply for another PhD?
I am an international grad student in the US. I would like to quit the PhD program(mathematics) in where I spent 2 years without "any degree" for some reasons. I am in the status prior to the research. If I want to apply for another PhD in other universities, will leaving the fact that I dropped a PhD program without a degree off make serious problems?  Does it make some legal, ethical, moral trouble in the academia?
Lastly I just wonder whether, if I am admitted to another grad-school, the department will track or check my previous academic record by inquiry VISA status, SSN, or the other ways.
According to the FERPA(Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act) act, can I control my educational records myself? I asked about this to some schools, they said, even if it's true, the school can also have the right to require the student's educational record in the case of application to the school.
If I got a degree in a school, I also think I should put the fact in the application.
But should I write my all post undergraduate record in my PhD application even if I didn't get any degree and just quit?

FERPA says that your old school can't release your educational records to another school without your consent. It doesn't mean the school you're applying to can't require that consent as a condition of acceptance.

Related: Do I have to submit transcripts from school I transferred out of for grad application?

Are you switching fields or going to another mathematics program? If you are switching fields dropping the math PhD field will likely not be held against you (you just say in your personal statement that while studying math you really go interested in ...)

Most (all?) universities in the US require that you mention all the schools you attended on your application, regardless of whether you obtained a degree from them. Omitting any school is a violation of the rules and, if discovered, could be grounds for rescinding a potential admission offer, even long after it has been granted.
In other countries, it varies.

Was a one-month summer program in another university (where I took one course) included in that category?

It's not a big deal.  If they ask you why you want to change schools (programs), just say the other program wasn't a good fit, and then enthuse about the program you want to enroll in.  No matter how bad things were there, resist the temptation to say anything that might display bitterness.  It's okay to sound critical, as long as you don't project an image of someone who doesn't like to collaborate.
Unless your grades are embarrassing, you should submit a transcript from the institution where you studied for two years.  Those two years of study make you a stronger candidate!

you should submit a transcript from your previous institution if it is required for your application, which it most likely will (regardless of whether your grades are embarrassing).


text:
Do academics get bored of research?
I am wondering if academics (Professors, Researchers etc.) who usually have to spend their lives on research get bored of the subject or get tired of research?
In this case, I want to know how they stay motivated - for example Nobel Laureates more often spend a large part of their life (15 - 20 years) on specific research. So how do they stay motivated?

Well academia.SE seems pretty well populated so

Like any career: change jobs/topics and have hobbies, friends, family, ect.

No they don't Austin, researchers don't have time for those things ;). OP, I don't believe Nobel Laureates necessarily spend years on the same subject. The Nobel prices are typically awarded, after years, for something which has proven to be an important contribution to a field. Nobel prices are not lifetime achievement awards.  An example would be John Nash, who spend relative little time on Game Theory, but who's work in that field was of enormous importance. However, most researchers, especially now a days, are highly specialized.

Followup question: Do people get bored of life?

No - they get bored of marking.

@David But that's what grad students are for.

there is an aspect of research that science is continually evolving, sometimes dramatically, and one can repeatedly launch into new areas esp in active fields, some tieing in with significant new applied technology (eg physics, computer science, biotech, etc). new (breakthru? aka paradigm-shifting) discoveries are exciting and one can find ways/ angles to connect/ leverage ones own bkg with them. its terra incognita sometimes with "dragons" at the fringes, and the star trek aphorism applies, "to boldly go where no one has gone before"... :)

@zeldredge heh, but really I think productive use of this site is overall very  beneficial (just like the other "professional" StackExchange sites – even Code Golf). jakebeal might have 35k rep, but is he bored? Nope. Discussing ethics and pedagogy is a great way to improve the way we work!

Since the question is about academics, I would like to point to what Richard Feynman believed in, and I think it's true - "Teaching students can also be a good way to involve oneself while taking break from uncreative spells in research" . Maybe not long term, but who knows what new perspectives can help the teacher himself/herself? If not anything, interacting with students can just help de-stress.

I heard people leave academia not due to boredom but due to pressure to publish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publish_or_perish

What helps, I think, is that "research" is not a single thing but a complex of many different activities. If I am feeling burned out on paper-writing, perhaps I find my joy in coding or mathematics or sketching new project ideas. Likewise when I am happy about papers but feeling burned out on something else. At a larger scale, even a "unified" line of research has many distinct facets that may feel quite different when one is actually closely engaged with it. Thus, I see no difficulty in the idea of remaining interested and engaged for a long period of time. I have been so for nearly 20 years (counting undergraduate research work as well) and I see no reason to expect my interest to fail any time soon. Funding, of course, is an entirely different story.

Brilliant Answer! It was exactly what I needed - Thanks!

From a motivation theory perspective, factors such as self-efficacy (belief in one's ability to achieve competency in something) and ability (actual competency) have a lot to do with one's motivation to engage in an activity. There is also the issue of "extrinsic" (contingent on external validation and achievement relative to others) vs. intrinsic (inherent satisfaction/interest in process regardless of outcome) motivation. If one findings research intrinsically motivating (worth doing for its own sake), there is better chance of sticking with it without getting bored over the long term.

@Aymor And it's hard to make it to a PI position without strong intrinsic motivation...

My spouse almost never gets tired of research.  This is a person who loves collaborating with people, helping students, tinkering with equipment, tinkering with data analysis programs, analyzing data, writing papers, reviewing papers, editing papers, planning the next experiment.  My son, on the other hand, is cut from different cloth.  As my spouse would say, this is a guy who is more of a tool user than a tool maker.
I heard an interview with a surgeon on the radio once.  She said, "Don't become a surgeon unless you feel that you can't do anything else."  Meaning, unless there's nothing else that would satisfy you.  That's the way my spouse is.  I don't think anything else would be anywhere near as interesting or satisfying for this person.
My spouse did change sub-fields about halfway through, feeling that the first sub-field was well understood and rather saturated, and wanting more of a challenge.  It was a good change.

There cannot be a single answer because people are different.
I'm on a first name basis with a nobel laureate in his seventies who abandoned all academic work immediately after retirement; he says that he could no longer bear the politics, jealousy, intrigue in academia.
My PhD advisor, on the other hand, just turned 92 and still goes to university two or three days per week. He has macular degeneration, but uses a 27" display to keep up with the literature in his field. He's aware that some of the younger profs at the department think that he's just an old fool, but he doesn't care.

I think the jury is still out on who is a 'fool' (old or young)...until these youngers get to be his age! (if they make it that far) I say well done. Sometimes consistent routine at all costs (including ridicule) is the best weapon against demise in old age.

I believe this is a situation in which Clarke's first law is likely to apply.

Not only could researchers become bored with their research, but in some sense, it seems the current system of evaluation amplifies this process. Indeed, there is a strong emphasis on specialization, which in some sense is guarantied to make you THE expert of a sufficiently narrow field. It is initially cozy to be such an expert, but then the risk involved in moving away from this soft spot is a deterrent to what truly  keeps researchers on their toes, namely curiosity and risk taking.
If not, they get bored and it seems some of them find it their duty to manage other people's research.

In this case, I want to know how they stay motivated ?

Let curiosity drive your research, not impact. Move around fields, places, be opened to new ideas. Talk to young people. Try and be creative. Go to conferences/schools outside your field of expertise. Be ridiculously ambitious about your scientific goals (that should keep you busy for a while...)

+1 Insightful to recognize boredom as an unfortunate side effect of the systemic pressures for specialization, and good suggestions (even if somewhat idealistic for early-career researchers) about how to avoid these pitfalls.

@Corvus if an early career researcher is already bored he should do something else :-)

Sure, I think boredom occurs, but boredom itself is not strictly negative. I think being mindful of it, helps a researcher identify when s/he feels that s/he has already contributed her/his most impactful work on a topic, and that it would be better to move to a new topic (or even subject). Perhaps never finding yourself bored within a narrow scope is worse?
From Richard Hamming's "You and Your Research" speech (http://www.paulgraham.com/hamming.html):

You have to change. You get tired after a while; you use up your originality in one field. You need to get something nearby. [...] What happens to the old fellows is that they get a technique going; they keep on using it. They were marching in that direction which was right then, but the world changes. There's the new direction; but the old fellows are still marching in their former direction[...] You need to get into a new field to get new viewpoints, and before you use up all the old ones.


text:
How can I get into computer science research as a high school student?
I am in High-School but want to pursue research in Computer Science, but as you know High-School usually does not offer any such options or tasks.
So I want to explore avenues where I can get these options and tasks as I am very very interested and really want to do it.
I would also like to say that I have good-strong knowledge of C++, C and assorted APIs from that (3 years programming for 5+ hours daily). So I wouldn't call my self too new to programming and think I can handle programming and so on.
Now, these are my questions:

How can I get involved in research?

How can I contact academics to ask them for research position or even an intern position in research for that matter without coming across as a "waste of time"?

Computer Science research is a very broad field, consisting of such diverse area's such as Theoretical Computing (Operational Research, Combinatorial Optimization, Logic ed.), Artificial Intelligence, Database Systems, Security, and many more. Could you be more specific in your question? Do you live close to an institute which has Computer Science research?

The fact that you know C++ programming does not qualify you for research, since you lack the necessary theoretical and mathematical background for research. So, first go to the university, get the necessary knowledge and take it from there. Life is not a race.

I know of universities that have outreach programs that support internships for high school students. Maybe check with the CS departments in your local universities?

@Alexandros I am not saying anything like that, I am certainly not implying programming qualifies me for research just that I am fine with even doing "the dirty work" of programming and implementing techniques and so on during research role if needed. Next, I agree "Life is not a race" but I love CS and it would be brilliant to do research and spend time around those who also love it just as much.

Research is a very strong word. I would suggest to start looking at algorithm contests (IOI, ACM-ICPC(university level, but you can practice), codeforces, etc), and get involved there. Maybe you can contact some programming contest team in a local university and join them to learn, you will get a lot of experience in basic CS. If you get notorious on those contests or in those study circles, you will be given lots of opportunities. Good luck!

As a high schooler and programmer myself, I can say that it's a lot easier to find an internship programming in a different research field. For example, I recently did a paid internship in bioinformatics.

@Alexandros In my opinion, your comment is overly harsh. Instead, I think it would be better to suggest learning opportunities that take him in the direction of research, at least to get a taste.  Example: science fair projects.

http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42763/how-can-i-get-into-computer-science-research-as-a-high-school-student?rq=1

@chubakueno If you get notorious on those contests or in those study circles, you will be given lots of opportunities. — Careful.  Some CS faculty (like me) consider success in programming contests to be evidence against research potential.

@JeffE Why do they consider it evidence against research potential?

@NimishMishra It's a question of conflicting goals. Programming contests reward speed in solving small problems with (at least below the international level) relatively straightforward solutions. Research rewards insight into bigger, more open-ended problems with no known solutions.

@JeffE I agree that the aims of  programming contests and research are not one and the same, but I disagree that success in a programming contest is evidence against research potential. They are two separate skills altogether. Research requires exploring and usually long-term analysis to discover something. Quick-thinking programming exercises sharpen the mind and maintain basic skills fresh (and ideally succinct). In this case, that quick thinking may help in less of the larger scale critical thinking of an abstract solution but would certainly help in the implementation phase of a test.

@psosuna I understand the principle you're describing, but with a few rare exceptions, it's not consistent with my experience.

Check with your teachers or advisors about summer internships.

Good on you!
I have a relatively simple suggestion: do a replication study.  First, find a collaborator -- a fellow high school student or college student of similar skill and experience.  You'll learn more in a team than doing it alone. Second, read a dozen or so research papers (probably conference papers) in the field or sub-field that interests you the most.  Pick one, preferably the simplest one you can find.  Your goal is to replicate the methods as described in the paper and compare your results to theirs.  (Don't pick one where you have access to their code.)  Once you have a paper picked out (or a few), recruit an adviser/mentor -- either a college professor or an experienced researcher.  You'll want to meet with your adviser/mentor weekly to talk about progress and problems you encounter along the way.  Mostly, this weekly meeting holds you and your partner accountable for progress.
In my field (Computational Social Science) there are many simulation models that are simple enough to be replicated from their specification. This varies widely in subfields of Computer Science, so your mileage may vary.
The point to all this is to get you an experience in the realm of research without requiring that you first go through all the preliminaries.  By focusing on replicating one paper, you only need to understand the material and methods in this one paper. You aren't trying to break any new ground. Instead, you are following in the footsteps of other researchers.  If they have done their job well, then you should be able to replicate their results.  Replication is a valuable scientific endeavor in itself.

When you mean recruit, do you literally mean pay them? Or what do you mean?

@RohanVijjhalwar Sorry for the ambiguity. No, you shouldn't pay the adviser/mentor, or even suggest it. I mean that you should search for good candidates, initiate contact, propose the arrangement, and offer a description of the benefits to the adviser/mentor. By taking the lead in this process, you are showing the adviser/mentor that you have maturity and initiative.

Yours answers are brilliant - just what I am looking for - :D +1 for your answer - sorry to bother you again but as I am not an involved in academia what is considered a good candidate?

@RohanVijjhalwar No worries. I'm happy to help. What you should look for in an adviser/mentor is someone who has some interest/skill in the topic. But, MOST OF ALL, look for someone who loves mentoring and working with up-and-coming students of any age. Start local. Ask for introductions to good candidates.  This is called "networking" (professional-style).  "I'm looking for a mentor for XYZ project. Do you know anyone who might be interested in working with a young team (me and my colleague)?"

@RohanVijjhalwar It's likely that the best mentor for you now would be a graduate student in CS or similar, or a junior professor, or some other researcher who has been involved with science fairs or other activities with high school students.

Thanks for your great contribution - It has helped me very much - you have successfully answered my question!

I don't understand how this would work. What is in it for the "mentor"? Why would he/she agree to such an arrangement, especially without pay? Grad students and junior professors are busy enough without having to talk to high school students, and I can't imagine why they would want to.

@FaheemMitha -- generally, experienced people who mentor younger or inexperienced people are motivated by something other than money. They are motivated by altruism in some form. Sometimes, they were mentored themselves when they were younger, and they might want to give back to society to return the favor.  There's also a thrill that some people get when they help someone get "a leg up", especially if that student is eager and enterprising.

@MrMeritology Wow, I'd love to meet some of those people. :-)

This is a tough question, you sound like you're very interested but I'd seriously question your familiarity with the body of computer science to be able to meaningfully contribute to a research project. A better option might be to engage in reading publications and identifying areas of knowledge gaps, and work on rectifying those in preparation for a career in research.
At the same time, I really don't want to discourage your enthusiasm. If there is an institute that engages in research in your area, you might want to check out their website and see what types of research the professors are engaged in. Start off by reading about those fields and , once you're comfortable, reach out to the professor with questions and let them know you're interested in research. Start there and see where it goes!

I am in a math department and many math departments have "math circles" or other activities that reach out to high schoolers to show them what mathematics at a research level is, provide them with teaser problems that show some deeper structure that you may find interesting and that can guide you towards current research. You have to expect that it takes a few years to get to where research really is, but at least it provides you with an avenue to talk to professors on a regular basis and get exposed to research.
Let me just assume that computer science departments have similar avenues. Find the closest university to where you live and check its computer science department's web site for outreach activities, or email their undergraduate coordinator for more information. They may have something like our math circles.

A researcher is supposed to have a deep understanding of his/her field and a solid grasp of the basics. Unfortunately to even begin to understand stuff at that level, we need a decent high school level general science background. Not to mention that Computer Science is quite interdisciplinary - it includes topics from physics, mathematics, statistics and lots of other knowledge areas.
Coding is a skill, it enables you to do your work quicker - it helps you do research but is very rarely the research itself. Even " the dirty work of coding" needs some basic background knowledge. If you know how to make rubber, doesn't mean you can make a tire without knowing what a tire is ! Making a tire requires knowledge of things like heat tolerances, load capacity, strength etc.
BUT this is not to discourage you, Absolutely not! Rather to know where you stand and what to expect and how to approach people for opportunities.
I have a few suggestions -

Look for freelancing programming opportunities - there quite a few websites _ I personally know of freelancer.com and fiver.com. Here you can work on programming assignments set by people and get paid for it. This sets you up for the next level - why ? If you do a good enough job that people pay you for, then many more will take you seriously ...
Now for pure research oriented opportunities - The best idea is to talk to people who are conducting undergraduate research - why ? students who are say in first or second year of their undergraduate programs would have more or less the same level of knowledge you have. Plus if you actually worked doing freelancing stuff or some-other paid or otherwise serious opportunity, this will give you an extremely positive point to negotiate an opportunity.

Great answer! It did not discourage me could you tell me if I could be at-least doing a internship in a research environment - maybe university? Would a professor teach me anything or is that something too far?

@RohanVijjhalwar One of the biggest differences between life as a high school student and life as a graduate student researcher is the extent to which one learns by being taught as distinct from learning by reading, studying, experimenting, and thinking without anyone teaching you.

As you are in very early stages of your probable research career, one thing I want to say is do shopping. Try to consciously ask yourself and others as to exactly what research you want to do and more importantly why. Do not be afraid to drop ideas or say no to potential supervisors or even current supervisors in the middle of your research work if it does not appeal and/or interest you. This is much easier and crucial at this stage of your career to find the right area if you want to flourish and more importantly enjoy your research in the long term.

Contact and network with people! These two things are key.
From there, prove to them that you are experienced. I did this by showing them my Github & Bitbucket, my iOS apps, my web apps, my websites, compilers/search engines, and my hackathon experiences.
This is what got me my research opportunity at Stanford in Computer Science.
Yours truly,
High School Junior working on Computer Science Research with PhDs at Stanford University this summer
Good luck!

I'm not a CS person (policy and politics PhD) but one thing that has not been discussed: Develop a domain interest by reviewing research on a particular topic.
Are you interested in a particular facet of CS? Is there an application of CS to a field you are interested in? Or is there a research questions that you want to apply CS methods to?
Once you read into the literature a bit (https://scholar.google.com is a good place to start) then you can find CS programs and professors that match with your interested -- and once you've done this, you can contact professors in the subfield of interest to volunteer your skills and ask domain-specific questions.

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


text:
Do short journal papers ("brief reports") count less than regular papers in psychology?
Many journals in psychology feature articles of different lengths, often labelled as "brief report" (4000 words) vs. "regular article" (12000 words). Are shorter articles generally considered as equally valuable and important as long articles, i.e., do they count as a "full" publication in the field of psychology?

I think this will depend completely on who's doing the "counting".  For purposes of faculty evaluation, tenure, promotion, etc, different departments may have different rules, so there won't be any general answer.
One would like to think that each article would be evaluated on its signficance, rather than length, and that decisions would be made based on overall contribution to the field, rather than a number of papers.  Of course, this doesn't always happen.

So there are departments that care about these issues? Is it necessary or am I even expected to specifically mark short papers as such in a CV?

Ask your advisor/faculty mentor.


text:
How to build bridges between mathematicians, computer scientists and biologists?
I am part of a recently founded laboratory in computational biology and we are trying to get all the parts (biologists, computer scientists, mathematicians, and so on) to speak the same language, or at least one we can all understand. To do so, we want to figure out some strategies beside seminars and weekly lectures.
I am not the only one who went through this challenge, see: [1]. For example, How to explain core biological concepts like evolution and selection to a mathematician? How to explain a mathematical formalization to a biologist (beyond the very basic models the majority of biologists know, such as predator-prey and logarithmic growth)?
There must be strategies; for instance, books that are in an effective middle (mathematically rigorous, but stepped enough that a biologist can understand it). This is a long term project and we need to devise strategies to progressively "retrain" ourselves. (Bibliography suggestions are welcome.)
[1] https://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2014/12/30/the-two-cultures-of-mathematics-and-biology/

It is easy to explain evolution and selection to a mathematician. The hard part is to show them that the World is messy, complicated and each assumption is a very, very coarse approximation of the observed data (NOT "reality"!). In other words, that the land of biologists is very far from the Platonic Cave.

In my experience there is sometimes an insurmountable cultural gap between biologists and mathematicians.  In this case the only solution is to have someone in between who you can both talk to.  Basically, if the biologist has never tried to formulate their problem mathematically because they don't see the point, then talking to a mathematician is not likely to work.  Also, both sides need to be happy to accept each other's motivation. It's no good if the biologist feels they "own" the real problem.

Disclosure: I'm a mathematical biologist that came into it from the biology side.
I don't think it is necessary to retrain the biologists so they understand maths and retrain the mathematicians so they understand biologists, although these things should occur naturally to some degree with interdisciplinary work. Rather, I think it is important to understand the motivations of each 'type' and to tailor the language to the audience.
To grossly generalise, biologists are more interested in quantitative methods as a tool to answer interesting biological questions and mathematicians are more interested in the method/analysis used to answer that question.
So when mathematicians talk to biologists, they need to place less emphasis on the technical details of a model/analysis and focus on the general features. For example, if you are building a model to answer an evolutionary or ecological question, a biologist is more interested in the biological assumptions the model is making and whether or not the model is a reasonable abstraction of the biological system. In turn, the mathematician may need to explain why certain details of the system can't or shouldn't be included in the model (e.g. because they would complicate the analysis for little gain in intuitive understanding).
When biologists talk to mathematicians they need to frame their questions in a way that is conducive to a quantitative framework. If a mathematician is trying to build a model, they don't need or want to know every minute detail of a system. It's overkill and will just lead to confusion. What are the most relevant points? For example, if a biologist is interested in how the density of cows affects the density of grass in a paddock, then it isn't helpful for the biologist to give the mathematician a lesson on all the intricacies of grass growing and grass eating. It would be better if the biologist comes with a defined question, such as 'how does increasing the number of cows in a paddock affect grass regeneration?' and points out that the main elements in the system are 1. how grass grows (as some function of grass density) and 2. how grass is eaten (as some function of cow density).
If you want a book about mathematical biology that is written for biologists then I'd recommend "A Biologist's Guide to Mathematical Modeling in Ecology and Evolution" by Sarah P. Otto & Troy Day

These kinds of interdisciplinary collaborations are becoming increasingly common. I am sure there are books covering at least 2 if not more disciplines but I think communication that is specific to the collaborative needs would be more effective. I would try to figure out what each of the party really needs to know about the other discipline. Try to find this out by simply asking over meetings, mails etc.
For the long run, depending on who is the "host" for a particular meeting or discussion, they take charge and deliver a talk about basics accompanied by slides, pointers etc.
For example, say the Mathematician is the host for a meeting about porting a program to a Beowulf cluster that does formal analysis of a particular gene expression over time (hypothetical scenario). In such a scenario, the mathematician would introduce the nitty-gritty about the formal analysis methods, things that needs to be considered and things that could be safely ignored and such.
If the computer scientist is the host in the same scenario, they will speak about the parameters needed for the program execution, why scaling up is important and issues such is numerical precision and software bugs that needs to be taken care of. Accompany the discussion with slides and provide pointers to basic concepts.
Over sufficient time, and enough communication, each party will become familiar with other party's jargons. Things may start slow but a cumulative effect will help accelerate the process as time passes.

Have people well-versed in more than one area.  They are very useful for bridging between the two camps.  After a while, the people who are not as well versed in more than one area will at least gain a better understanding of what the others need to be useful, and of what is practical, what is possible but impractical, and what is impossible.

You all know how to teach and learn the formal parts of any discipline. I'd suggest teaching each other the assumptions, and the things that don't work quite as well as they do in theory, and the jokes.
Although most feelings of "huh, that's funny" about the next discipline's work are going to be embarassing undergraduate misconceptions, always share them. Some of them are the sign of a mismatch in disciplinary assumptions and you want those to be discussed as soon as possible.

Since you ask for potentially appropriate books, you may find Mathematical Biology: An Introduction with Maple and Matlab by Shonkwiler and Herod helpful for bridging the gap. What struck me about this book is that it takes the time to explain the biology to mathematicians, which I appreciated coming from the mathematics side. (Whether it is as successful at explaining the mathematics to biologists is more difficult for me to judge.) The final three chapters introduce genetics, genomics and phylogenetics, including a brief introduction to algebraic statistics.
I should emphasize that the book is just an introduction, so do not expect to find an in-depth examination of any of the topics. However, it could be a useful stepping stone.
As for helping biologists to understand mathematics, I think a key step is to provide motivation: Why is the mathematics useful and what can it do to aid analysis, solve biology problems, or even deepen understanding of biology itself? In particular, what worthwhile things can be achieved with mathematics that would be difficult or impossible without it? What's the payoff? A following or concurrent step is to make connections with prior knowledge. For instance, what mathematics/statistics do biologists already know and use? How do new proposed methods/algorithms/formalisms build on and improve on previous ones?
As an example of the latter, in Gilbert Strang's classic Introduction to Applied Mathematics, he masterfully introduces the Kalman filter step-by-step by starting with least squares and linear regression, then going on to weighted least squares (what can you do when you trust some observations or measurements more than others), then introducing recursive least squares (when your measurements arrive one at a time and you want adjust your model without a full recalculation each time) and finally bringing in the Kalman filter to deal with the situation when your model is non-stationary (see sections 1.4 and 2.5 of his book for details). While this example is not specific to biology (although the Kalman filter is used in systems biology), it shows the step-by-step process, starting with a familiar topic.


text:
Is it a good idea to take a break from studying a mathematics PhD and revisit academia at a later stage?
In September I started a mathematics PhD at a UK university straight after my undergraduate MMath degree at a different university. On the whole, I am enjoying the experience. However, I've been having recurring thoughts that perhaps I am not cut out for doctorate level work and it might be a good idea to revisit mathematical studies at a later stage.
Basically, since coming here I've been feeling consistently like my heart isn't in it (and this has had a negative effect on my work ethic). This is not necessarily because I’m not capable of doing it, but rather because I never had a proper break from academia and I feel like I've been running out of steam. I know PhD students very frequently go through spells of feeling dispirited, but I feel that if my heart is really in mathematics that this shouldn't be happening. I would rather go into doctoral studies with a running start knowing that I am adequately trained in the area I am in, rather than adjusting to a learning curve (and an inexperienced supervisor).
Here are some options I have considered:

Having a complete break from academia (6 months to a year), followed by a period where I slowly ease myself back in at my own pace by reading.
Taking CDT (Centre for Doctoral Training) courses. I had previously applied to this and been rejected, but now I think I would be more competitive. I think this rigorous training would be helpful for me.
Doing something altogether different -- learning another programming language and doing a programming job, or working in simulation/modeling at the Met Office, or another company that relies heavily on fluid dynamics. Or maybe even the EPSRC (which is where a lot of the funding for PhD mathematics students comes from)
Getting a normal job to demonstrate people skills, and saving up money to do another Masters programme, which will put me in a very good position for my PhD.

After doing the above, I could return to a PhD programme much
   later, when I am a much more mature person with a
   better mindset towards my work.
Thankfully, my parents are willing to support me emotionally and financially while I pursue any of these.
My question is whether this is a good plan. In particular:

Is it a good idea to take a break from studies if wanting to
continue them at a later date, especially for mathematics? Would it
hurt any opportunities later on down the line to take up a PhD a
year or so from now?
Would my department or supervisor think badly of me for wanting to
terminate my studies - and (generally speaking) would I not have to
pay back the studentship instalments that I've been paid so far?
(I've been funded solely by the University, not by a funding body
such as the EPSRC).
What would be some worthwhile things to consider doing during a
break from academia?

Update: it sounds like this would not be a great idea, and I should only make the move if I am really, really convinced about it. Nonetheless, I'm leaning further and further towards it because I think it's better to take a break from my studies now rather than 3 years down the line. I don't seem to have the motivation required to be a good doctoral student at the moment. This is something I might speak to my advisor about.

Is it a good idea to take a break from studies if wanting to continue them at a later date, especially for mathematics?

That's a tricky question.  There are probably some people for whom this is a good idea, but I wouldn't say it's generally one.  If it's possible in your current situation to essentially hit the "pause button" on your studies and be guaranteed the ability to come back (I think this is possible at many US universities), it might not be so bad, but otherwise you're taking a pretty big risk.  Also, in even as short a time as 6 months or a year, you risk forgetting a lot.  Certainly this is something a lot of other people I know who've taken breaks (say between undergraduate and graduate degrees) have mentioned.
I would think about trying to arrange a shorter vacation (maybe 1 month) first, and see how that feels.  Taking a whole year is a genie that will be hard to get back in the bottle, and you don't know how you will feel, say, two months in.

Would it hurt any opportunities later on down the line to take up a PhD a year or so from now?

It certainly might.

Would my department or supervisor think badly of me for wanting to terminate my studies - and (generally speaking) would I not have to pay back the studentship instalments that I've been paid so far? (I've been funded solely by the University, not by a funding body such as the EPSRC).

I can't speak to them (or speak about the financial aspects), but probably it will not look great.  You should be prepared for everyone in the department to assume this means you are dropping out, no matter what you say about coming back.

What would be some worthwhile things to consider doing during a break from academia?
  Has anyone else on here had experiences of a PhD (particularly maths) not going too well and feeling like they have had to stop or recharge their batteries?

I do know of one situation where this worked out a very well.  A friend of mine in grad school took a year off (after 3 years in the program) to teach in an inner city school.  I think at the time he started he was not so sure he wanted to finish, but the experience motivated him very effectively to go back and complete his degree, since he realized teaching middle school was definitely not for him.

I realize this post is old, but I feel compelled to contribute:
Here's an answer from a former academic who left university for greener :) fields:
Just do it. Look, the number of people in this world who are even capable of handling the intellectual and emotional roller coaster that is a PhD is exceptionally small. We ALL feel inadequate.  We ALL question our decision.  We ALL suffer the imposter syndrome and contemplate leaving.  But you've made it a long way already.  Why not continue on this path, at least to completion, even if your mindset is 'later dudes, i'm out!'?  Are your job prospects now really better than they will be in 3 years, PhD in hand?
As for feeling like things aren't going well - again, we all feel that way. The system is set up to MAKE you feel that way.  Also, the system draws in people with extraordinary need for achievement, and those people, myself included, always feel like things forever balance on the edge of disaster. It just isn't true.
You did not state your age (or if you did, my mistake), but if you're ~30, 35 or younger, just complete this remarkable journey.  Remember - a PhD, even if not used, can never be taken away. It will stand as a testament to not only your acumen, but your ability to deal with difficult situations and persevere. I'm not in academia anymore, but today it hangs on my wall, as it always will, and I am filled with pride when I look at it.
Don't give up - when all's said and done, your future self will be proud.
Its a PhD.  If it were easy, everyone would do it.

Let me add: as a high need-for-achievement individual, the level of remorse you'd feel for having almost, but not quite finished your PhD will FAR outweigh any benefit you'd glean by quitting early.

Thanks for the comprehensive response. I should probably mention that I did take the decision to quit my PhD after 8 months, due to personal issues which meant I couldn't see a way forward with my PhD. I have no immediate plans to return to academia, unless I find an area that fascinates me so much that I like reading about it in my own time anyway.  However, it turns out that the personal issues I was facing affect me in more ways than just academic - so I'm seeking professional help for those.
I am now training to become a teacher and am enjoying it quite a lot.

Sounds to me like you may be depressed right now. Try speaking with your supervisor about the possibility of taking a week or maybe two off.

Is it a good idea to take a break from studies if wanting to
  continue them at a later date, especially for mathematics? Would it
  hurt any opportunities later on down the line to take up a PhD a year
  or so from now?

Yes, it will hurt future opportunities. At the very least you will forget many things during that time.

Would my department or supervisor think badly of me for wanting to
  terminate my studies - and (generally speaking) would I not have to
  pay back the studentship instalments that I've been paid so far? (I've
  been funded solely by the University, not by a funding body such as
  the EPSRC)

Maybe they will not think badly of you but they will certainly move on in the meantime. Your supervisor will very likely accept new students and may not have time to work with you in the future. As for the financial aspects you should consult that with the institution. The terms of my PhD funding (not UK) stated that if I did not finish my PhD I owed all the money that I had received plus interest.

Has anyone else on here had experiences of a PhD (particularly
  maths) not going too well and feeling like they have had to stop or
  recharge their batteries?

Yes, I did have the experience although not during my PhD but during my Masters (applied math). In fact I did drop out after having a very rough time. During a 2 month period I was able to sleep for only 2 to 3 hours per night Monday to Sunday. Even though I lived only 4 blocks away from the institution I did not have time to go home and slept in a sleeping bag on the floor. During that time I only left my cubicle once a day to buy take-out food and every second or third day for a quick shower. After 2 months of this I hated everything and everyone: my professors, the institution, my fellow students and my life in general. One day I stood up and decided that it was not worth it. I announced that I was dropping out and simply left.
After sleeping some 18 or 20hrs straight I started thinking that I may had acted a bit hastily. After a second good nights rest I decided that I had definitely rushed my decision. 72hrs after I left I was speaking with the department head asking to be readmitted into the program. It was not easy, during those 72hrs I had missed one exam which meant I was expelled from the instituion. Fortunately (for me) I was readmitted and was able to obtain my Masters degree.

"Sounds to me like you may be depressed right now. Try speaking with your supervisor about the possibility of taking a week or maybe two off."
This is an interesting point - I do actually suffer from depression in general (and this may be a corollary of me having Asperger's syndrome as that can make it much more difficult to deal with). I think this would be a good idea, but there are still lectures I have to go to, workshops I need to teach, lectures to sit in and take notes for (as I get paid for note-taking for special needs students). So I would ideally like to take a week off but can't.

I am not sure I quite understand your comment above. You spent quite a bit time to write this long question, yet you can't take some time off?

I say that, but then I just realised that next week is the final week of lectures, so after that, I could take some time off.

I agree with your own feeling. You do seem to need time to find out about yourself in a more ordinary working environment. (Met Office Modelling Department ? Come on. They have the pick of Math/Atmos Phys PhDs there and you should know it. Take it handier.)
Exeter has been one of the first UK establishments to introduce US-style major/minor degrees. The Math Dept's web page shows an interesting With Year In Industry program. I'd look into this avenue.
Buona fortuna.

See https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42908/is-it-a-good-idea-to-take-a-break-from-studying-a-mathematics-phd-and-revisit-ac#comment162588_67022

Also, I don't think pointing someone who already has an MMath to the UG programmes of Exeter University's maths department is going to be helpful

I stand corrected. But the Exeter MMath course has a similar option as well as one on International Study.

So yeah,  that does sound like you're depressed. (I will admit, I did not read the WHOLE post).
The angst is definitely weighing you down, and affecting you day by day.
Sometimes it's better to slow down, in order to speed up...
Speak to more and more people about your concerns.  One : to hear what they have to say, Two : to hear your own thoughts reflected through their minds.
But one thing is for sure,  you can always rely on your own mathematical ability.  Your innate skill to think, reason and absorb mathematics.
Maybe let your mind travel around a bit.
To give your mind a break, there are plenty of YouTube channels that will entertain and motivate you ...
since it has to be 'maths' related,  why not  Numberphile,  ViHart, StandUpMaths,  SingingBanana, MathoLoger.   Hell,  even step outside your intellectual zone and dive into other disciplines ...  MinutePhysics, SixtySymbols,  Periodic Videos,  Vsauce,  The School of Life,  The Film Theory,  The 8-bit Guy   etc...
Maybe a few books to guide your decision:

The Professor is In - The Essential Guide to Turning Your PHd into a Job - Karen Kelsky (auth.) - 2015 - 0553419420
A PhD Is Not Enough - A Guide to Survival in Science - Peter J. Feibelman (auth.) - 2011 - Basic Books - 0465025336

oh,  and one for the LULz:

Surviving your Stupid, Stupid Decision to Go to Grad School - Adam Ruben (auth.) - 2010 - 0307589447

the first recommended book, started out as a blog, in case you wanna take a browse --- Blog :: The Professor is In
The second book shows you how to plan ahead in a cautious manner,  while the third one will have you crackling in one sitting.
But I personally prefer the first one.

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


text:
Can I enroll to graduate school (PhD) in Germany?
I'm finishing Masters degree in Computer Engineering at university of Russia in this year. GPA of my Master diploma is 4.9-4.0 from 5. I have 3 publications in russian scientific journals. However, my bachelor's GPA is 3.5 from 5 and I think it is main problem for enrolling to PhD. My past low level of Bachelor's degree correlated with the lack of interest in Science. At the moment my interest in Science growing more and more, than more I understand in the research. I'm studying some courses on educational platforms such as Coursera and edX for to correct my past mistakes and for increase my scientific outlook.
Do I have any chances for enrolling to PhD in Germany? I don't pretend to top universities.

The formal requirement for enrolling as a PhD student at a German university will typically be to have a Master's degree, potentially with some (modest) grade requirements (on the Master's, the Bachelor wouldn't matter); and to obtain the agreement of a Professor to act as your PhD supervisor. The latter of course is a very individual decision.

Thus there is no formal requirements for GPA for the bachelor's degree if I have master's degree. Is right?

Most of the time the only /formal/ requirement is to have a Masters in a somewhat related field. As stated by Arno, you need to find a Prof. interested in having you as a PhD student. It is somewhat more involved for structured PhD programs, but here again you mostly have to convince a Prof to accept you as a student.

@DanilaSemenov Yes, the grades from the Bachelor's would usually not matter at all for formal admission. As the Russian grade system differs from the German, there would be some leeway in translating anyway.


text:
Is it possible to order individual academic journals?
Is it possible to order a physical copy of an academic journal? If I were published and wanted a copy of that Issue to keep, could I buy a physical copy? The journal that I might be published in is Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology A, which is an AIP journal.

Well, as long as the publisher actually prints paper copies, I don't see why you wouldn't be able to get a copy. But if it's your paper, why not just print off your PDF of it?

I received issues of JVSTB on paper in the past. Although I have to admit that these were special issues from conferences, where I attended.

Don't know about that journal, but many journals have web sites including information about subscriptions and single-issue prices.

Some journals used to send a "glossy" copy of a published article to the corresponding author.

If you are going to stay in academia, the coolness will wear off pretty quickly. I wouldn't spend the money to buy the journal issue.

Some journals are on-line only and some are both on-line and print, and a few still print only. Since journals generally want to keep costs down and the printing process takes quite a lot including postage the trend is for all journals to drop print. Left is the possibility of print-on-demand but I am not sure this will be a possibility. I have yet to see any on-line journals offer such printing.
So while that was the general picture, in your case, you need to contact the journal. If they print copies, they should be able to sell you one. But, such a request should best be made when you provide your final manuscript of proofs, not long after the fact, the reason being that no-one sits on stocks of printed journals, they minimize the number of prints produced.
So: contact the editor and ask is the simple answer.

I was writing an answer almost exactly like this one... However, contact details of the journal editors in question and subscription details can be found here.

In general, yes, it is possible. But as noted in the comments, it depends on the journal. Most of them have this information on their websites.


text:
Lack of mathematical training for a CS Ph.D
I've graduated and I'm looking to apply to a Ph.D. program in computer science. However, during my undergraduate years I did not take math courses other than the ones required for the CS major (i.e., discrete maths and algorithms). Thus I haven't taken a college course in calculus/statistics/linear algebra/probability, which I am aware is essential training for CS Ph.D. students. I also haven't taken an operating systems course since it wasn't required for the major and I opted for a different set of CS courses.
The reason for this was that I did not consider applying to graduate programs at the time, and chose to take courses in other unrelated departments to fulfill requirements for my second area of study. However, I am currently taking an online MOOC in calculus and linear algebra to increase my technical knowledge.
Although I have good grades in my CS courses and research experience, I'm wondering if this would be considered a red flag that I should address in my statement of purpose. If so, what would be a good way to do it?
Alternatively, would it make sense to apply for a Masters program to get more coursework under my belt before applying to a Ph.D. program?

Lack of mathematical training is a gap, but not what I would consider a red flag, if you have strength enough in other areas.  The key is whether I, evaluating your application, would think: "This person can't handle math" vs. "This person did other things besides math."
It is definitely a good thing that you are increasing your training: a MOOC will likely not make a big difference on paper, but if it's making a real difference for you intellectually, that matters too. Furthermore, a good mental mathematical tool-kit will make your life easier in many ways (including detecting when you shouldn't believe something just because it has math).
As for the question of whether to start with a Masters: that really depends on where you are and where you are trying to go.  For example, in the US, many Ph.D. programs literally or effectively start with a Masters, so it might be redundant (though the MOOCs or any other prep work will allow you to do less remedial work as part of it).  In Europe, on the other hand, most Ph.D. programs assume you already have a Masters, so it's pretty mandatory to start there.  Another thing that you might consider is to apply to both, starting with the Ph.D. if you get in, and burnishing your credentials in a Masters first if you don't.

I'm looking to apply to programs in the US. Should this be something I should explicitly address in my SOP.

I personally would not, but instead emphasize your areas of strength.

I was in your shoes at one point.  Here's what happened: I was accepted to a very good computer science graduate program, with a letter that identified two specific courses that I would need to have under my belt before starting the program the following fall.  I was strongly encouraged to take those two courses in the summer prior to starting their program.
That's what I did -- those two courses were offered in the summer session at the state school near where I lived.
Also note that there are lots of varieties of computer science PhDs.  Some really don't require or use much math.  Some are totally the opposite.  Some are in between.

Alternatively, would it make sense to apply for a Masters program to get more coursework under my belt before applying to a Ph.D. program?

Unlike in physics, in computer science, the main difference between being a master's student and being a PhD student is how long you stay in the department.
In short, I would advise you to apply to schools that interest you ASAP.  If they don't send you a letter advising you about what to take over the summer (as they did in my case), you could contact them (after you've been accepted) to ask some specific questions.
In the meantime, read some catalogs.  Each course will have its prerequisites listed.  I think you'll soon be able to appreciate what I'm saying -- that not all flavors of graduate level computer science studies require a lot of math background.
Oh, I forgot to say -- the admissions committee will look very carefully at your transcript.  They will be able to figure out if you have any problematic gaps based on that.
Regardless of exactly where you end up next year -- I think you will probably enjoy learning to do proofs.  Linear algebra will be fun and rewarding for you.  Probability might be a good course to take too.

What courses were you suggested to take? And what area of CS are you working in? I'm looking to apply to systems related (networking) fields, so there wouldn't be much math there. However, on the application pages for a lot of CS PhD sites they strongly imply that applicants (in general) should have taken basic math courses e.g. calculus and linear algebra.

-1 For "in computer science, the main difference between being a master's student and being a PhD student is how long you stay in the department". I have no idea what you're talking about.

In physics, you apply for a PhD program.  Leaving after a masters is in some sense admitting to a measure of defeat.  Not so in Computer Science.  In CS, you can apply for a PhD program and leave with a master's without losing face; you can apply for a master's program and when you're done with the Master's, proceed with the PhD program of studies.  It's more flexible.

This varies enormously between departments.  Some CS master's programs are in no way preparation for a Ph.D. program (professional master's programs).  Some are and function more or less as you've described.  Some are but have different standards (and many master's students end up rejected from the Ph.D. program).  And when Ph.D. students leave with a master's, they often don't lose face in the outside world because a CS master's degree is a common credential, but they may lose face within the department.