text:
How to overcome changing undergrad course/university due to failure
Right after school I decided to pursue a degree in physics. It went well at first but then I started to struggle with depression and other personal issues. Eventually I started to fall behind and felt overwhelmed by the coursework, I lost my passion for the field and just felt frustrated.
I noticed it was time for a change, so after moving away and attending another university things were lightening up a bit.
Since I was too far behind in my coursework I was afraid of losing my financial support. Thankfully I was always good at programming, so I found a nice job to cover my expenses and switched fields to Applied Computer Science. Ever since then things are working out great. I got top grades, am nominated for a stipend, and even got the time to volunteer and participate at some minor research groups.
Anyways I feel bad for not being able to finish my physics degree. I feel like I completely wasted 2 years of my life and just don't know what to do/think about this. I do miss every aspect of physics now and secretly regret my decision every now and then.
Would it be reasonable to get my physics degree (at least finish the bachelor) when I am done with my current field? If not, how can one deal with the impression of failure and regret?
(English is not my first language, any edits are warmly welcomed)

Specifically for your experience, I would say there is no failure: You started a subject, lost interest and completed a degree in a field you enjoy more. Where is the failure in that? In fact, in countries that treat University as education and not a purchasable degree it is normal for large numbers of people to drop out in the first year - because they find it isn't for them. University is quite simply different from school. An no, you haven't wasted your time, because you tried something that you decided did not fit you (for various reasons) but you still gained some experience/knowledge.

As you are from Germany: have you considered choosing a master that is both related to computer science and physics, similar to this one: https://www.tu-braunschweig.de/cse/information/index.html ?

As someone who had a similar experience (things went badly wrong during a degree, but unlike you I just moved in to working). Although I don't think my lack of degree has made my career directly worse (I am a programmer, and I enjoy that to a large extent) I do feel a bit of a failure for not having done the degree and this does adversely affect me. On this basis I would suggest that continuing the physics degree while it is still a realistic option could greatly improve your future mental well being.

I had a very similar experience: I took two years of engineering, left the school, studied general topics for two years, and then earned a degree in mathematics. The biggest difference is I have zero interest in going back for an engineering degree. Either physics isn't really a degree you are truly interested in, or it was just not the right time for you. Perhaps taking some physics classes in a non-degree-granting situation will help you figure out which one it was.

Difficult times occur. This is normal. Unless you did something foolish that caused your failure (and nothing indicates you did), there is no reason to feel regret.
You cannot control everything in your life. Whoever does not attempt anything, does not fail; people of action fail regularly. Failure is a central part of life, and there is no reason to regret attempting to study physics and then finding out it's not for you at this phase of your life. In fact, I actually recommend testing ones limits early, and knowing where they are makes one a more mature personality. Your current success is point-in-case.
And, keep in mind: limits may be expanded, albeit slowly. Therefore, my recommendation depends on whether your regret refers to ceasing to do physics itself (the topic!), or it is rather the failure to complete (the studies!) that you regret.
If you feel that you would have liked to do physics (the topic!) after all, perhaps you can consider reactivating your studies (or add a Master's degree as suggested elsewhere). But if it is only the missed opportunity, then I recommend to notch your physics studies up as valuable experience and move on the path where you have made progress and which clearly suits you well.

Wonderful answer :)

Dont worry,
you can always apply for a master's degree related to the field of physics.
It is nothing unusual.
You should let it go, and multidisciplinarity is in expansion in any research and future career related  of your interest ( assuming that you want to continue your studies).

This makes it sound like one can just drop out of a bachelor's program and get a master's instead. A master's in physics will be more difficult than a bachelor's, and it will assume all the knowledge one should have gained in a bachelor's. Anyone can always go back to study more physics, but it's more reasonable to start where one left off rather than two steps ahead.

Master isn't necessarily harder than bachelor. Persons are very diverse and course plans vary a lot across countries and university.

I am not sure on what are you pointing on? That is not possible to study master in physic and related fields to physical science with bachelor in  computer science? @ChrisWhite

Computer science and Physics are in in my  opinion interconnected, @Nemo so I agree with you, depending on curriculum I am sure that OP had basic courses related to physics and if he wants to improve knowledge Master can give him a plenty of space for that

After completing school and academic degree I decided to start the dissertation. Being accustomed that everything runs its usual course, I simply chose a field which was convenient for me (location).
Well, after half a year a nasty realization crept in: The interest was not enough to get me through the dissertation. Try as I might I could not muster the energy to get through. So with rising horror I realized that the normal academic career which was nearly half of my lifetime at that point would come to an end.
So I can relate to your feelings. Yes, I felt very miserable at the point and no, the rational consolations did not reach the heart. It is completely
normal you feel this way and you need to give it room. Take your time.

I feel like I completely wasted 2 years of my life and just don't know what to do/think about this

No, you did not wasted your life. Only after a time the realization crept in that I simply was not ready for the task at this point. That was a sobering experience. I also realized that failure is the only way to find out your boundaries and wrong assumptions; you learn much, much more from failures than from your successes. Sorry if that sounds like good sounding pieces of wisdom, but it is true.
You did not waste your time because you are pining. If an university would never give out degrees or other forms of commendations, no rewards, no prizes, no notes...would you still have joined the course ? It seems like it. You still learned and enjoyed it, you had a good time.
Simply give yourself time, you will realize what the right course of action is.

Academic success is measured in your best, not your worst. If you write 100 terrible papers and 1 good one people will think of you as a good scientist. Similarly if you get your physics degree after failing it you still proved that you have a high understanding of physics.
If an employer has the choice between someone who got a physics and computer science degree at first try and someone with the same degrees on the second try then the first will be valued a bit higher, but considering how many people have a physics and computer science degree it will probably never come to that.
That said, you don't need a physics degree to prove you are not a failure, you already did that with your computer science degree. My advice would be to get a physics degree for the love of physics, but not because you don't want to look like having 2 years wasted.

I'd like to put a qualifier on your first paragraph: I would change "terrible" to "inconsequential" or "middling" papers. If you indeed write "terrible" papers, e.g. in fields like mathematics, nobody will look at your good one. If you mess up in experimental studies, nobody will believe your measurements. However, I agree in the form that whatever number of projects failed on you and never were published or only with moderate interest, will not matter as long as you end up getting strong results, too.

Your pursuits in Physics will reward you in ways you never expected.  While you may not have achieved the degree, you did gain knowledge and understanding.
You can always finish the degree, if a degree is necessary for a field you want entry into.  I would celebrate what you've accomplished, and know you are all that much closer to getting that degree if you should ever choose to do so.
You might want to try just one class and chip away at it over time so it won't be overwhelming.
You didn't fail.  You simply need a wider time frame for your goals :)
Timothy Miltz

+1 For two reasons: 1) a degree is an acknowledgement of knowledge and experienced gained, not the giver of knowledge and experience, and 2) as the OP gets older, they will realize that failure, well-handled, is an asset.

When you are in certain situations sometimes it's best to have a change of environment and that is what you did, you changed to something you are clearly very good at.You should not feel any sort of negativity towards yourself because you felt at the time that the physics course wasn't working for you,lots of people change their course.Think of it this way, had you stayed on your physics course would you have been able to cope with all the stress?Trust me things happen for a reason and I feel like you doing this new course has probably helped your mental stability so you are much calmer.You didn't waste the two years, if anything you gained two years worth of experience that you could come back to if you ever wanted to.We think the worst thing is to waste time and money but it's not the worst thing to ever let waste away is your happiness and how you feel.I'm sure the people who care for you feel the same way. SO don't feel sad be proud of your achievements because you have done a heck of a lot. WELL DONE MAN!

things happen for a reason -- I can't think of any comment less becoming of a physicist than this.

Please refer to my answer.

If you feel a hankering to learn more physics, take more physics classes.  You can start now, with one course per semester, alongside the courses you need for your major.
After you graduate, you can continue taking one course per semester if you wish, or you can take several at a time.  You can take a class while working full time, if you make sure not to put in extra hours in your job, and if you arrange your schedule carefully.
You may need some more math classes.  Certain math skills and the right sort of mathematical dexterity make physics courses much more manageable.
See how you feel as you go along.  Let your interest in the subject matter determine how far you go with physics.  In other words, don't pursue a degree just for the title and the diploma to put on the wall.
That said, if you find, over time, that it is an enduring interest and you want to keep going, probably the simplest thing would be to take the necessary undergraduate math and physics classes (and probably a couple of chemistry and engineering classes to complement the physics) as a non-matriculated student, and apply to grad school.  There again -- you don't need to decide a priori whether to aim for a Master's or a PhD.  Keep your options open.
It's great that you have a skill set that makes you reliably and enjoyably employable.  You have your whole life ahead of you in which to study anything and everything that interests you.
My favorite undergraduate math teacher (Calculus I) went back to school to study math at the age of 50.  That showed me that there are many possible paths to knowledge.


text:
Should I hold back criticism in an anonymous survey for fear of identification by the professor?
At my university, at the end of every course, professors have to submit an anonymous survey to the students. In this survey students can write the good and bad aspects of both the course's program and the professor's teaching skills.
Sometimes classes are of very few students (even under 20), so a problem arises: it is very easy to link a survey to a particular student, just by comparing his/her calligraphy in the exam with the surveys. So my question is: should a student mitigate his/her judgment in the survey for fear of a harsher revision of his exam?
Note, I'm not speaking about offensive and/or "off-topic" judgments (i.e. clothing habits), but of legitimate criticism.

Is there any reason to think professors see the results before the exams are graded and final grades are assigned?  The teaching evaluation systems I'm familiar with are careful not to allow this.

In my department, we don't get the individual forms in the student's own handwriting. (And we don't get anything until after grades are submitted, either.)

If you think the professor might be able to connect the dots, you could take the survey with you, type up your answers, print them out, and hand them in to the department anonymously after you receive your grade.

As a course instructor I welcome critical feedback because it helps me improve my teaching. I have absolutely no interest in finding out who wrote it, or in 'exacting my revenge' in any way, even if I disagree with the comments made and might be able to guess who wrote them.

@AnonymousMathematician Yes, it is quite possible that professors see the evaluation before final grades are assigned. There's no way to fully prevent this in the Italian educational system, because of the way exams are distributed along the year.

@ff524 Yes, in my university, we did get handwritten individual forms up to a few years ago, when a LMS was set-up. Probably the OP's university still manages teaching evaluations in the old way.

@aparente001 It's probably not possible, given the way the survey is typically administered in Italy.

First, a couple of remarks for those not familiar with the Italian educational system, to provide more context (the OP studies in Italy according to his user profile):

In Italy, there are really no final exams: exams are distributed along the year in 3-4 sessions, and students can decide to take an exam much later than the end of the course. Thus, professors always receive students' comments before the exams (there's no "after").
The kind of survey described by the OP was common in my university up to a few years ago (now, it's managed through a learning management system), and -- yes -- professors received handwritten forms (e.g. I read the You must die remark described here on a handwritten form). The survey should be typically handed back in class, so students can't hand it back after the exam as suggested in one of the comments. In the edit below I explain in more detail the mechanism.

Should a student mitigate his/her judgment in the survey for fear of a harsher revision of his exam?

From my experience, I've never seen anyone wasting time in trying to pair the calligraphy of the remarks with that of the exam papers (I surely didn't), and I'd consider retribution extremely rare (though jerks exist). Therefore, I wouldn't bother mitigating your judgment, but be polite and keep it at a professional level.
Note: How evaluations used to work in my university before the introduction of a learning management system
(and how they still probably work in the OP's case)
Teaching evaluations are managed by a university office (not a departmental level). In the paper era, toward the end of the courses, a professor would receive two sets of forms: one contained a questionnaire prepared by the competent office; the other could be filled with free comments.
During one of the lectures, the professor would hand the forms to the students and would give a (20-30) min break to fill them in. At the end, a volunteer among the students would collect the two sets and put them in two different envelopes.  The envelope with the questionnaires would be closed, signed and delivered to the office by the volunteer; the other envelope with the free, handwritten comments would be handed to the professor in class.
So, the professor could read the comments before the end of the course and before any exam.
Nowadays, we can still read the comments before the exams (as I said in the first remark, there's no way out for this), but they are no longer handwritten.

"I've never seen anyone wasting time in trying to pair the calligraphy of the remarks with that of the exam papers" (American here.) Not that I think it matters much, but I usually spend enough time grading homework that I can recognize many of my students' handwriting on sight. At my university I only see evaluations after grades have been submitted, but I do see the original handwritten evaluations.

@Anonymous Students always have to write their names on the exam papers, so we always know the handwriting of everyone. The issue is just the pairing with handwritten evaluations.

That's what I'm saying. When I see handwritten evaluations it is often immediately clear to me who wrote them.

Thank you for your answer and for explaining how the surveys work to the other users, I should have thought to write it in my question. Also at this point I think I won't edit the info into it because your answer is already complete!

Anyway, we are midway to leave paper behind: the questionnaires are already managed through the internet, and only the free comments directed to the teachers are handwritten.

@NicolaBastianello - Couldn't you just create a throw-away gmail address and email the comments to the professor?  If I understood right, the department never sees the comments, and they're just intended as constructive comments for the eyes of the professor alone.

@aparente001 He can, but such an email can go totally ignored (or even finish in the antispam filter). The message of such form of teaching evaluation is clear: if you have any remark, this is the standard way to convey it; other ways might go ignored. Besides, it's important to avoid excessive fear, otherwise one can start to think: will the professor lower my grades because I arrived late at the 1st lecture? because I looked bored and yawned at the 2nd?  because I was noisy at the 3rd? because etc.?

@aparente001 Of course a professor can give a hard time to students and lower their grades for whatever reason they fancy, especially in Italy where typically we don't grade on a curve and oral examinations are widespread, but one should not start to fear this kind of retribution at every step along their studies.

I think the best strategy here depends on your knowledge of the instructor. If they are sincere, earnest, and care about students, giving them useful information is a good thing. If they are vindictive, bitter, and dislike students, you are wiser to use other avenues to communicate this to higher-ups. This is universal.
The trickier case is with instructors who for some reason you have little personal "intelligence" about... Perhaps better safe than sorry, so treat the unknown as a worst-case scenario? This is a subtler, more philosophical question, about your own approach to risk and greater good.
In any case, even the most angry, bitter faculty I've know I think would not do anything substantive about grades for a student who's said something negative (or positive). I do suspect that it could be worth a "plus" or "minus", despite their claims to the contrary, but not more than that. I do recall in my own experience having "annoyed" some instructors by non-compliance and patchy attendance...

I'm not sure if every school does this, but at my school, we did our teacher evaluations before the final exam. The professors, however, were not allowed to view the comments made on the survey until after grades were posted.
Since you say your criticism is legitimate and could help improve the course, I think you should make the comments you have about the course as you see fit. If you don't, the professor won't be able to know the criticisms and will not be able to improve the course to fix the problem(s). Many professors at my school read the comments and took them to heart as ways to improve their courses. Hopefully your professor feels this way as well.

For what concerns your first paragraph, see the remarks in my answer.

Yes mine is in the US and we had an electronic system, so handwriting wasn't a concern. I've had many professors that would continually remind us to fill out the survey because they take the comments seriously because they enjoy their work.

I was referring to the fact that there is no such thing as a final exam in Italy, so you always see the comments before an exam or another.

I believe the question for OP is who are the grades handed to? I believe when my university had a written evaluation, it still would have gone to the registrar's office first, rather than being handed to the professor. It's possible the evaluations are handed in elsewhere because it's anonymous.

In Italy the registrar's office typically receives the results of the common questions of the survey, but free comments are directly handed to the professors. I'll edit my answer to explain better this.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How can I overcome the fact that I attend a weak undergraduate institution?
I am currently a traditional sophomore math major at a large university in the southern USA. I'm interested in attending graduate school once I graduate, but my university has a weak math program, and I am afraid it will severely effect me in the future.
For example, the department only routinely offers the most basic undergraduate courses, such as a two semester sequence of real analysis, one complex analysis class, basic topology, and algebra. Starting my junior year, I will be running out of math classes to take, and it will be hard to construct a schedule that makes me a full time student. By my senior year, directed studies will be my only option for classes.
Some solutions I've thought of

Apply to math summer programs and other enrichment programs like REUs
Transfer to a different school
Get a relevant minor or double major

The problem with transferring is that my upper division math classes are not transferable to other schools in the state. I would have to retake every math class I've taken other than calculus, and it would take me at least 3 additional years at another school.
The only constructive advice I've received from faculty at my school is to graduate in three years. I do not like the idea of graduating early because I've simply exhausted the departments offerings. I also do not think a PhD admission committee would look favorably upon that.
What other courses of action should I look into?

Unfortunately, this is a situation where financial constraints matter.  Could you give some indication of what you can afford?

@AlexanderWoo I cannot afford to leave the state (Georgia, USA). If I were to transfer out ASAP, I could afford three additional years starting Fall 2016. I don't know if this will affect anyone's advice, but I have a full ride at my current institution.

Do you have some idea why your upper division math classes are not transferable?  From the outside, I would be concerned that the reason is that the courses are weak and cover less material or operate at a lower level, so they are not truly equivalent.  If that's the case, then they might not even prepare you adequately for a relatively low-ranked Master's program.  If the reason is turf protection or a desire to suck more tuition money out of you, that's unfortunate but suggests different responses.

Transferring to UGA or Ga Tech would allow you tons of course selection and you would still be in state. I went to one of these for undergraduate math (UGA) and did fine.

@TK - Could you convert your comment to an answer?

Wouldn't it be nice if there were something like a 3-2 program, such as one often finds in engineering, where a student does the basic courses in the home institution and then takes the more specialized courses in a partner institution?  But if there is no partnership of this sort already set up, I think it would be tough to create one in time for your studies.  I understand your reluctance to transfer, given that you might lose some of your credits in the transfer; but the longer you postpone transferring, the worse...

... things will get, i.e. the more out of sync you will get.  I'd say, transfer ASAP.  Even if you have to start out at the new school as a non-matriculated student.

@aparente001 I don't believe this merits an answer as I do not know the nuances of the possible solutions that OP has. I can only tell the OP about the possibilities of UGA and Ga Tech, but not about the cost/benefit of actually transferring.

I couldn't find on GTech's website any obvious reason those credits couldn't be transferred.  How do you know that they can't be?

@NoahSnyder GT has a system where I can input the classes I have taken at my current institution and see how they transfer to GT. Classes such as abstract algebra I, ODE, Calc 3 etc. are transferred as "general math elective" and are "not equivalent" to the GT class. It's my understanding that I would have to retake those classes. (Though I've seen GT's syllabi for those classes, and I believe I could pass a department exam of sorts and earn credit. I am looking into the details and regulations of such tests.)

@Lsonic If you're seriously looking at GT (or UGA), talk to the undergraduate director there.  A lot of times, there are supposed rules on the books which are actually easily bent, or even totally ignored.  It's hard to know from the website which rules are really enforced and which are not.  It might be you're worried about something which can easily be waived.

I transferred from a community college to a prestigious four-year school, as a music major in both.  At the four-year school, the chair of the music theory department had a conversation/interview/verbal exam with me, where he carefully evaluated my skills in ear training, harmony, analysis, etc.  He concluded that I was coming in with the approximate level of an incoming sophomore.  He knew all his departments courses inside and out.  I can imagine that one might take a less holistic approach, and test a student on their knowledge, course by course. ...

...  At any rate, my guess is that the GT online system that is spitting out "general math elective" for everything should be taken with a grain of salt.  I imagine that the online system isn't equipped to draw conclusions about the more advanced math classes, and simply produces a default answer.  But when the student is evaluated by the department, the number of credits that transfer as non-electives will be decided.  Besides testing the student, departments also do a careful comparison of the two syllabi.

It sounds like you have a good start on the most important thing: take advantage of every opportunity at your current program and excel at all of them. Even from a weak undergraduate program, if you can come out with multiple letters saying that you are the strongest student they've seen in X years and have the credentials to back that up, you'll have a good chance at solid graduate programs.
Your situation means that standardized tests are also even more important. Math is nice because there actually exists a test (math subject GRE) that most schools put significant weight on, so make sure to take it very seriously. Doing well on the math GRE takes away a lot of the uncertainty that admissions committees will have about your application due to the institution.
Assuming that you don't transfer, some other options:

Get to know faculty and spend that extra time doing research. Proven research experience can make up for a lot of coursework, and you'll hopefully get a much stronger recommendation letter as well. This is important to do no matter what kind of institution you're at, but is probably extra important at weaker programs where your application can't rely on reputation and coursework.
Consider graduating early and getting a Master's degree at a strong program. This isn't always financially feasible, but if it is then it's an option to strengthen your coursework and resume. Availability of strong master's programs can depend on the field, but it's worth looking into.
Graduate early and get a job doing research. Again, availability may depend on field (I hear that these aren't common in math), but if you can get the right job it can be a great boon to a resume and help generate another good recommendation. Bonus points if you can find a job near a good university and take a couple classes on the side.

Even if you can't transfer credit for your upper level courses, you almost certainly wouldn't need to retake them.  Instead you could take different upper level courses until you have enough upper level courses to graduate.  Typically prerequisites are at the discretion of the professor teaching the course, and mathematicians are typically quite flexible about them.

"The problem with transferring is that my upper division math classes are not transferable to other schools in the state."  Actually, this is often at the discretion of the new university's chair of undergraduate studies.  If you ask for the classes to transfer and provide evidence of what you learned, such as copies of your exams, you may be granted credit.
Transferring to an institution with a history of successful placement in graduate programs would be a wise long term move.  I cannot provide advice about the financial aid you might receive inside or outside Georgia without more information.  Try it and you might get sufficient aid.
Graduating early is also good because it will allow you to finish school earlier and get the job you want.  I think admissions committees would look favourably on early graduation because it shows discipline and organization.  However, you should arrange to have evidence (such as subject GRE scores and letters of recommendation) that you have learned enough to be successful in the graduate program.

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


text:
Taking undergraduate course by a graduate student, officially?
I am supposed to start my graduate studies (M.A.Sc.) at a university in Ontario, Canada, soon. My potential research theme (as I've talked about it with my supervisor) does need to some background in chaos dynamics & fractal geometry... I've tracked the host university and could not find any related course, planned by either of the departments... So, I just tried to check the other universities, in the neighborhood, for finding any related course to be take it, as a guest student, based on the policies.
One fully-related course has been found, presented in the other university, named "Chaos & Fractals"... But it is an undergraduate course...!
All this said, Does any body know whether I will be authorized to take an undergraduate course as a graduate student (to be counted among my required credits, of course) or not?!
Thanks in advance

Taking a course at another university for credit can be bureacratically complicated. But informally auditing a class without receiving credit is likely quite easy.

@TomChurch: Just consider possible to take the course as guest student. Furthermore, as I've asserted within the question's body, I am eager to take the course as a part of the my roster of official courses, not just auditing that.

@Rori: You mean there is no hard-coded code of ethics to decide about this case by the universities?

No one can answer this question, except possibly your new supervisor. The bureaucratic issues involved in having a graduate student take an undergraduate course for credit, not to mention a course at another university, are very complicated and will be different at each institution.
(Before you spend any time trying to answer this question, you should check with your supervisor to make sure that they want you to take this course. For example, they might feel that despite the overlap in course material, taking this course would not be a good use of your time.)


text:
Primary Investigator gets really nervous around me?
My new Primary Investigator, who is well respected in her field, gets really nervous when talking to me for some reason. We are the same gender and both married so it's not a problem of that sort... This does not seem to happen with any other student, who she has a really good relationship with, but when talking to me, sometimes (not all the time) she really fumbles for words. This then makes me start to get nervous and our interactions sometimes become awkward. How should I improve our relationship so I can communicate effectively with my advisor?

Do you have any idea or hypothesis of why she may act this way? For example, are you particularly big or physically intimidating?

"same gender and both married" doesn't imply "it's not a problem of that sort".

I'm neither physically big nor intimidating (hopefully...). At least, I've never had another PI be intimidated by me before, and I've worked for a few.

How do you know that she does not fumble exactly as in your presence when she is with others, 1-on-1? By definition, you can't be there. If you rely on others' words, maybe they are simply less sensitive to such issues than you are. My point being, she might just be socially awkward when in personal conversations. Shining in academic talks doesn't contradict this (assuming she does), as you can learn to focus on your topic and talk only.

@gnometorule It's not only in 1-on-1 conversation that this happens, so I do see how she interact with others and me in group conversations as well

What's a PI? This means "private investigator" to me.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit In academia, PI = Principal Investigator.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit I read the question as "PI gets nervous around me, it's making it really hard to measure circumferences"

Franck makes a very good point. It has been known for wives to have affairs with other women.

Have you made any mistakes around her? She could be intimidated. Make a stupid mistake it will make her like you a lot more b/c it will humanize you. :) I'm only half joking.

I don't really see much evidence of nervousnes in what you've written. "Sometimes but not always fumbles for words" doesn't necessarily say "nervous around me" - in fact, if it's interacting with you that's the problem, why would it only happen sometimes? Of course there may be more that we don't know about, but is it possible you are reading too much into this?

How much is this playing into it: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/52308/how-should-i-inform-my-advisor-about-struggles-with-aspergers-syndrome

@jakebeal: Hmm then I vaguely recall having this discussion before: that seems to be an Americanism or at the very least it's not global (despite your bizarre inference that if I must not know academia if I don't know the term). Can we spell out acronyms in questions please? You have a global audience here.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit I think you should click this link. At least that's what I do if I don't understand acronyms. AFAIK the term is pretty standard in academia, even in non-anglophone countries - e.g. the term in France is investigateur principal. In Japan the term is kenkyuusekininsha, and it means the same thing; in English translations of Japanese personal pages in academia, the term is also principal investigator. Where are you founding the claim that PI is an Americanism?

In an earlier version of this question OP mentions that she has "Poor social skills, extreme at times" and "Difficulties with eye contact and facial expressions". Also, in this question OP thinks her profs are sitting around, gossiping about students. It would seem, then, that there is more to this story...

I would advise you to simply ask about it, in a way that pre-supposes as little as possible.  For example, you might say something like:

Can I ask you about something I am feeling concerned about?  I've feel like our interactions become very awkward and stumbling sometimes.  When I see you talking with other people, however, I do not see this happening.  I'm concerned about this, because I want to have a good advisor/advisee relationship and be able to communicate effectively with you.

Don't assume anything about her feelings---what you might be interpreting as feeling nervous might be something else entirely, even just a mannerism of your PI.  You also may be incorrect that this is unusual with you: people have strong observational biases and also you don't see your PI when she's alone with other people.
Hopefully, the two of you can then have a short awkward conversation that will help resolve (or at least allow you to work effectively despite) your other awkwardness.

Thanks for the answer. This does not just happen when we are alone though, sometimes even during group conversations the interaction might become awkward when she is talking to me. I'll definitely consider the advice though.

Last resort to bring it up directly: that has a real likelihood of making it permanently worse.

@neuronet depending on the cause, leaving it unfixed may only degenerate into much worse.

Yeah, true. But if it gets better, say they just met, then no reason to be weird and talk about it...You will be marked as high maintenance if you prematurely bring up emotional stuff.

It is impossible to hypothesize about an exact reason with such few information but I wish to make a few observations.

Have you analyzed yourself thoroughly?

It may be that you are anxious yourself. It could make other people around you to feel uncomfortable. It may be that you are seeing the reflection of your anxiety on others.
It makes a lot of difference for me when a professor greets us with a smile before starting a lecture, rather than being gloomy with eyes of a dead fish.
Try to wish her everyday with a smile.
Assuming you have already analyzed yourself, I agree with @jakebeal's answer, but my advise is to converse by email due to obvious reasons.
May be you just need to break a little ice between you and her. Invite her to a coffee sometime, may be you could talk about your family, about anything other than your subject.
A personal side note: May be its just me, but I sometime feel highly uncomfortable with piercing staring of some of my peers. I use this strategy of talking not looking into their eyes. It may be awkward but gets the job done. If you wish you could try talking by not making any eye contact to rule out if that is not the case. This is an entirely subjective observation and take it in that spirit.

Disagree with recommendation to do it via email. Not good for communicating nuance and emotional subtlety. Plus don't want a permanent record of it, at least not at first.

@neuronet This is a situation where there is absolutely no conflict between the adviser and advisee, nor they are conversing any controversial issues. The student cant stop the adviser using a recorder during the face to face encounter, can she? Face to face communication is not advised since it would make the situation a Catch 22.

"there is absolutely no conflict between the adviser and advisee" we don't actually know that. As to: "cant stop the adviser using a recorder "  Yes, but email is recorded by default.

Here are some other possibilities besides those Sathyam has mentioned: Possibly you are smiling too much. Possibly your normal interpersonal distance is closer than what she is used to/comfortable with. Possibly there is something about your voice or mannerisms that is uncomfortable for her. Be sure to compare your behavior with that of other students with whom she doesn't get nervous -- if you notice such a difference, that may be the problem; try changing it to see what happens.

I recommend bringing it up explicitly only as a last resort. PIs don't, as a rule, like to delve into interpersonal psychological issues with advisees. It has the very real possibility of marking you as high-maintenance (focusing on feelings and personal stuff rather than science) and could exacerbate future awkwardness.
Before even seriously considering bringing it up, I'd make sure of the following:

This has been going on for a long time (a couple of months, at least). That is, give the relationship time to settle into an equilibrium. It could be early relationship weirdness and it will just go away.
You have introspected honestly about the causes, and worked to eliminate any obvious causes. One thing that strikes me about the OP is the lack of any consideration of alternative hypotheses, causes, or remedies. It strikes me as a bit casual and unreflective diagnosis, frankly. This may just be the way it was written, I realize, but a lot more naunce is called for.
You have gotten confirmation from people you trust (not just friends) that she is indeed acting weird. The internet is good, but people that know both of you, and can give discreet and objective advice, would be even better. Discretion is important here: don't start trash-talking behind her back if she is your advisor. :)
It is interfering with your ability to do good science together, and with your mentor-mentee relationship in a way you find unacceptable. After all, sometimes advisers are just awkward, but they still give great professional and scientific counsel. This is actually very common, if not ideal.

If those four conditions are met, then it might not be a mistake to talk to her. The PI isn't a friend primarily, but the boss, so it's important to act accordingly. My hunch though is that if you really take the time to think through the four conditions I mentioned, you will largely resolve the problem. That's my experience as both a advisee and an adviser for many students over the years.

I disagree with the premise that talking about interpersonal issues is something that will make the PI uncomfortable, and you high maintenance. For example, in my university we have to have a 2h conversation with out PI focused on interpersonal relationships every year.

@Davidmh there are probably cultural variations. I'm in the US and that would not happen here unless there was a lawsuit first. :) PIs tend to not want to enter couples therapy with their students. :)  I have had many students, and have many PI friends, and we all feel this way. Of course there are exceptions and context and such. We like to review the science, but not "interpersonal relationships" (whatever that means!). And note I said don't do it FIRST: if you go through the four steps I suggest, and still there is a problem, then it may not be a bad idea.

Could it be that the PI feels intimidated because you're really smart or knowledgeable? Even if you're "just" a student and she's a PI, she might be suffering from a bit of the "impostor syndrome".
Anyway, I suggest approaching this step-by-step.
It might be something you do unconsciously, something that wouldn't bother most people. So let's rule that out. Explain the situation to a couple of close friends (people you can trust to tell you the truth even if it might hurt your feelings) and ask them if they can think of any reason why someone might act flustered around you.
It might be something specific to the way the two of you interact, or it might even be your imagination. Perhaps you could talk to another student about this; ask if they've noticed the same thing and if they have any idea why this is happening.
Finally, it could be something specific to the PI. Maybe she is attracted to you, or you remind her of someone from her past. So it might be time to follow jakebeal's suggestion of asking her about it. However, depending on what the problem is, this could make things more uncomfortable.


text:
How to increase participation in tutorials, as a teaching assistant?
I will be a teaching assistant for a couple of "tutorials" this semester. Basically, I just have a list of problems that we have to go over in the tutorial. Last semester, the Calculus for Engineering students were happy to participate, but the Calculus for Finance students were not. The only factor I can think of is that the Engineering students were more prepared. How can I get the students to participate? Should I just stall and not continue until someone raises their hand, and then they'll eventually get the message? Somehow I'm not sure that really works...

A slightly brute force way of getting them to engage is to ask individual students to present their solutions to the problems on the whiteboard. Sun Tzu made the argument that if you want an army to fight, you put it on "death ground", a position from which there's no escape without fighting and winning. This is effectively making use of the same principle - you put people in a position in which the only way out (without looking daft) is to do the work and present it well. The same trick works if you want people to read a research paper - just make them present a seminar on it.

The problem is that I can't "make" them do anything.

True, you can't force them, but you can ask them.

See What are some good ways to lead a discussion session for a TA in a graduate-level STEM class?, What to do in recitation?, How to improve myself as a recitation (discussion,lab,tutorial) teacher?

You can't make people do things, but you can convince them that it's in their best interests. In education, students trade money and time for an opportunity to benefit from your knowledge about a particular subject and your willingness to spend time teaching them. If everyone sits there without engaging, who wins? You, because you still get the money and they don't get the knowledge. Assuming the subject is interesting to them (not something you can fully control) and well taught (something you can control), it's in their best interests to engage with you, so sensible students will.

The problem is that I can't "make" them do anything — No, but you can base part of their grade on doing certain things.

If the problem is lack of preparation, reviewing background that will be needed for next week's lecture may be useful to them.

I often walk over to a randomly picked student and ask him/her a question. I do that randomly and unpredictably, including corners of the room or sides where students expect to be out of the action, and no student will stay inattentive. Under no circumstances belittle or ridicule, though, no matter how wrong they are, and if the student makes even a partial step in the right direction, give them credit for this. If they are stuck, you can then solicit help from others to further complete the answer.
For students avoiding your eyes, try to pick a question with unclear/ambiguous response. When you then ask the student, they are likely to respond with "I don't know" or similar, and you can then say that they are indeed right, that the answer is indeed unclear (and, of course, you discuss why). This gives them a confidence boost, and the next time you ask them they will be less worried to answer.

I would tackle it by clearly defining (or even redefining) the term participation. Particularly I'd advocate for enhancing student's engagement rather than the traditionally defined participation.
Coming out to the board and writing down one's solution or answering the tutor's question on the spot is not the only way we can judge if someone is participating. If the Finance students are indeed less prepared, this is actually an intimidating experience for them, and can cause further withdrawal. Here I list some practices that I have tried and tested, there will be some over-generalizing so bear with me. In your situation the mileage will differ depending on how well you know your students.
First, get them involved in deciding the format of the tutorial. A good way is to send them a poll before or right after the first tutorial. Make the poll anonymous and ask them questions that can help you improve the teaching quality. For example, related courses they have taken, confidence in calculus, how they learn best, issues in the field of finance that interest them, preferred ways to participate (group discussion, showing answer anonymously, etc.)
Once you have the general gist, plan your format around it. You can alter your examples, your ways evaluating participation/engagement, etc.
For instance, make your questions relevant to their field of study. Sometime simply naming your variables with things that they are familiar with improves acceptance. If they are from the business school, case study instead of straight-up "please solve this" exercise would be a good and more familiar option. For example, you can present the challenge first, then data, then the formula. Try to make it as close to their future career experience as possible and this immersive approach may just interest them.
For less prepared students, you can consider group-work and group-self-teaching. For example, a mechanism called jig-saw may be a good choice. Let's say you have four questions and 16 students. Group them into four, and then have each group study one question and get that right. You can tour around and coach them. Then, reshuffle your group so that now the new group has one student from each of the questions (e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 as a group) and each of them can take turn to explain his/her approach to the their group members. Each of them is still held accountable and the stake of massively embarrassing themselves is much lower.
Another group-based platform that may work well is message-board. Platforms such as Piazza allows students to contribute to answer a question either with their name disclosed or anonymously. Instructor can then provide feedback. The math symbols may be harder to manage, but Piazza works with LaTeX so it's not that hard to master. You can consider posting the question days before the tutorial so that less confident students can do some extra preparation before meeting you. If coming up to the board and explain the answer is really your way of doing it, then you can also consider assign the question to the students before hand so that they can start working on the one they may be called upon to demonstrate.
There are easier twists and there are elaborated modifications. The overarching tactics can be summarized as:

Know the learning and communication traits of the generation and cohort you teach.
Write clear learning objectives and seek feedback on them from other experienced and reputable teachers.
Engage students flexibly rather than forcing them into a mold of "ideal student" that we or our teachers or our teachers' teachers once conceptualized.
Make their learning relevant and try your best to make them own their discovery.
Do not be afraid of setbacks. Changes do not always bring positive reactions, but they are crucial as our audience is ever-changing; the moment we stop trying new teaching methods is the moment we stop being a good teacher.

authors: حافظ على مجرش


text:
Is there a lot of writing in PhD programs in top-rank US schools?
I am an M.Sc. student in a university in a developing country, and I am  frustrated with the volume of useless writing that we are supposed to do in my program. Every single course has a class project, in which we need to do a literature review a project and then at the end need to submit a 10-15 page report. We also need to submit a thesis progress report every three months and a lot of other writing matters that I am sure will not be read by anyone.
I have no problem with writing real papers that help other researchers to improve the field. My problem is with writing useless course reports without any innovation (because of the time limits) or Progress Reports, which I am even not sure that will be read carefully by the instructor or the grader! At first I considered these things an exercise for real papers, but now I think I don't need this type of exercise any more!
I am wondering: is this large volume of writing in U.S. top schools too?

What discipline are you and how many "real" papers in "real" journals have you published?

For every word of "useless" verbiage that you have to write, your supervisor probably has to write ten.

@Moriarty so what? that doesn't make the verbage that students have to write any less useless. i don't think many students can or should sympathize with their professors.

If there isn't "useless writing" there should be "useless reading" activities in a Ph.D. program if this is the approach.  You can even add "useless class discussions". I would like anyone to expand the answer in a way that what is the definition of useless for any program? Does everyone feel  the same way in the same program? What I am saying is that we can agree with the question's approach but also, should be careful as the academic advancement will go on through the mentioned activities for many people. Few can be above or below the line means that they don't suit the program.

Yes, you should expect to do quite a bit of writing as part of your courses in any high-rank U.S. university.  It is, indeed, good practice, and in a good university your work should indeed receive significant scrutiny and feedback from the instructors.
Furthermore, I would not be so quick to dismiss such practice in technical writing.  First, the quality of prose that you have produced in the initial version of this question clearly indicates that you have a long way to go before you can routinely achieve a high professional standard of writing.  Second, no really good writer ever considers their art to be finished, and that includes long-experienced academics.
Do not forget that communicating your technical work effectively is just as important and difficult, if not often more so, than doing that technical work in the first place.  I know people who have run their careers into the ground from a reluctance to invest sufficiently in becoming comfortable with scientific writing.
In short: if you want to be a scientist, you've got to embrace the writing.

Beautiful answer.

Good answer, but I have to admit that, in retrospective, I didn't find the (luckily few) reports written during the university years any useful to improve my current scientific writing: I really started learning how to write during my PhD years, when I started to write real papers.

So: "I have not yet begun to write!"

Try to find authors who write well and learn from them, in writing or in person (even luckier if your supervisor is one of them) - there are techniques for good writing which turn writing from a chore to a pleasure.
Especially technical people often very much dislike writing as opposed to programming; to those I recommend to think as follows: writing is like programming - you need to declare the known setting, decompose the problem, build a systematic, logical sequential case, compile it and link it all together. (pun intended)
Writing is like developing software that is interpreted not by a computer, but by a human.

+1 for the writing like programming analogy. This is true not only at the level of the paper, but also at the level of the paragraph. Writing is endlessly fascinating this way.


text:
Exploring something completely new, even silly.
As it were, I finally dreamed up a direction to explore and write something about, but just like every other time, I noticed someone senior has written has already explored the line of thought. In Physics, it seems as if there is practically nothing novel that I can explore. I know in part that may be it is just that I am not able to think fast enough.
If I am thinking about exploring something, and realize someone has already explored it, then decide to completely independently explore it without reading their work, and arrive at something similar or different, is this something that I can still put out there with my name? The thing is I have not written anything yet and have no reputation, and so I am hoping that I can put something may be simple but hopefully different and a bit new, even if it is silly. The problem is that as far as I can tell and after trying for a bit, it is looking like the chances of me doing something not completely explored might be even lower than I thought.
I am a serious scholar though not in any program at the moment, and have quite a bit of time. Any suggestions as to what the right approach is would be great.

Trying to do independent research is hard. The answer to your question is at: Is it possible take take part in a research project if I'm not a part of a university?

"If I am thinking about exploring something, and realize someone has already explored it, then decide to completely independently explore it without reading their work, and arrive at something similar or different, is this something that I can still put out there with my name?" - this is at odds with your title and the rest of your post. Please edit your question to clarify what you are asking.

What you are writing is pretty much exactly the reason why non-senior researchers in academia have advisors:

It is very hard to have a complete overview over a field, including which lines of thought have been explored, and where the open problems are. Many open problems are known to researchers in the field without this being obvious from the papers.
In order to perform meaningful research in a field that is not brand-new, the best way to get started is to focus on something small but interesting. Developing a completely new theory in Physics is, for example, probably not the right way to start. Coming up with research questions that are small enough so that they are unexplored yet interesting enough for meaningful research is not trivial and requires substantial experience.
To some extent, starting with research also means to refrain from too high expectations of what can be achieved. For example, as a computer scientist, you could reduce an aim to "build a 100% safe self-driving car" to "detecting a dog on a leash next to pedestrians that may jump onto the street from image data only". The latter is more achievable, yet fits into the big picture of building a self-driving car.

So my advise would be to get someone who is at the frontier of the field that you are interested in and who can give you guidance.


text:
Should I integrate the notations of different papers in the prior works section of my thesis?
I am writing the "Prior Works" section of my M.Sc. thesis. In different papers I saw that there are  different notations for fairly similar concepts. Should I describe each prior work with its original notation which helps people to refer to the original works without confusion or is it better to unify the notation across all of the prior works to make the thesis easier to read.

There's no universal right answer, but I usually err on the side of making my paper more readable. When the notation change from the prior work is drastic, it's fine to make a parenthetical comment that U is referred to as f in the other paper (for example).

In my PhD thesis I had a largeish section in the "state of the art" chapter discussing the wildly different conventions, definitions, and notation of previous work in the area, and setting up a common language for comparing them (and later for the main work).
In the resulting papers I just defined the terms, and paraphrased earlier work in them as required.
So, it really depends. In your thesis you do have the space available to make it absolutely clear, in papers/conferences space is at a premium.


text:
Accidentally finding the solution to an exercise
I was given an assignment for a graduate course a few days ago, and I had to do some background reading in order to understand what one question was asking. In the process of doing this reading, I discovered a paper that contained the exact question I was working on, but phrased as a statement. A proof of this statement was also included, meaning the solution was now laid out in front of me.
I'm not sure how to approach this situation. I can't simply reference this paper, since telling the instructor "the solution may be found here" misses the point of the exercise. On the other hand, I can't write my solution without providing a citation, since that would be academic dishonesty. What should I do in this situation?

@CaptainEmacs, or you could try to find a different solution, or clean up this one (but still referencing the solution you found)

In my opinion, if your instructor marks you down for correctly paraphrasing the solution and citing the original text, rather than doing it all from scratch (or pretending to do it all from scratch), I would say that's a poor lesson in how to conduct research. I know that's not really the purpose of the assignment. But still.

@jakebeal It's an answer now. I deleted the comment to avoid duplication.

@jakebeal hm, instead of being voted up, it was voted down. It would be nice if whoever does this, gives a reason why. Not above criticism, but would be useful to know.

Did you already read and understand that solution?  And is there a reason you don't just double check with the instructor?

Literature research is a legitimate process in science, they can't blame you for that. Clearly, however, you did not "rediscover" the result. One option would be to tell the tutor that you found a solution in the literature and if s/he could give you an alternative assignment instead.

I discovered a paper that contained the exact question I was working on
Common research practice, before working on a problem that you think is relevant for your work of publication quality, it is advisable to do a background search on the same to see if someone had worked out the problem already. It saves a good deal of time and energy when you find your brilliant idea already published else where before actually investing time on it.
Now, from the spirit of what you described, the aim is not to discover a publishable result rather than understanding how to reach the solution. If you understood the solution and submit it in writing, there is absolutely no problem if you cite the source even though you will miss the joy of independent work. It is also possible that you may find a related problem solved elsewhere, which may or may not be a publication in the usual sense, but the same logic applies there too. In my opinion,

it is appropriate to cite the source unless you reach the solution by
  independent work.

I suggest a variation of Captain Emacs's suggestion, namely to write the solution (in your own words) and hand it in, including an explanation of where and how you found the reference that contained the solution, and including a note stating that because you hadn't arrived at the solution by yourself, you would be happy to accept an alternative assignment. However, I doubt that that would be necessary. The instructor likely cares to know mainly that you reached a good level of understanding of the material covered by the question, and would not care as much how you arrived at that understanding.
I should also note that it's not clear to me that not including a citation would represent academic dishonesty. It certainly would if you were specifically instructed not to use the internet as an aid to solving the homework, or if you copied the solution verbatim rather than read it, understand it and write it in your own words, but otherwise, whether this was seen or dishonest or not would depend on whether there was an (implicit or explicit) assumption that students are allowed to use any sources they wish to in order to arrive at a solution, as long as the solution they hand in is written by them, in their own words, and represents genuine understanding that they have attained. With that said, it's best to be as honest as possible, not least because you haven't done anything wrong by stumbling on the solution accidentally, so I would greatly favor the honest approach advocated above or the similar one suggested by Captain Emacs.

Whenever a solution is used which is not common knowledge (i.e. where the "scientific collective" is the author, or which is so well known that everybody knows it, e.g. Linear Algebra etc.), an attribution is in place. Everything else is plagiarism. Own words are fine, but the attribution still has to be there, and an assessment most certainly is not exempt.

@Captain I'm very big on honesty myself, but I think the strict approach you are advocating is going too far. What if the OP knew the solution from reading it last year, before the assignment was given? Would he/she have to cite the source then? What if he/she forgot where he/she read it? In any case, this is context-dependent. The course/graduate program/university should have a code of conduct/ethics policy describing what constitutes academic dishonesty and what doesn't, and it either agrees with your position or not. Some professors would be fine with not citing the source in this case.

I've run into this issue several times in various classes, and I've never had an issue with the method described here. No formal citation, just a link (or even the name of the website) has usually been enough. Of course, if your instructor has specifically said that you're not allowed to use any outside resources for the homework, you've now opened a completely different can of worms...

@chipbuster A link in lieu of a citation, for homework, would be perfectly fine, of course. The whole point is making clear where your ideas come from.

@DanRomik Assuming it is really from memory, and assuming the student has forgotten that there was an external source, it is likely that the solution will look different from literature, and the solution may be acceptable. I'd just like to mention that some scientists, more often than one would like, also start using certain techniques after they have been made acquainted with them and forget where they got them from. Even assuming a mistake, it results in people not receiving credit they deserve. Learning to associate knowledge with its source is core part of the academic education.


text:
How can a Master degree lead to 300 ECTS?
http://emjd-dc.eu/files/2011/11/emjd-dc.pdf
Here, one of the admission requirements is, A Master's degree corresponding to 300 ECTS.
How is that possible?
A Masters degree is at most of 2 years. 2 years = 4 semesters.
1 semester = 5 courses = 5 * 6 = 30 ECTS.
Then, 4 semesters = 30 * 4 = 120 ECTS.
Where does 300 ECTS come from?

Bzw, not all courses are worth 6 credits and not all programs plan 5 courses per semester.

I'm guessing ECTS is the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System. From that page, a bachelor's degree is worth 180-240 ECTS credits, and the master's is worth 60-120.
It sounds as though the institution you're interested in wants a master's degree and at least 300 ECTS credits. From the linked page, it's possible that you could have a master's but still only have 240 ECTS.

A bit of history: Before bachelor & master Germany and some other countries just had "Diplom" which took ~5 years. When Bologna came, these programs had to be split in two. A bachelor is supposed to be work-qualifying and some programs decided that you couldnt possibly be qualified after 3 years so they offer a 4 year bachelor and to make up for that a 1 year master. This requirement just makes sure you dont take a 3 year bachelor and then switch to a university with a 1 year master.

Of course it is possible. bachelor degree is 180 ECTS, plus master degree 120 ECTS it is European Credit Transfer system or Bologna process declaration, when EU established some common core system for all member states. ( countries ) If you are still applying for ULJ, or anywhere in EU, ( maybe not England since they are not strict part of BP ) They have 180 ECTS plus 120 for master.


text:
What can I do, if I don't like the proposed research subject by my potential supervisor?
I am supposed to be admitted to a M.A.Sc.  graduate program in engineering at a reputable Canadian university. I am now communicating with my potential supervisor about the potential plans for my research...  and here is my concern:
My background and enthusiasm have been shaped around applications research and implementation of the acquired control techniques within the realm of robotics, whereas my supervisor has a more theoretical viewpoint. When we had started to communicate, he did assert that we would determine the research theme,  according to our common interests and overlapping subjects.  But today, I have received an email from him,  consisting of an idea for research that is considerably theoretical.
I am not really attracted by that subject, since it does not cover my desired research field, considerably.  I might notify my idea,  frankly,  but I am afraid of confronting him and creating any dissatisfaction from him.
He is eager to hear my viewpoint,  and I have no idea how to transfer my perspective,  efficiently,  such that any misunderstanding will be avoided.
Have I right in this case,  or have to do whatever my potential supervisor is saying?
I have not yet met him,  face to face,  but I know that he is,  amazingly,  kind and able to track what's going in my mind.  How should I declare my opinion about the concern,  such that he would not consider my clarification as a disobeying?

What does "not along my code of ethics, noticeably" mean?

@virmaior: "It does not cover my desired research field, considerably"

In most dialects of English, that's really not what it means. The sentence you used would be appropriate for 'they're asking me to kill rabbits' or 'they want me to lie to patients'.

@virmaior: That's borrowed from a north-american (but not so common) reference... But thank you to mention the expressions...

How should I declare my opinion about the concern — Directly, honestly, and respectfully.  You're an adult; if you really don't want to work on the topic this professor proposes, you really don't have to.

I sometimes find it helpful to think about research focus as having three entirely distinct aspects:

Passions: the core "gee whiz" that is what really draws you to research (e.g., in your case, swarm robotics)
Techniques: the methods and skills that you actually use in your pursuit of a research project (e.g., discrete-event methods, domain-specific languages, control theory)
Applications: the societal issues that (e.g., environmental issues, civil security, traffic, elder care)

There are often many different techniques that can be used to pursue the same passion, and many different applications that can be used to motivate its development.
These pieces can combine in different ways, and at different times in one's career, different elements will be on top.  It's most satisfying when your passion is on top, but there are times when you need to focus on one of the other areas, e.g., to develop or apply skills in order to advance yourself to where you can get back to your passion, or to work on application-specific elements that are necessary in order to make your passionate work relevant.  These may be passing detours that you need to take and return, or they may turn out to be more interesting than you thought and to lead to new passions of their own.
Where you are in your career, right now, I would suggest not being too picky about maintaining focus on your passion.  If you can see ways that the other things you do might be later related back to your area of passion, then I would suggest taking that detour.  You don't need to let go of your passion, and you can keep looking for ways do satisfy both elements, but right now, at the Masters level, you probably need to focus on the techniques aspect of research.

Actually, as an undergraduate with 6 proceedings and 3 ISI publications (all as the major researcher), I have done some research in my field, in depth, a little bit. Therefore, switching to another major sounds tough for me, because I feel all of my accumulated experiences, acquired from that field will be futile, empirically, and I have to start from the scratch... So, you advice me that I better to rely on my supervisor's path (is who a hero in his field with over 5 decades research experience), right?!

@Roboticist I don't understand why you think this choice would be "switching to another major", since it's clearly also relevant and applicable to your area of passion, just not apparently your preferred approach.  I am also not telling you "your supervisor knows better," I am saying your interests and your potential supervisor's interests (and funding constraints) may only have potential overlap in some areas, but not others.  Your choice is likely not "How do I persuade this person?" but "Can I find sufficient value for myself in the program which I am offered?"

Such a nice and optimistic viewpoint: "Can I find sufficient value for myself in the program which I am offered?"...
I would appreciate for your contribution, Sir...

@Roboticist It's hard to say without being intimately familiar with both the proposed research and your own interests, but my immediate thought (as one who works in the area myself), is that a strong theoretical grounding might be invaluable for ensuring that your application systems are actually resilient and suitable for field conditions and don't have hidden scalability flaws or other such dependencies that don't appear in the small systems you can test in the laboratory.

So, that provides the other privilege, then... :)

@Roboticist I'm afraid that I don't know what you mean by "the other privilege"

According to your explanations, the theoretical topic might lead to hitting two birds with one stone for me: 1- Taking the position and stepping into the way of research. 2- Constructing a robust background for any other design-driven research project.

@Roboticist Precisely.  Only you, however, know your goals well enough to actually make that judgement.

A successful project profits from both supervisor and candidate being interested in the same question. If you really dislike the topic, you should try to convince the supervisor to accept a different question. He will then, if he is amenable, try to convince you of a variation of his, you will amend it, etc. until - hopefully - convergence.
However, you may find that the supervisor is simply not interested in your direction. This can happen, even if he likes you. That's fine, and then you either have to find somebody closer to your question of interest or compromise.
That being said, it seems that you are talking about an MA Sc degree. This is considerably shorter than a PhD, so, depending on the details of the situation, it may be easier for you to find a compromise.
If topic really matters for you, however, you need to think hard whether you want to go into a field which you have qualms in.
I am not sure about what the ethical consideration of a "theoretical topic" as opposed to a practical one could possibly be; be is as it may, I would avoid bringing this up, as it may insinuate that you cast doubts about the ethics of your prospective supervisor.

Theoretical topic just like "discrete-event systems" v.s. my desired research field: "swarm robotics"
Thanks for your contribution... But I know that the sole options are either "considering a compromise" or "digging into something not so sweet(!)"... I was hopeful if you could guide me how to discuss about the case with my supervisor in order to acquire the optimized convergence... (My experiences just suck in this case)

@Roboticist Now that you clarify the topics, these look really disparate. Does the prof at all do swarm robotics? If not, is there anyone else at your department doing it? You will not convince a prof that runs no project in an area to take on a project in that area unless he is interested to learn and there is no departmental better match.

As a matter of fact, it is possible to define a research on robot swarms based on the discrete-event systems; but the guy might not sound to be so eager to broaden his scope a little to define such a thing, because he shows no positive reflection regarding my potential research suggestions...
There are more related fellows, there. But: first of all, they may have no position for me and that might not work to switch the supervisor... Secondly, this guy has counted me in and admitted me as his student. I am not going to be out, EXCEPT I HAVE TO... It's the damn-last option...

@Roboticist As a thumb's rule, there are two things that need to fit for a thesis: topic and supervisor. Everything else can be somehow sorted out. If this guy is theoretically interested, he will probably only accede to your topic suggestion if he sees any benefit in theoretical understanding for himself. Do not forget that the supervisor, in 99% of the cases, has a bigger overview than the student. I am troubled by your statement "not ... so eager to broaden his scope a little ... because he shows no positive reflection ...". This sounds as if you are a teacher tut-tutting your student.

...You may want to consider the possibility that the supervisor understands more about the opportunities of a field than you do. I strongly advise against coming even close to a statement like that in discussing with your potential supervisor. Frankly, your supervisor's response to a statement of that vibe could be "I am sorry that my openness is not up-to-par with your expectations, and am sure you will find a more intelligent, open and reflective supervisor somewhere else." It is perfectly ok not to be interested in a particular topic - from both sides. That includes your supervisor's.

I considerably hope that this statement will be right: the supervisor understands more about the opportunities of a field than you do
Thanks, Sir... At least I've found not to use that clarification within our dialogues...

I do not know; perhaps he doesn't understand the field better. However, you seem to have a strong opinion of what should be pursued in your research. Which is fine. However, if the supervisor pays the position, and you do not agree with what he wants, that's where the problem lies. You appear to want to convince that supervisor to fund your project which seems outside of his scope and expertise. I stand by what I said: you should pick a supervisor that supports your topic. Assume even if he decides to fund you, if you pursue your line, he may not be of much help. Are you prepared for that?

Yes... You are right, profoundly, on this: Assume even if he decides to fund you, if you pursue your line, he may not be of much help. He does convey a considerable amount of experience over decades in his field. I would be flourished by that experience and "his help", if I step into the same way...

All things are negotiable... unless, conceivably, your sponsor-professor's research money is explicitly tied to a specific goal.
Also, as in the other answers and comments, it would surely be profitable to you in the larger picture to broaden your expertise in directions that your sponsor thinks would be productive. His/her experience should translate into insight and perspective that you yourself might not yet have.
And, responding to a particular point in your question and comments: I don't think that different "specialties" are as disjoint from each other as you seem to worry. Work in a "different specialty" might indeed be very helpful to you in gaining new understanding of your "current specialty", maybe seeing possibilities for innovation that you hadn't seen before, due to "being in a rut".
Also, although the immediacy of generating publishable research has its appeal and reward, some enterprises (e.g., education and acquisition of insights) have a longer cycle time.


text:
Phone contact after no response from scientific collaborator?
I have a scientific collaboration with a senior scientist from a University in Europe. He agreed to work with me on the project and our roles were defined in the process(only supervision and minimal interaction from his side and active contribution from my side). Emails were received regularly from his side till December 22nd (prior to the holidays). After the holidays (on January 8th) I sent him the work that we agreed upon and he has to verify my conclusions and let me know whether I can proceed forward.  Yesterday I emailed him  inquiring whether his busy schedule has prevented him from responding to my document. Should I assume there is no further interest from his side or can I call him to find out what his thought process is ?

remind him again.

@AnonymousPhysicist - phone or email ?

I would not send a reminder after 1 day.

"whether his busy schedule has prevented him from responding to my document" this wording can come across as sarcastic. I'd say something more like "just following up on x" next time.
But the poster above is right. Don't send a reminder after one day. Reach out again, ring him in a week. If he doesn't answer, wait a few days and send an email. Be polite, just say you're following up because you'd like to proceed on the work, blah blah.

Or call him sooner if it's actually urgent. Just don't send two emails in two days ;)

Since it is European University, call him to his office phone (most likely shown in the email) and be open about it. People don't like emailing too much here, especially the older generations. Don't be afraid to put him a bit on the spot, but stay polite and start the conversation with "Dear Sir", always works!

@Cninroh - thanks a lot. I did not know people did not like email in Europe. I will be sure to call a lot of people moving forward


text:
Identical APA-style In-text citations
I am working on a paper in which I cite two resources from an online reference work with no author:

Ransomware. (2016). Malware Protection Center. Retrieved from http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/mmpc/shared/ransomware.aspx
Ransomware. (2016). TrendMicro. Retrieved from http://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/definition/ransomware/#logo

Unfortunately, these two works have identical in-text citations: "('Ransomware,' 2016)."  The only material I can find on situations like this is when the authors are the same, and the remedy is to append the letters "a" and "b" to the date, like (2016a).  These works, however, do not have the same author, so I do not think this fix can be used.  How should I differentiate between these two citations?

(1) "These works, however, do not have the same author, so I do not think this fix can be used." - can you explain what having the same author has to do with a disambiguating letter? (2) While you state your two works have no author, you seem to treat the keyword Ransomware as the author name for your in-text citations. (3) I disagree with the assessment that the listed works have no author. The "authors", in this case, are Microsoft Corporation and Trend Micro Inc.

@O.R.Mapper I thought the letters were to disambiguate between the first and second work by the same author, not as a general disambiguation tool.

@O.R.Mapper "Ransomware" is the title and in APA style you use the title when there is no author. As for if there is an author or not it is tricky (e.g., this APA Style post), but I think you are correct.

APA style attempts to resolve ambiguity related to the names of authors in both in text citations and the reference list. As far as I am aware, and this APA Style Blog comment confirms my belief, APA style does not attempt to resolve ambiguity about authors. In other words, as far as APA style is concerned in text citations do not need to differentiate between two different people with identical names.
As your example has no listed author, I would argue (although it does not appear to be addressed in the APA Style Guide) that as far as the citation is concerned the authors have the same name. In the case of multiple works with authors with the same name and year the in text citation just appends a, b, c, ... to the year.


text:
Is it common for a university to buy a plane ticket directly?
I was just accepted to a PhD program and they wanted to fly me out for an open house. They said they would reimburse travel costs up to $500. However the issue is I have less than $500 in my bank account and certainly not enough to buy a plane ticket. I emailed asking if they could buy the ticket directly. Is this common? Can universities do this?

Some universities encourage the students' and employees' expenses not to be expenditured by them in the first place. Even if this is not the case, your university may have a modality to buy the tickets directly. Ask.

When I was a wee student, it was pretty uncommon for places to buy my plane ticket directly.  But it seems to be getting more common now.

Only one of the four universities under whose auspices I've traveled did this. But since that was my graduate institution not having to carry the cost of the ticket until I could be reimbursed was a huge advantage.

You should definitely ask if they can buy it directly for you. I know my department has done this in the past with students who don't have the cash on hand to wait for a reimbursement.

I emailed them asking if they could buy it for me. Thanks for sharing about your department, that makes me feel better!

I've traveled several dozen times for university-related business, including several grad interviews. In every case, the vastly preferred method was for me to pay and be reimbursed. However, in almost every case, there was some way around this if needed, it was just much more complicated. Examples have included

Getting an advance and submitting an expense report later (unlikely for you because you are not yet an employee/student)
Getting a university credit card tied to my grant (ask after you are a student - I had this as a grad student and it made life much easier)
Using the department travel card (or having the secretary do it for me if I wasn't trusted)
Using the university travel agency to book directly

The last two should definitely be options for you.

"The last two should definitely be options for you." - but only if there is such a thing as a "department travel card" or a "university travel agency", which is not at all a given. In particular, "university travel agency" very commonly means nothing else than an ordinary, 3rd party travel agency that has a contract with the university and receives some administrative benefits in exchange for granting some discounts towards the university. However, this changes nothing about the travel agency being an external party that has to be paid.

As graduate program director I insisted that we start buying tickets for all of our interviewees, rather then promising to reimburse them, for exactly this reason. It took a little bit of pushing, but in the end I was able to make it happen. I'm at a big bureaucracy-bound state school, so if we can do it, anyone can.
Your request is entirely reasonable and as a program director I would be very ashamed if my program were unable to meet it.

I would say for a graduate program to fly you out directly would be very uncommon, unless you were invited to give a specific talk - but given that you've just accepted to be a student there, I imagine this is not the case.
You might be able to ask them, however, to buy yours (up to $500) if you explained your case.
The world is run by people after all...

It's actually common for more prestigious graduate programs in science and engineering to pay the travel expenses of students making recruiting/interviewing visits to the campus.  Students often don't have enough cash on hand to pay for their ticket and be reimbursed later, so the university might be willing to pay directly for the ticket.  The OP is being invited for such a visit and is being offered reimbursement.  Asking for the school to pay directly for the ticket is a reasonable request.

@BrianBorchers I guess this graduate program is "more prestigious". :) That's a good thing to hear.

@mmmmmmm Not to say yours isn't, but I think most PhD programs in math at least which have some sort of open house will pay for students to come out and visit.

It's common at the R1s that I've been to, especially for fellowship candidates and minority students.

@Kimball This university IS paying for students to come out and visit, just through reimbursements.

@mmmmmmm I was just making an comment on Brian Borchers' comment---that this practice is common even among "average" departments, not just the "prestigious" ones (say, not just the "Top 20").

While it is not unreasonable to ask a department to fly you out, it may be worth looking at getting a credit card. While taking on debt is not ideal, having the ability to "float" expenses like this can be very useful.
Additionally, if you are currently a student, many US universities offer short term loans. The terms of these loans is variable. For example, University of Nebraska loans up to $500 for 90 days at 9% APR and University of Washington loans up to $2500 to undergraduates for an academic quarter with no interest but a $30 fee.

@ChrisWhite every university I have been affiliated with has required me to pay for things up front and get reimbursed. If the choice is between not going to an interview, or in this case a post acceptance event, because you cannot afford it and taking on short term debt, I would go with the short term debt.

I have a credit card but it is maxed out.


text:
Is it ok to ask a professor if he/she is taking a leave of absence
I am currently deciding between graduate schools for PhD programs and I am concerned that a potential advisor might be planning to take a leave of absence to start a new company. Is it socially acceptable to ask the professor if he/she intends to take a leave of absence?
Doing research with a professor that is on leave would be difficult particularly during the early years of graduate student life.

"leave of absence" can be code for leaving permanently.

a leave of absence is not defined clearly, it may have several aspects.

You should ask whether they would be willing to take on PhD students, and, if yes, meet regularly. You suspect correctly that starting a new company does not make it likely for him to have much time the next years, so even if he says (means) yes, it may not mean that he can act on his promise, so handle with care.

+1 for phrasing it as "taking on PhD students" - that's the polite way to ask

Or (in U.S. English, anyway?) "accepting" new PhD students...

Yes, you should directly ask a potential PhD advisor if they intend to stick with the job.  If they do not like the question or contractually are not allowed to answer, they do not have to answer it, but it is definitely a fair question.


text:
How common is it for recommendation letters to be sent directly from the writer to the recipient?
Something that I frequently read on academia.SE is that recommendation letters, in most circumstances, are sent directly from the person writing the letter to the person/committee reading the letter, and is never to be seen by the person the recommendation letter is about. Invariably, there is also a comment saying that this is mainly US-specific.
So I'm curious, what is the actual situation, worldwide? Which is more common: the writer sending directly the letter to the recipient of the letter, or the writer giving the letter to the applicant, who in turn sends the letter to the actual recipient?
In my own limited experience, when I had to apply for PhD program funding (in France) I had to send my advisor's letter myself to the committee along with all the other documents, whereas when I applied for funding to attend a conference in a German institute, my advisor had to send the letter himself. So it doesn't look like it's strictly limited to the USA, but it's not a practice followed everywhere either.

"So it doesn't look like it's strictly limited to the USA, but it's not a practice followed everywhere either." Haven't you answered your own question here? What do you expect in addition to this?

@xLeitix Something based on more than my own two anecdotes... For all I know, maybe the process I had to follow was very unusual for Germany, or the process I had to follow for PhD funding was unique to France, or [insert random speculation here]. I don't even know if it's a practice followed 100% of the time in the US, too. I had hoped maybe people here had some concrete data about this.

I added the [tag:reference-request] tag, though I'm unsure whether there exists an actual survey or similar. Personal observation in Germany: I needed reference letters for my scholarship, and these went directly to the Studienstiftung.

We generally have external reviewers instead of recommendation letters in Finland. Coming from that background, the entire concept of recommendation letters seems dubious to me.

From my experience in the UK and Canada, all reference letters were sent directly to the recipient (electronically).

From my experience in applying to a Japanese university, sending a sealed envelope was okay, and it does not matter if the student sends it or the referee.

I applied to two schools in Germany and the Netherlands. The German school asked for a letters to be send from the writer, the Dutch asked for the contact information to recommender and then they wrote him directly and asked for a skype call.

In my experience in Australia, letters that pass through the hands of the candidate are only used for very junior positions: jobs after high-school and sometimes first graduate jobs. For other positions, candidates are asked as part of the application process to list the contact details of referees, and the selection committee will get in touch with the referees directly -- usually by phone, sometimes by email.
I'm not sure whether my experience is typical.


text:
Does a conference talk in an invited session count as an invited talk?
Here is the situation: Prof. X organizes an "invited session" at a conference (in the broader realm of statistics and economics), and asks my supervisor, Prof. Y, to give a talk there. Y does not have time and refers X to me (I am a PhD student). Therefore, X asks me whether I would be interested to give a presentation in the session, to which I of course say yes.
Now, my question is the following: Can I list the talk as an invited talk (or more precisely: as an invited conference presentation) in my CV?

Yes, you can list this as an invited talk.  Even though the first invitation was not to you, the second invitation most certainly was.
Here is another way of thinking about it that may make it clear: imagine that rather than inviting your professor, the organizer has simply asked your professor: "Who do you think would be good to invite to my session?" and your professor suggests you.  This would clearly be an invitation (albeit one where you benefit from your professional network, which often happens).  The only difference between this situation and yours is that the suggestion was preceded by a failed invitation of your professor.

ok, I can see that. On a related issue, how would you organize invited and "standard" talks in a cv? Would you split the invited talks into invited seminar presentation and invited conference presentations? Or would you just have one "invited talks" section, and one "contributed" part?

@user3825755 I think it's useful to highlight "invited", so I would split the two (once you've given a lot of invited talks, you may find it useful to split them further, e.g. to highlight keynotes).  Personally, I have hit the point in my career where I have stopped listing talks associated with papers at all, but until you've built up a lot of talks and papers, it's good to list the contributed talks to give evidence that you can give a talk.