text:
What should I do if I regret paying online services for homework during my last semester of college?
During my last semester of college, I was going through many difficulties. I could get into detail about everything I was experiencing and feeling during this stressful time but it would be too long.
Anyways, I had an important capstone project, including other assignments piled on top. It was during the last few weeks of school that, once it was time to turn things in, I lied about the project implementation and I paid to get the final project paper and a few of my other assignments done. This was the only time I’ve ever thought to do this. I edited/changed the work, I didn’t 100% copy/paste during this period but I feel very terrible that I resorted to this and I want to confess and return my degree.
I had thoughts about dropping out before but felt this wasn’t a choice because of my family. My mind went to a dark place so I felt if I failed I couldn’t do another semester especially since my family was expecting me to graduate. I don’t even plan to pursue anything with the degree, I felt pressured from my family and didn’t stop to think what I truly wanted so now I’ve just been stuck about what I did last year and I don’t know how to forgive myself or what God would want me to do. Any kind advice would help, please.

Did you seek therapy regarding your difficulties? It sounds like that would be more fruitful than worrying about the degree.

If you wanted to, do you think you'd be able to do the work by yourself? Or did they do work that you can't do?

return my degree I (seriously) wonder if this is a thing.

Your post seems to suggest that you have learned from your mistake. Given that, I'd suggest that you let the past be the past and move on, hopefully to better acts in the future.
Returning the degree (if it would even be accepted) won't do anyone any good, provided that you behave ethically going forward.
We all fail in some ways at some point in our lives. Learn from the mistakes and don't repeat bad behaviors.

Thank you so much and yes I have learned the hard way! Thanks again

To keep the spirit of academia, I would go back and re-do all the assignments that you paid someone else to do. Nobody's going to grade it. It's not going to count against you, but you should see how well you could've done now that you're in a better place. Also learn how to avoid the "dark places" and don't let anyone push you that far. In the "real world", this is called a burnout, or just straight up depression.

In extremis, redo those jobs yourself for your own peace of mind.

You seem to be in search of attonement or absolution. Trying to achieve that through the university's administration seems unwise: at absolute best you might get a lukewarm "well, it's done now, don't worry about it". At worst, you could create a big mess that will cause a lot of work for a lot of people, and not actually make anything better for anyone.
I'd suggest looking for your forgiveness through other channels, whether they are therapy, prayer (your mentioned God), or acts of community service. Maybe you could look at mentoring young students or something (for free) as your act of penance.

+1 for seeking peace through community service. A mistake was made, but the context is you lacked support. Become the support you needed and you could save other students from this turmoil.

You were lucky to not have been caught apart from your conscience. You found integrity in yourself. This will prove useful - you will now know its value going forward, more so than someone that never saw temptation. There is not much value to make the system punish in this matter you if you have seen the error of your ways yourself and are determined not to repeat them.
I pick up another point that others pointed out, unfortunately only in comments: do the work again, yourself. Submit it to the court of your own ambition to convince yourself that you would have been able to do that. If successful, it means that you have, in a way, "taken out a loan of skill" which you now pay back. If you can, try to pay it back with interest, with a more ambitious version of the work you should have done.
To be sure: I do not condone cheating at all, I think it is wrong for many reasons, and not just fairness. But you have deeply understood that it's wrong and, for this integrity you found in yourself, you deserve respect.
"Go forth and sin no more." - There's wisdom in these words. Good luck!

I don't know if this is possible in your case, but I've re-taken classes before.  It wouldn't be "easy" but it would satisfy everyone and everything, permanently.

This would assuage your guilt and help ensure that you learn what you were supposed to learn in the class. You might ask the instructor if you could audit the class since you took it the previous semester and felt like you didn't fully understand all the material at the end.

You arent alone, especially with COVID a lot of people did college this way. Learn from it and move on. Dwelling will just hurt you more.

I recommend a three-pronged "attack" to your personal road to perdition1-like journey:
1. Don't do anything sudden
This one is nicely covered in several other answers and comments here. It is not likely the system is equipped for this, and blurting out admissions without planning could trigger all kinds of permanently damaging things you and your family do not deserve.
That you have posted a question here in Stack Exchange to help think this through shows that you may already recognize this possibility, so kudos to you!
2. If you are like me, you may feel things that were not done right or correctly should eventually be corrected when possible.
Other answers indicate that one way to "make things right" from your own perspective and feelings 2 would be to find a way to retake or re-audit the class. That may be impossible right now, but go ahead and find out what the processes might be and make a plan to do it as some point in the future.
Make an effort to find out all your options along these lines, and do it in such a way (via emails with dates) that it is documented and your intentions are clear. That's the beginning of your...
3. Cleanup in Aisle 7
In my answer to a somewhat different circumstance What should I do if I did someone else's homework a few years ago? I wrote

Times are different. This is the age of the internet, and "The internet’s not written in pencil... it’s written in ink."3

You don't know where your future will take you. I can speak from personal experience that turmoil, confusion, depression, "bad places" we go mentally generally get better over time, and in future years and decades you may be supporting yourself and your family in a position with some visibility.
You might even end up in a situation where they do background checks or there's competition for a competitive position, or eve running for political office some day, perhaps at a local level or beyond.
If you have made some "atonement" or efforts4 to deal with the situation by retaking or re-auditing, or at least exploring those possibilities in a documented way via emails, or even taken a similar class later; basically taken some action, then when you follow others' good advice here and put it behind you (i.e. focus on the future, deal with present responsibilities of job and family) you can then

put your worries here aside and focus on all the new worries and challenges that life keeps putting in front of us
but know that if this somehow ever comes up again, you can demonstrate that this bothered you and you took what actions were available for atonement while simultaneously not putting your responsibilities towards your family at risk. You chose a course of action that was reasonable, reasoned, recognizant, and responsible.
did not engage in "scandal cover-up behavior" that could cause trouble later4

1Tom Hanks says no-one ever talks about his favorite movie Road to Perdition Wikipedia, IMDB
2 or if some day this ever finds its way back to you during a background check for a future job or by some bad-intentioned individual
3 Erica Albright quote from The Social Network
4 While the twelve step process does not apply here directly, they do contain some elements - feelings of guilt and/or regret do haunt us sometimes and cause trouble later. A summary of steps #8 and #9 would be that we should try to make some effort to fix stuff, except when the fix could cause even more problems for others (in this case your family) or you. In those cases, letting "sleeping dogs lie" is recognized as the most compassionate and correct course of action.
5 for an extreme example of "trouble later" see: Washington Post's June 15, 2019 Echoes of Biden’s 1987 plagiarism scandal continue to reverberate and Wikipedia Joe Biden 1988 presidential campaign Had he taken remedial action at the time in a way that could be pointed to after the fact, it would have been better.


text:
Can corresponding author withdraw a paper after it has accepted without permission/acceptance of first author
A is a corresponding author for a paper (PhD work) that has been submitted to a journal. I am the main and the first author, while he is the second author. Recently, he has withdrawn a paper after it has been reviewed for 8 months and recently accepted in the journal without notifying me or getting my acceptance because of a personal conflict. He contributed to the paper only through his comments and revisions. I have many emails showing his minimal contribution to the paper and his satisfaction about the work in the paper. The paper is part of my PhD and I am recently graduated. I would like to know if the journal can simply accept his request despite that he contributes to the work only through his revisions. What is your advice?

Can they? Or should they? It is probably possible, but likely unethical.

@Buffy I mean should they? Can I publish the paper after removing his contribution?

Was any reason given for the withdrawal? You say "because of a personal conflict." I can imagine many things that might mean, some of which would cause sympathy for the other person, some of which would not.  Has there been any meaningful communication since? If they agreed to let you publish alone that would be very different.

It seems unethical to me for your coauthor to remove a publication without the agreement of all authors. The journal won't know there is a problem, however, unless you tell them.
If the other person is/was your advisor then think hard before you make a move, balancing the value of a single paper against the future good will of the other person.
But, ideally, you should be able to contact the editor of the journal and lodge a complaint that the withdrawal was done without your permission (or knowledge, if that is the case).
But it is also difficult, at this stage, to "remove" their contributions, since they are/were more than just words on the page of the paper. Those conversations (oral or written) contributed to the content of the paper. Doing so would seem to require their permission, just as withdrawing it requires (or should) yours. Good luck.

Thanks. I contacted the journal and made complaint about that. They asked about the contribution specifics between me and the corresponding author. The editor escalated the case to the editor manager for handling.  Just to get your point about the corresponding author was being my advisor, do you mean this can affect his future career? or you mean he can take action against me. I have already graduated!

Future career, but only in the case you would want future recommendations. Not many people will go out of their way to sabotage a former student, but it happens.

I don't think there is anything unethical on the side of the journal. It isn't their job to sort out author conflicts for papers that haven't actually been published.

@Buffy, it sounds like the advisor already retracted a paper of the OP "because of a personal conflict". If that is really true I don't think the OP can trust him to write a good recommendation letter anyway. At that point is probably better to make it clear that there is a personal conflict and to try to get a recommendation letter from someone else (who perhaps will comment on why a letter from the advisor is missing). Of course this assumes the OP can find someone else who is willing to stand up for them.

@WolfgangBangerth, no, it is the advisor being unethical, not the journal.

@Ben. again, I'm speaking of the ethics of the other author, not the journal. The one is affecting the career of the OP. Not nice.

A paper shouldn't be published without agreement of all the authors, so any author raising a problem with the paper should be sufficient to halt its progress through the publication process.
The level of contribution is irrelevant here. Either the corresponding author contributed sufficiently to the work to be an author, or they didn't. If they did, they must be an author, and must agree for the paper to be published. If they didn't, they should never have been an author. Those lines are not always clear and certainly conventions differ between fields/locations/labs, but here it seems like the decision was made that this person should be an author, and it's not appropriate to remove someone as author without their agreement.
The issue here is instead the reason for withdrawing. If, for example, the corresponding author, or any other author, recognized some time after the submission that the first author contributed fraudulent data to the manuscript, clearly the right and ethical thing for them to do would be to inform the journal and withdraw the paper.
You only vaguely mention a "personal conflict". If any author requests withdrawal of a paper for reasons unrelated to the content of the paper itself, that seems to be clearly unethical, but can be somewhat difficult to argue without evidence. If you do not know what reason was given to the journal for withdrawal, I'd recommend asking them. Only then will you know how to proceed. In the meantime, I'd consider whether there is anything you can do to mend this relationship. If the paper is good quality, preventing its publication hurts both of you.

You raise an important point - the paper hasn't been published. But permission was originally given and now an unannounced withdrawal. That is problematic.

@Bryan Krause The journal sent me the email of his withdrawal request. It doesn't include any reason. My question is can he claim that I contributed fraudulent data to the manuscript despite that this study was a part of my PhD and he approved my graduation.

@Buffy Agree it's problematic, but it's important to get to the reasons, because changing ones mind on whether they agree to publish is not itself wrong. On the other hand, not agreeing for a paper to be published to penalize or get revenge on someone is wrong whether it occurs before or after the initial submission.

@RefaatGalal He can claim whatever he wants to claim. If you want to dispute it legally, you need a lawyer. If you want to dispute it administratively within your university, you may be able to raise some complaint. In either case, you'll need to support your position with evidence, and possibly he will need to do so as well. What you shouldn't do is to try to publish the paper unilaterally if you aren't the only author.

What is the nature of your personal conflict?

@ Bryan Krause We have paper to be sent to a conference and we are arguing who should be the first author. I did the simulation study and wrote the paper. After graduation, he made revisions to the writing. Finally, I refused to publish the paper with his name as a first author.

@RefaatGalal This is a separate paper than the one you're talking about here?

@BryanKrause Yes

@RefaatGalal And this is your thesis supervisor? I'd say you're more or less at the mercy of your former department/institution's attention to research ethics. If they will accept and investigate complaints, you can complain to them, and your former advisor will have to give a reason for withdrawing the paper. It'll probably be harder for them to argue about that paper than the new one. Then again, if your advisor cares this much about first authorship it's probably because of some idiotic policy by the institution like counting only first author papers for tenure/promotion/funding.

Certainly it will help if you have any written evidence that the withdrawal of that paper is related to the authorship dispute about another paper, but if they're smart they won't let any such thing end up in writing.

@BryanKrause Yes, he was my supervisor. Actually, he needs to put his name as first author because of his promotion this year.

@RefaatGalal Got it. Well, actually he doesn't, but it seems the institution has decided that he does, which puts both of you in a terrible position. I'm sorry for both of you.

@BryanKrause I have emails sent forward and backward with him about who should be the first author of the conference paper. Additionally, he withdrew the peer review paper at that time.

@RefaatGalal Maybe that's enough, maybe it's too circumstantial. You'll probably need advice from someone familiar with the procedure for making academic misconduct complaints at your institution.

You are asking too much of journals.
A journal isn't obligated to publish your paper. If it is good, they will want to publish it, but it isn't their job to sort out disagreements between authors: If one author does not want the paper to go through the publishing process, then it is not the job of the editors to figure out why that is, who of the authors is right, what the correct approach to resolving the issue is, and so on. From an editorial perspective, the right thing to do is say "Look, folks, this is your job to sort out. Come back when you're in agreement and we can reconsider the paper. Until then, take your paper and talk about what you want to do."
The situation is different once the paper is actually published. At that point, journals have to consider that they have an obligation to the public to be an archive of knowledge, and the bar for retracting a paper is substantially higher. But before the paper is actually published (even if it has been accepted) it's not the editors' job to resolve interpersonal conflicts -- and as a consequence, I don't think that the journal acted unethically in your case.

Just thinking out loud. Could the editor not have sought comment from all author? By comment, I mean not necessarily approval.  Just to be clear though, my understanding is the journal/editor is not a mediator. The comments would be for accountability and/or transparency.

@semmyk-research If there is only one possible outcome, why ask for comments? What would you do with these comments?

An interesting view you've got there @Wolfgang-Bangerth. Comments in this instance or in other scenarios should assist with #transparency. No wonder the reasons for & meta-data for retraction is ongoing discourse. | RetractionWatch Transparency Index | Marasović et al. (2018) on transparency of retracting | Vuong (2020, p. 149) on 'more transparency' ... taxonomy or four info: initiation; cause; consensus; post-pub review

@semmyk-research There's no retraction here. The paper hasn't been published, it was still in the pipeline.

This answer builds on Wolfgang Bangerth's answer, which I agree with.
The journal basically has two options: they can let your co-author withdraw the manuscript, or they refuse. If they let your co-author withdraw the manuscript, then we're basically where you are at.
If they don't let your co-author withdraw the manuscript, then what do they do next? They again have two choices: they can publish, or they can not publish. If they publish, then there's a serious ethical violation - they cannot publish a paper without the consent of all authors. If they don't publish, then the paper basically sits in the system collecting dust, which does not help anyone.
Since all the other options are bad, the journal is left with letting your co-author withdraw the manuscript.
It sounds like you are hoping the journal will arbitrate the authorship dispute. That's not the journal's role. Firstly they don't have a close-up view of every authors' contribution (they can scarcely send someone to visit your university to check), and secondly, they have no authority over the authors. It's something you will have to hash out with the co-author, if necessary involving other members of your department, but not the journal.

To add another minor detail to the already good answers: The journal may not have the right to publish.
Usually the journal asks you for waiving your copyright shortly before publication, not during review. When the authors want to retract the paper before, there is nothing the journal can do against it.
Normally then the first author or corresponding author needs to sign the waiver on behalf of the others and your co-author will probably not let you sign it, so the dispute isn't even the problem of the journal anyway as they won't get a legal signature on the waiver and thus will not publish the paper.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Determining research approach (deduction/induction) of a two-fold thesis project
Background:
For our master thesis, we are exploring challenges with cross-border energy projects in the North Sea (wind farms, energy islands etc.) and how agile methodologies (usually used in private sector) can be implemented in the public sector to overcome these challenges.

We have a theoretical framework based on agile methodologies in the private sector and the limited literature on their implementation in the public sector
We have collected data from interview/reports to identify the challenges with cross-border energy projects
Our aim is to connect the above section together and provide recommendations for applying agile methodologies to solve the specific challenges

Our challenge:
Our research paper is motivated by agile methodologies to provide recommendations to solve challenges on cross-border projects - this is a deductive approach. However, data collection and analysis is very inductive, in that it is not based on theory and agile was not considered when identifying themes for analysis - this seems much more inductive. At the end, we wish to connect the analysed themes with agile and discuss how it can be applied to solve challenges.
Main question: Is this research project informed by a deductive approach, or both deductive/inductive, seeing as the data collection was not performed to "test" the theory or a hypothesis? Is it both and can it be both?
I am currently writing the methodological section and therefore wish to understand the premise for our two-fold research paper.

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


text:
Meaning of "Higher Education Entrance Qualification" in the application form of a german university
I am applying for a masters degree in Mathematics at a University in Germany.
I already have done a bachelors in my home country X ( Bachelor of Arts with math as 1 of subjects)and a masters in my home country X in mathematics.
Consider the screenshot of application in progress(I am asking this question here because no source to contact has been given in the university website):
Screenshot of application form

Question: What exactly is meant in application form by "University Entrance Qualification"? I have no clue on what should I fill in the form here?

Even though no contact is given, most unis in Germany do have an "International Office" or similar called institution, that is there to help students from abroad with questions like these. I would check if your uni has one, too.

To study at a German university, you need a particular kind of qualification called Hochschulzugangsberechtigung. And yes, German universities will ask for that even if you have already obtained other university degrees. The form asks for how you have obtained this qualification.
The ordinary way of obtaining the Hochschulzugangsberechtigung is the Abitur, earned by completing the highest level of school and sitting an exam at the end. As you presumably didn't attend school in Germany, you won't have an Abitur. If the country where you did do your secondary education have a concept of "diploma obtained by finishing school which then qualifies you for university", there is a decent chance that this is considered equivalent to an Abitur and would thus work.
There are plenty of other ways to obtain the Hochschulzugangsberechtigung. The problem is that education is a state-matter in Germany, which means that each Bundesland will have their own rules on what exactly you could do. For example, I obtained mine by virtue of having already completed a university degree, as recognized by the state of Northrhine-Westphalia.


text:
Can I make complaint against my supervisor who kept me working in non-research work in his lab with NO SALARY
I recently graduated with a PhD in Fall 2022. In my PhD study, I published 7 papers in peer review journals and conferences. In summer semester of 2022, my PhD supervisor stopped my fund few days before the start of the semester and he claimed that I did bad in the previous semester. Later, he said I stopped your fund because you behaved improperly with me. The problem is that he requested me to work all the summer semester on non-research work  in his lab such as revising his papers (I am not co-author in these papers) and train his team members with NO SALARY.  I couldn't refuse because he wouldn't allow me to graduate. I want to send formal complaint against him to the university. When I told him that I am going to complain about that, he said many student are working on campus with no salary. I would like to know if his situation is illegal or not so that I make complaint against him.

What do you mean by "take action"? Whether he broke the law will depend on what country you are in (but we are not lawyers in any case). Whether he broke university policy will depend on your university's policy.

Which country is it ?

@Job_September_2020 USA (Louisiana State University)

You are always entitled to making a formal complaint (just read the rules about how and where). However that doesn't mean that the decision will be in your favor. IMHO, training team members is a normal part of the job if they are less experienced than you, while revising the papers on which you are not a co-author is somewhat out of the ordinary, but I'm not a lawyer to definitely tell what is technically legal and what is not, and it looks like you managed to spoil your relations with your supervisor even before that, so complaint or no complaint, I would advise to change the adviser.

You indicated that you recently graduated with a PhD in Fall 2022. Just to be on the same page, your intended complaint is post-graduation right? .. as a former student or as a postdoc?

@fedja: What job? (he's not paid any salary) What advisor? (he's recently graduated)

@DanielR.Collins "job"="regular duties of a graduate student involved in a lab work related to his/her dissertation". As to the second question, my bad: I didn't notice that the OP has graduated by now :-)

btw, you have disclosed you entire name and where you did your PhD, which makes it extremely easy to find you (and your advisor) online as well as trace this post back to you

If you were taking research credits under the advisor. He can assign you work like reviewing papers. I am not sure how many credits you were taking under his guidance

This seems very off to me, or minimally that it varies strongly. Everywhere I've ever worked or studied, "research credits" for PhD students are an administrative fiction to keep students formally enrolled and impose no additional obligations. Certainly they're not an excuse to coerce someone into unpaid labor.

You are asking an interesting question, but, not knowing the exact details and not being a lawyer, I cannot answer it for your case. It sounds to me that your relationship with your now ex-advisor broke down already before summer.
While most professors (including me) like to make jokes about having graduate students as slaves and cheap labor, they actually deeply care about their graduate students. I hope this includes me as well. The relationship between advisors and students often transcend a strict supervisor-employee relationship and sometimes gets closer to that of a family member (in part because the advisor is also supposed to be a mentor). This gives ample room for difficulties and misbehaviors if things "do not work out".
Belonging to a lab also takes on aspects of being a member of a family. It is typical that students that belong to a lab need to do work for the benefit of the lab, including some mentoring / training of new lab members. If it were the case that you did not do that before the summer, then it would seem just that you were asked to do it in the summer. Lab members are also expected to review other lab members publications. Again, if it were the case that you did not do this before the summer, then it would be fair to ask you to do some of this during your last summer. In addition, working on articles usually gives you ideas for new work of your own.
Now, a professor who does consider graduate students as some sort of indentured servant and gains personal profit from it is violating academic custom, their contract with the university, and the law. In this order, the chair, the dean, and the university's legal department should be the addressees of a complaint. Sometimes, there is a position such as a graduate student ombudsman that serves as a honest broker. When you complain, you should be clear on what you want to achieve. If you were doing forced labor, you could look for just compensation. If you were mistreated, you could look for an apology by the university and a prevention from this happening again. You could also of course find a lawyer (if you cannot find on, then you have no case) and use the courts directly. Going directly to the courts would make it difficult for you to find a job in academia.
As human beings, we all have a difficult time to separate emotions from facts. Maybe you should talk to your lab-mates or to previous graduate students. Whether there is a pattern of mistreatment of graduate students or not will make a lot of difference in how others will see your situation.
TLTR: Whether you were treated illegally cannot be determined by the data you provided us.

You really have to look at your contract with the university. In the US there is no standard grad student contract. For example, some universities have a policy that the admin guarantees grad student salaries for 9 months, but that summers are discretionary, and if the advisor decides to pay, it must be out of his/her own grants. Other universities guarantee 2 years of salary, but after that your salary is contingent on teaching every semester, which in practice means no summer salary. The teaching itself can be furthermore guaranteed (as in you are guaranteed a teaching slot) for 2-3 more years, but after that, you have to scavenge for teaching gigs within the university.
The system makes it very easy to abuse and exploit grad students. An unscrupulous professor will use the thesis sing-off as leverage to exploit graduate students for free labor. In terms of legality: in many (most?) places graduate students are not even considered employees, as you are supposedly getting trained and given free tuition, which is just an accounting trick. So employment laws do not apply, e.g. you can't get unemployment insurance payments during summers, you don't have the usual (however minimal) protections of employees in the US, etc. If you go to HR, I bet the case will be bumped to the department chair.
From the information you provide and without reading your contract, my best bet is this: unethical yes, illegal no.

To OP: I agree with this answer's "look at your contract". I'd add: If there's no real contract, then look at the letter (or emai) offering you admission and funding for the Ph.D. program. As far as I remember (from when I was in charge of my department's Ph.D. admissions in the late 90's), we always included a lot of details in those letters. Nowadays, our teaching and research assistants are unionized, but I assume you're not, since you didn't mention asking a union for help.

I think there are two questions at play:

Was what your advisor did illegal?

There is no way anyone here can give a good answer (you would need to find a lawyer).

Can you file a complaint?

You can certainly file a complaint with the university/department or even your state's labor board. Whether this will result in any action is another issue, but illegality is not a prerequisite for raising the issue with the appropriate higher-ups. In fact, legality is almost irrelevant to academic ethics in many contexts.

To be honest, mentoring juniors is a usual task, and you can fit them into your own projects, with or without giving them co-authorships. Also, many research assistants, paid or not, are not entitled to a co-authorship. For example, in economic science, political science, and social sciences, paid research assistants are usually not coauthoring, but still doing a lot of work.
You could check the official website of journals like Nature to get an idea of what is a co-authorship. Revising or proof-reading a paper alone does not usually grant co-authorship.
You can always argue for your co-authorship, though. If it is in natural science, I think it cost your advisor little to add you as the sixth author. I suggest you to friendly, openly, and respectfully express your needs before battling with your advisor. You can also write your own papers without putting your advisor's name: this is reciprocity.


text:
How are PhD studies in Australia perceived?
For some background, I am currently an Australian PhD student in my 4th year. From reading posts on this site I have gradually noticed the differences between the content of my degree and of a PhD awarded in either the US or in Europe.
It appears as though an Australian PhD program is noticeably shorter than PhDs in other countries, with a maximum of 4 years of scholarship provided. Along with this, we are offered no coursework of any kind during our degree and completing a masters before starting is uncommon (at least in my field of engineering).
My primary question is how the structure of a PhD degree affects the perception of a graduate overseas? Are these degrees considered less important than longer degrees by any significant number of academics internationally?

Sounds like maybe you're comparing to the US; US PhDs are quite different from Europe (or Australia), we don't do a masters/"Hons" before.

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11936/how-are-phds-from-foreign-universities-percieved-in-the-us?rq=1

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/137585/phd-length-are-shorter-phd-degrees-from-different-countries-valued-differentl?rq=1

I assume that you are asking about the perspective from the US and the EU. The following is the US perspective, although I lived for many years in the EU (Germany) and about 50% of my research was based in Tasmania, so I have some familiarity with people holding PhDs from both places.
Since the question is about perception, the only good way to answer it would be by doing a survey of US/European researchers and ask questions about the relative value (however defined) of a PhD from 'anonymous university' in Australia. I don't know of such a survey.
The words "US PhD" covers a wide range. You have the ivies, and R1s, and on the other end you have what are essentially mail-order PhDs. And within the highly-ranked universities, you of course have different professors with their individual reputations. In my experience, Australian states and European countries have fewer (no?) universities printing mail order PhDs. By which I mean that if you come from a relatively unknown university in Australia or the EU, I'd assume it's a real PhD, while if you come from a relatively unknown university in the US, I'd check if the degree is real. So the following assumes that everything else is being equal, e.g. reputation of the university, professor/advisor, etc.
People with recent European or Australian PhDs tend to be on the shallow/narrow end of having background knowledge of the history of the field, as compared with US PhDs. The keyword here is "tend": the two bell curves have a lot of overlap. I acknowledge that this could be specific to my field, Biology, where it's impossible to cover the whole historical and technical aspects, so knowledge in one end comes at the expense of the other. If this matters when hiring, it depends on the opinion of those doing the hiring. But I think that this perception exists.
In my experience hiring, people with PhDs from the US tend to be more experienced teachers. This does not mean that US PhDs are better teachers, but that, at least in my field, the perception exists.
Another perceived difference, and this is based on complaints from PIs in the US when talking about non-US postdocs, is the holiday culture of Europeans. For example, I did a postdoc at a US lab (R1 institution) led by an European PI, who hired lots of European postdocs. These postdocs would pretty much work 3-4 days a week, not answer email during nights or weekends, make every US holiday a long weekend (e.g. come back to the lab on Wed after every holiday falling on a Mon), then take off a full month during Christmas and pretty much disappear during the summers. In my experience, Australian PhDs fall in between European and US attitudes towards holidays. I lived in Germany for many years, and certainly appreciated this aspect of European culture. But in terms of perception, which is the OP's question, I think that it's a real issue.
As others have pointed out, what will get you an academic job are your publication record, your history with grants, your teaching experience, and your letters of reference. So there's little use in worrying about how your PhD is perceived just because you come from an Australian university. But you asked about perception, and that's my perspective after 20+ years as a US-based academic.

+1 #perception | #categorisation | emphasise #tend

I think several times in your answer when you write "is perceived" you actually mean "is perceived in the US".

Maths experience: the US gives everyone some background in all areas of maths in courses and beyond that students only know their own research. European universities offer a whole bunch of advanced courses, so some students have a lot of background in a lot of areas but others only know the background in their own speciality. Fully agree on the teaching, US PhDs usually are required to teach, Europeans in general are not. Also agree on the holiday culture. These Americans send emails on Satursay night and expect an answer requiring multiple hours of work on Sunday morning.

Degree equivalence is often determined by governmental departments or educational institutes (based on their internal rules).
For example in Australia: https://www.education.gov.au/qualifications-recognition
Qualifying for a position/grant/visa is not about "perception" but about how a body compares overseas courses to what they offer. This is likely a well defined set of comparisons and takes into account many different parameters and may vary from institute to institute inside a country.
As for personal "perception", that is individual and not something you can really theorise about.

The question is about perception, not equivalency. Of course perception matters, although I agree there's little use in spending time on the issue of perception when you are almost done.

In my experience, academics switch very often between Australian and UK universities.  In the UK, an Australian PhD is likely to be considered equivalent to a UK PhD.
In some other countries, academics may know little about Australian universities.

After you graduate, you are judged on your publication record, ability to attract grants, etc.
In a US PhD, because you spend longer as a PhD student, you usually also build up more of a publication record. Furthermore, because you take courses, you usually also become knowledgeable in more subfields. Comparatively, in a Europe-style PhD, you master one subfield (the subject of your thesis), and one subfield only. So, in that sense, non-US PhDs are considered 'lesser'.
The corollary to this of course is that US PhDs take longer to complete, during which you are not very well-paid. You can still get postdocs with non-US PhDs, as well (if you are good).
Edit: in spite of all the downvotes, I got the above mostly from my Australian supervisors. Interpret as you will.
PS: One other thing they said is that thesis Masters are generally more prestigious than non-thesis Masters, aka Masters by coursework, if getting a Masters degree is something you're considering.

This answer seems to misrepresent the situation. PhD's in the US take longer since they include course work which would be part of a Master's degree in several European countries (where a Master's degree is often required to begin a PhD). So both claims that earning a PhD in the US will give you broader knowledge or lead to more publications than a "European style" PhD seem very questionable. It's just that the coursework part if the program tends to be outsourced to a Master's degree in (at least parts of) Europe.

@JochenGlueck that does not match my experience, which is that the typical PhD student starts after 4 years in a BSc (Hons) program, and then they apply to either US or non-US PhD programs, going direct to the PhD. See e.g. https://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/students/prospective.students/ph.d.programme. "The University's minimum academic requirement for admission as a Ph.D. student is the equivalent of a good UK 2.1 four-year undergraduate honours degree (five-year from Scottish universities)" There is no Masters degree requirement, and you go direct to thesis work.

According to the answers to this question a Master's degree is usually required to start a PhD at least in each of the following European countries: France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Russia, Sweden. The only European country for which there is currently an answer and that does not require a Master's degree is the UK. So it seems much more typical for a European PhD to require a Master's degree than not.

@JochenGlueck that's weird. I just searched up the admissions requirements for a random German university (LMU), and I got "A 5-year Master's degree with at least the grade 'good' or a 3-year Bachelor's degree with the grade 'very good' is required for admission to the doctoral program." -- my experience as well is that as long as you can convince the professor to supervise you, you're good.

By the way, the following is copied from a paragraph in the section "Academic Requirements for Admission" in the description of the PhD programme in Cambridge that you linked in your comment: "In the United Kingdom and Australia, students will have completed a four-year undergraduate degree leading to a master of science, or similar qualification. In other countries, including the majority of Europe and India, a three-year undergraduate degree followed by a two-year masters degree is necessary."

Yes - which is also weird, because my experience with these systems is that a 4-year undergraduate degree does not lead to a MSc, but rather a BSc (Hons), which presumably falls under the "similar qualification". Getting a MSc requires more than 4 years, typically 5 and possibly 6 (e.g. if you do a 4-year BSc (Hons) and then a 2-year MSc program = 6).

Regarding the LMU link: Yes, there are some exceptions to the Master's requirement in Germany (or at least in some federal states). But apart from these exceptions being, in my experience, only rarely applied, they also imply that the PhD student has to do additional course work which they would not be required to do if they had a Master's degree (and which, in your LMU example, actually leads to a Master's degree). In your link this is explained in the point "Access with an outstanding bachelor's degree".

Your experience being in the UK is common, but it is not representative of how it works in mainland Europe. You need a Masters or equivalent to do a PhD in Europe.


text:
Search committee and Dean asked for my slides
I had a campus interview for an academic position. The day went well (in my view) and my talk generated lot of questions and discussion. I could say that since my answers were received in affirmative and I was also asked questions on the lines of how can you improve the teaching of so-and-so course, attract more students to take this so-and-so graduate course. Since about only 1/3 of the faculty members in that department attended the talk (total attendance might have been about ~25 persons), I was asked to send my slides to be circulated. When I spoke with a few faculty members after the day of the interview via zoom, they confirmed that they had indeed seen my slides that were emailed around. I had my meeting with the Dean separately a few days later via zoom (he wasn't available when I visited). We had a great meeting and the Dean commended my preparation and again asked for my slides (I made a set of ~12 slides specifically for the Dean that covered essential aspects of my candidacy from an administrator's point of view).
Overall, my research talk and one-on-one meetings with faculty members, search committee members, and the Head of that department went well and many expressed positive remarks about my potential fit with their department.
How should interpret their circulating my slides with the faculty?
Does that happen often?
Can I take their promptness in doing so as a positive sign?
Can I interpret the Dean asking for a copy of my slides as a positive thing?

Follow up question" "is it a bad sign for my faculty career that my SE question got closed straight away?"

What is "SE question" mean? Salary Expectations?

"Can I take their promptness in doing so as a positive sign? Can I interpret the Dean asking for a copy of my slides as a positive thing?" -- You can never know. They may have done the same for all of the other candidates. Or the dean might actually be interested in the topic and wanted to learn something about it. Or ...
In other words, don't spend your time reading tea leaves. You can't know whether it's a good or bad sign, or no sign at all. Put your efforts in the things you can control: Like writing your next paper.

+1 good answer. I'd be a little kinder: it's certainly not a negative sign.

Correct. It's not a negative sign. But I also don't think it's a positive sign. It's entirely unknowable.

+1 don't spend your time reading tea leaves (it could be a dead or alive Schrödinger's cat). #efforts: writing your next paper, grant proposal...


text:
What could be going on?
So I submitted a manuscript to a public health journal under Cambridge press sometime in October last year. Actually beginning of October.
Since its submission, my manuscript has gone through several stages in the review process, as indicated by the online submission system. It initially went from "Awaiting admin processing" to "Awaiting reviewer nomination," and then to "Awaiting reviewer selection." After that, it entered the "Under review" stage, but subsequently returned to "Awaiting reviewer selection." Surprisingly, it stayed in that stage for only a day before transitioning back to the "Under review" status. However, for the past five months, it has once again been stuck at "Awaiting reviewer selection."
Given the extended duration and multiple transitions in the review process, I have tried reaching out to the editor through various correspondences but have not received any response thus far. This lack of communication has left me uncertain about the current status of my manuscript and the estimated timeline for its review.

Ask yourself this: If you knew the answer, would that mean you could do anything with that knowledge? Instead you could have spent that time on cooking a meal for a loved one, just relax, writing the next article. All of that would be more productive. I know it is hard, but once you submitted an article, you need to forget it existed until you get the final answer.


text:
How do you use book reviews in your research?
I'm in the humanities and it is normal that after a book comes out book reviews of said book will appear in journals. Now while I think it is expected that scholars write book reviews of other scholars' books, they do it mainly as a service to the field but it doesn't really count for much and are usually are not cited (unless they become part of a larger dispute). Thus they don't really help one's google scholar citation count etc.
Still, they obviously form an important part of the academic environment in the humanities. That is why I was wondering how you use book reviews in your research? I for one, occasionally read reviews of books that I heard of and want to get a quick summary of, but, if I have read a book (say for my lit review etc), I also like to double check whether my interpretation of the book agrees with that of others that have read the book.
Are there any other uses? I suppose I am just wondering because, again, these reviews seem to be quite important (taking up substantial space in journals), but don't get much credit.

Informally, just as an interested and avid reader, I gain lots of knowledge from book reviews.  For example, I only read reviews of "From Bauhaus to our house" and never the book itself, but I can intelligently discuss its concepts as needed.  Sort of like movies whose trailers one has seen.

(1) To start with the most obvious use case, book reviews are a quick way to decide whether you should buy the book or not; for example, university librarians might use it as a guide to decide whether to order a book or not.
(2) Both students and academics often use book reviews as a way to get a rough idea of the key topics dealt with in a certain book, especially if the book uses extremely obtuse language and highly abstract concepts (ex: topics related to metaphysics, ontology, epistemology, etc.). In other words, book reviews can help you to prepare in advance for reading a very difficult or challenging book.
(3) Academics often read book reviews to get a quick grasp of recent developments in their highly specialized topic of research. Book reviews are much more narrow in scope than literature reviews. If I am an expert in say, Chaucer's medieval poetry or Gandhara's Greco-Buddhist sculptures, then it is much easier to read book reviews, because a literature review tends to be too broad, and only a small portion of that literature review will be relevant to my specialized interests.
(4) Some academics use book reviews as a way to check whether the book would be a good fit as reading materials for one of their classes.
(5) For books that deal with controversial topics, it can be helpful to read reviews by different people so as to get a grasp of different perspectives or interpretations, broader implications, or the merits/demerits, or possible flaws found in the arguments espoused by the book author.
(6) If you agree to do a book review, you will normally be sent a free copy that you can keep for yourself. It's a nice way to get free books. Sometimes the reviewer will offer the book to one of their students.

Your second point means that they do this in addition to reading the actual book, correct?

Yes, as a preparation for reading a difficult book. I will update the answer to clarify.


text:
May the spouse of a tenure-track candidate accompany them during their lunch with the head of the department?
In a hypothetical North American setting, assume that a tenure-track candidate whose spouse is also with them during their campus visit. Having lunch with the head of department is common for such a candidate on that day. But, may the candidate's spouse also accompany them during their lunch? Any hints in this regard are appreciated.

Interviews often also include dinner with a larger group of faculty, and it would be more reasonable to ask if your spouse can attend that.  While it's still part of the interview, dinners have somewhat more of a social function.  A lunch meeting, especially one-on-one, would be all business.

What would be the purpose? You want a job, so everything you do during interviews should be predicated on making that happen, and bringing a spouse is in all likelihood not helpful. Rather, I think "honey, take an Uber and look around town to see where we might want to live" is the right approach to the spouse spending the day.

Is it supposed to be just a lunch with the departmental head or with a a larger group of faculty? In my experience it makes a difference. Also, is the spouse also on the academic job market? That would also make a difference.

@MoisheKohan: 1. Most likely head and another headquarter individual 2. No.

Looking at it the other way: if the department really wants to recruit you, and the main obstacle to persuading you to join is the problem of relocating your family, then they may well want to invite your spouse in order to explain the wonderful attractions of the location.

If the lunch is only with a few other people, this could be handled with a little bit of polite interpersonal skills. Just mention your spouse is also around, drop some indirect hints that if she was invited he would be glad to join; and if the HoD does drop an invite, she joins, if not, that's your answer. I think academia is so personal it's hard to come up with general etiquette between academics of the same field that always applies.

I don't think there's an ethical question here, but perhaps an etiquette question. And the answer to that question is: No, I wouldn't suggest this to a hiring Department.
As a cultural matter, every meeting in an interview schedule, including lunch, is considered a business meeting. So lunch isn't a social outing.

To strengthen what this (completely correct) answer is saying: the lunch is not just a "business meeting", and not just "not a social outing", it's a part of the interview. So it is literally no more appropriate to bring the spouse along to the lunch than it is to bring them to any other part of the interview.

In general, the rule is:

During the interview (prior to an offer, as in your question), don't bring your spouse or partner to any events. Many people don't even mention their spouse, because it can unfortunately be a source of discrimination if you have a two-body constraint or you are planning to raise a family, particularly for women candidates.

During the post-offer visit, you can (and are even encouraged to!) bring your spouse or partner to events where they might have a say, or where they might have a vested interest in what's being discussed. This could very well include a meeting with the head of the department if you are planning to chat about, e.g., whether the department holds social events, whether it supports a couple in making housing and job decisions, and general culture of the department.

I have been HoD (math) twice and in my uni, there is no lunch/dinner specifically with the HoD, it's usually members of the hiring committee that attend. Lunches/dinners are most definitely part of the interview process, we're just checking the absence of red flags (e.g., if you start insulting the waitstaff, what would be your attitude towards the janitorial staff be). And also trying to evaluate your capacity to function in a group. A partner would not come to Department Council meetings and thus has no reason to attend that type of event.
Now, there's another reason they should not be present. My uni has a strong spousal hiring program and it extremely important that a candidate not show their cards in that respect prior to being extended an offer. Indeed, although it can be done, it is an immense hassle, in particular for the HoD, to go through the process of spousal hiring. And the hiring committee knows that and also knows that the process is likely to delay the hiring by one, if not two months. A candidate that would come with a two body problem would therefore probably lower their chances of being extended an offer as compared to someone without a two body problem. (The right moment to bring up the issue is after an offer has been made.)
There are of course exceptions: someone hired at a higher level would probably be more open. (Math is a small world.. if you are the prof level and have a spouse also in the field, it's likely that this is known.)

Just as a smallish counterpoint to @Anonymous M's good answer: if the spouse has a significant decision-making role in the candidate's accepting/not a job offer, it would be entirely reasonable to (propose to) include them. In that case, if the dept somehow vetos the spouse's presence, that'd be a bad sign about the atmosphere/politics of the dept.
But, yes, as @Anonymous M correctly observes, this is rarely done, in the U.S., in math depts, in my observation... "for good or for ill" ...

I think making this request under any circumstances puts the dept. in an awkward spot: the dept. head most likely does not want to be having an applicant's family members attend the lunch (when they are not also being considered for a job there), so the dept. head has to figure out a polite way to say "no".  Dinner with members of the math dept. sounds like a much more reasonable occasion to ask if the spouse can attend.

@KCd, I agree, I've not seen this happen, and insisting/announcing that one's spouse (as opposed to kids?) will attend the lunch would be non-typical. I would not do it, myself, because of the downsides. But I can imagine that some people might feel strongly about their spouse's participation in the interview... and, that refusal to allow the spouse to attend that "business lunch" could be a deal-breaker from the candidate's side. And, insistence might be a deal-breaker from the dept head's side? :)

@paulgarrett I admit I have a lot of trouble imagining a situation where this would make sense. I am hiring (the hypothetical) you, not your spouse. Your spouse may be a wonderful person, but they are not being interviewed and have no more business being present than your children, your parents, or your pet iguana. I could maybe understand bringing children if you apologize, warn and ask permission in advance and explain that you had no choice because there was nobody else to look after them, but bringing an adult would be a huge no-no for me.

@terdon, I agree, this would be unusual, on grounds that you and KCd mention, and in my observation. However, I can imagine that a candidate could have the ideological viewpoint that their spouse is really a partner in a larger sense, and is an equal "decider" about the job, etc. Yes, I know, this would be received unsympathetically in many circumstances, so it's not that I'm "recommending" it, etc. I have seen a little bit of a shift in recent years about the larger aspects of faculty hiring (Midwest R1 in math)... So, it's conceivable to me that a candidate might take this viewpoint.

In most walks of life, spouses do exercise vetos on major decisions - and a new job in a new city is one such. Yet that does not justify them being there in the thick of things. Even if say a new professor of Arabic was being hired and a candidate was a woman from the Middle East whose culture disallowed a married woman being alone with a non-mahram male. I doubt if request to the HoD for spouse accompaniment to his interview lunch would go down well. Whatever way you look at it you have one person asking for special treatment in an environment of nominal equals.

@Trunk, yes, such a request/requirement could be viewed as anomalous, and asking for "special treatment", ... or, "after all these years", it might also be viewed as asking reasonable treatment. :)

HoD (or anyone who ever had to talk to anyone whose spouse is present) might not agree. Spouse answers questions put to partner, tries to redirect conversation when partner can't offer a satisfactory answer, projects every point of disagreement as an attack on The American Family, etc, etc. No siree.

@Trunk, well, obviously there are conflicting impulses, and trade-offs... Though I don't necessarily advocate (what might be construed as) a radical approach in such situations, I do understand that some candidates might positively want to play that through... in part to see the department's reaction. If I were dept head (which, mercifully, I've avoided, so far...) and such a request were made to me, by this year I would agree to having the partner/spouse/whatever attend the lunch. I do like to fantasize that academe is (sociologically/ideologically?) "better" than generic job situations.

@paulgarrett  Boys oh boys. I'm thinking that maybe some "broadminded" contributors here are trying to play through those of us wanting a fairer academe ! The only circumstances I'd agree to it would be physical necessity, e.g. a partly paralyzed candidate who needed someone to assist with the props. Besides, these unlucky brethren have quite enough going against them so no one with a heart would deny them a chance to display their talents on an equal footing as able-bodied applicants. Guess I'm the last here to tumble to the real reason behind User's request. It won't work of course.

Firstly, there is no automatic lunch with the HoD or anyone else prior to your being offered a position or rejected.
But let's say that there is such an event. And yes, sometimes academics - both junior as well as senior - will use small meals, especially afternoon tea in UK to appraise a candidate in a more relaxed situation. Or maybe just to fit an interview into a busy day's schedule.
What would a spouse be doing at such a lunch ?
Unofficially scouting for a job of their own in the same department ?
Such intentions will stick out a mile in the emotional landscape of the lunch.
I'd expect a HoD to be quite disgruntled about this outrageous maneuver. There is ample means for an applicant with an academic wife to state their personal situation in their initial letter and depending on the employing university's policy on such things there may be a separate dialogue on that issue.
If the spouse is there to make their other half appear somehow more substantial or to offer emotional and/or moral support in putting across certain views that may or may not be controversial then the question must arise as to why the candidate needs such support in a simple one-on-two situation . . . It's going to be hard for the HoD to avoid the idea that this candidate is somehow inadequate - or at least fears so - as an individual representing themselves. Certainly not the type of person a HoD could feel would be a pillar of strength to the department.
If the spouse imagines that an academic selection process is just like a lot of simple social events, e.g. dinner parties, community group meetings, PTA meetings, political dinners, etc, whereby someone with a spouse is often subtly accorded a higher status than someone without one, then that spouse is making a serious miscalculation about academia. A spouse is a personal support  yet never a professional one: one's colleagues fill the latter role.
If the spouse wants to be there because he/she disbelieves what their partner has told them about this job's terms & conditions and wants to hear it from the horse's mouth - well that is a damn bad reflection on the marriage.
Lastly, if the candidate wants their spouse there to neutralize any disadvantage they feel due to the HoD being of the opposite gender, I think the request would evoke a strong reaction where the HoD is a woman. For over a century women academics had to work against the head of not only "male privilege" in the profession but also usually faced all-male interview boards - and on their own.
To a woman HoD, any male applicant seeking to have his spouse beside him at any point during the selection process would be seeking a benefit neither sought nor obtainable by woman applicants throughout the history of academia. Your application could hardly go any further.
A tenure-track appointment obtained under such circumsances would be worthless: the story would leak out and you'd face a volley of ridiculing looks every day you arrived on campus. No department can afford to draw such a person upon themselves.
From every angle I imagine, I see this notion of yours of bringing a spouse along to an interview-lunch as suicidal in the context of your job application and, given the human tendency to gossip, quite dangerous to any nascent academic career.
If you really want to have a future in academia - moreover in teaching - please please reconsider detachedly (preferably using an impartial senior academic colleague) the appearance of your modus operandi during job applications. Tenure-track candidate selection will for obvious reasons be conservative: the employing department will be obsessed with not hiring an applicant who shows the slightest indicator of uncollegial behavior and will not care a hoot about the risk of missing out on hiring the next Schwinger or Feynman.

This is wrong (-1). "there is no automatic lunch with the HoD or anyone else prior to your being offered a position or rejected" In my Canadian institute, I have seen multiple candidates who had had lunch with HoD (during their campus visit) right after their presentations and before their face-to-face meetings with faculty members.

By the way, there is no the "idea of yours". If I had a clear idea, I would not have asked about it here. I just simply asked about how the mechanics of that lunch works.

You observed the HoD taking some candidates for some jobs to lunch at one or more universities. That doesn't mean this lunch thing is an academic selection norm observed across most universities in most states. Universities are free to design their own selection processes as long as these are pertinent and fair. BTW did you see spouses at these lunches you observed? Maybe you will explain why a spouse's presence would be requested?

This is overall just a rant, where many of the points here are anything but the poster's business.

Odd to pick a fight over the sentence "it's common to have lunch with the head of department"

"A spouse is a personal support yet never a professional one:" --> Actually, the choice of (life) partner tends to be a primary factor in predicting the academic success or a female academic. I mean, I would certainly find it awkward to have a partner with whom I can't discuss my professional development or get support related to my professional issues. And besides, that's all even without mentioning a number of academics who's partners work in similar or related fields, and who had been working together on and off during their academic career.

@penelope  Not primarily, not directly a professional support. I take the point that whoever looks lovingly on someone is contributing indirectly to a solution to whatever is flummoxing them then. The interpersonal aspects of work relationships likewise, assuming we provide full and true detail to the spouse. Yet still and all, Professor X has to convert this psychic energy into real effort to resolve his pesky problem in topology, psychology or whatever. I trust you don't mean husband Jim down the hall or across the quadrangle to whom you scarper every time you're stuck. That's mad.


text:
Is it ok for a thesis chapter to start with a figure?
Slightly different to the question here which asks is it ok to put a figure in the introduction of a thesis, is it ok to start a thesis chapter with an illustration like a figure or table?
An even better answer might be give the pros and cons. An advantage I can think of is that it is nice to look at when a reader has to read through many pages of a thesis and if it also gives a summary of the whole chapter. A disadvantage I can think of is that it distracts from the chapter introductory text and might not look professional.

I think it is good practice to place a figure always after it's first reference in the text. So first have a verbal description, and then place the figure. If you are working with latex this might help: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/641343/figure-placement-after-first-time-referenced-in-text

If I saw a chapter starting with a figure, I would be slightly irritated at the writer for not making it clear whether I am supposed to look at the figure first or the text.
If you want to give the reader a break from endless text, just put one or two sentences first, explaining what the figure is or introducing the chapter, and then put the figure.

Thanks that makes sense. Also in reponse to @BerndGit's comment, I've decided to leave the figure at the bottom of the page with a caption and text before it referencing it.


text:
How to approach getting a TAship as a new grad student
I'll be starting my graduate(MS CS) program in the upcoming fall at a US university.
I'm looking for GTA opportunities. However, the course-professor mapping is not publicly available and there is no portal where one can apply for TAships.
The only option seems to be cold-emailing professors asking if they have any positions.
As an undergrad, I have extensive TAship experience, as I even TAed two graduate level courses. How can I (or should I even) leverage this while trying for TAships?
How can I, in general, increase my chances of getting a TAship given that professors are likely to ignore most emails?

Most TA positions go to doctoral students. And few are awarded by professors in any case. Are you a US student or from elsewhere?

International student in the US. There are TA positions available for Master's students too, I just don't know how to obtain them.

In most cases in the US, teaching assistants are awarded to students by the department rather than by an individual instructor.   The department then assigns the TA's duties based on the needs of particular courses (e.g. how many students are in the course) and the particular skills of the TAs.  If that's the system in your department, then you should apply to the department for a TA.

Consider asking the Chair of the Graduate program that admitted you if there is a chance you can get a TA-ship in their department, maybe they can put you on wait-list. Such things can work,  for instance, if one of the professors has a grant approved late and use some of that money to relieve their students from teaching.

@spatial Even if masters students are allowed to TA, it doesn't necessarily mean there are any positions open and available to them.

@BryanKrauseisonstrike True. Suppose there are positions. What is the best way to increase one's chances of getting one of these?

As I said in the comments, TA positions at the masters level are rare in the US and are generally reserved for doctoral students. Moreover, they are normally awarded by departments, not individual professors, other than those with large grants, most likely in lab sciences, not CS.
One option is to join a doctoral program, in which case you become a natural candidate for a TA.
The other possibility that comes to mind is to find a university that doesn't have a CS doctoral program, but does have a MS program along with a large bachelors program. In that case, you ask the department about possibilities. But you will need to search out such institutions. They aren't especially rare, but they may not be research focused.
In many ways, the best route is through the doctoral program, which you might be able to leave with a masters at some point if you then decide you don't want to go further.

TA positions at the masters level are rare in the US - this is not true. For MS CS at least, many universities offer TA positions to some MS students (incl. Stanford, UIUC), exceptions being Carnegie Mellon, Columbia, etc.

@spatial, if a university has a doctoral program then almost all TA positions will go to doctoral students, both as a matter of economics and for the educational experience. I'll stand by what I said. I'll also guess that if you have found exceptions at places like UIUC that they are both rare there and hard to get.

It is true that TAship is preferably given to PhD students first and then to MS students. But usually, PhD students get funded from research grants - so they're not required to TA.  I just gave you examples of unis where a lot of MS students get TAships. Some other examples of unis where a significant number of MS CS students are TAs include: UW Madison, UT Austin, Georgia Tech, UNC, etc.


text:
I'm losing passion for my first choice of majors. Is this normal "jadedness" or do I listen to my heart's calling?
Although I'm physics and astrophysics (3rd/ 4th year or so as I've changed majors a few times) on paper, i.e. per my transcript, in truth, I've done a lot more math courses than physics ones. I've also more or less completed a minor in economics. I came from a finance major background, and this could not have been more unrelated to my life's passions and interests. I made a mistake, but I was young, and we all do. Furthermore, I've run businesses, so at least I can complete some studies in economics to put on a resume.
However, I'm beginning to lose a bit of passion for physics as I'm truly 100% loyal and passionate towards pure mathematics. While I do love physics in general, the fact is that I mostly love it because of the math. Furthermore, because I've completed advanced math courses but I am not advanced in the physics labs, I find myself lagging somewhat in the laboratory work. I like to learn "truthful" facts, and with math, I feel that I am constantly proving and focusing on truth. With physics, however, I sometimes question whether I am learning factual formulas or theories, or whether the things I learn today will be re-proven incorrect in 30-50 years from now. Additionally, I was going to pursue both physics and engineering or physics, math, and computer science. Once upon a time, I wanted nothing more than to do experimental physics with my life, but now I hesitate to dream about this further, because my lab work is mediocre. It seems that biologist and chemists do the physics lab work just as good as myself, which makes me feel embarrassed.
So, I feel that I have narrowed down my choices somewhat as I'm stuck between a "more physics" route or a "more math" route. Everyone tells me that I love physics with everything in me, which is true. However, I only love it because of the math. I do love learning about atoms and all, but without a superior quality of lab work, my experimental physics choice seems a little lofty. Should I switch over to math, or should I instead persist and become better at lab work while I can? Is it normal to lose some passion, and to become jaded over time? Would appreciate advice from those who've gotten it more figured out than myself.

Well, if it helps a math proof that makes the assumption the Riemann hypothesis is true might also be made irrelevant in the future. Also, y'know math like...isn't real in the sense it's not bound by physicality to keep itself in check. That's another kind of truth. You sure that won't bug you after you've left physics behind?

This question is too person-specific to be answerable here. Can you make it more generic? That aside, it isn't clear what the issue is. "I enjoy maths more than physics, should I stick with physics?" would seem to invite the answer: "No, do what you enjoy!". What is the actual concern here?

This is a big question. I think first it's important to realize that you don't necessarily need to find a "passion" in school. There are lots of things in life to enjoy. And, no matter what, the thing that was super cool day 1 is going to be less cool day 1000 and even less cool day 10,000. That's not to say you can't still enjoy and be passionate about a subject, just don't expect to be riding that initial high forever. You're so early in your career that everything is new and interesting. It is especially difficult when you're starting out because if your anything like me - or any researcher/academic for that matter - you probably enjoy learning about new things in general.
When picking a career (or long-term academic commitment) it's easy to forget that interests change over time. I (unlike you) strongly disliked math through most of my life. I wasn't bad at it but I was thrilled to be done with my freshman year calculus class. Yet now I do a ton of modeling and computational work - lots of math. It's impossible to predict what you'll be doing in 5 or 10 years.
So all that said, the takeaway is don't stress too much because you can always pivot, change, and tailor your research/career to whatever you like. It sounds like you view this choice as somewhat pivotal, when in fact it is just one stepping stone. Do what you enjoy, but don't be think that you can never change your mind.


text:
Submitting a paper without affiliation
I am an early career researcher. I don't have any affiliation at present. If I get a job offer before my paper submission, it would be a couple of months before I join the position. So it might not be appropriate to name the new affiliation in my paper.
I doubt there is any solution to this problem, but I'm posting to ask just in case there is one. Would it be a good idea to submit straightaway to a journal instead of first submitting on the arXiv where people can see my paper before its publication?

What is your question?

With the edit, your question seems to be whether to submit a preprint to the arxive or not?

Does your PhD giving institution allow for visitor status or similar ? Most places like having more publications, and if this is a case of "I meant to finish during my PhD, but I (or my supervisor) ran out of money before I could finish", they might be able to arrange something. (If this is unrelated to your PhD, probably less so.)

My advice: Don't worry about it.  The important thing is to show on the publication a way to contact you.  Even if it is a personal GMAIL address.  There could be many reasons (besides unemployment) for preferring such contact information.

In my field of research, papers require mentioning the affiliation right under the name of the author. So it's not just the email address which tells the affiliation.

I do not think people will necessarily infer that you are unemployed just from seeing you listed as an unaffiliated researcher.
First of all, as a rough rule of thumb, people don't think much about others (close family and friends excepted), because they are busy sorting their own lives.
Secondly, if they thought about it, they would conclude that there are alternative hypotheses and that therefore they don't know. For instance, you might be employed outside your field but continue to write publications in your field on your own time and resources. In that case, your papers would still be submitted without affiliation, as your professional affiliation would be unrelated and irrelevant to your research.

Thanks. Being employed outside academia would imply that I couldn't find a postdoc position in academia. Everyone who has known me professionally knows that I did not want to leave academia. So an implication that I am employed outside academia would also be embarrassing for me.

Maybe the problem is a cultural and/or psychological one? People who don't get embarrassed about such things wouldn't see a problem here. I can't know how you could get over your embarrassment, but still I'd think that's the thing to look at.

Getting a postdoc is far from "making it." A good portion of postocs are just glorified technician positions exploiting recent PhDs who have not given up on the dream. So being unaffiliated is nothing to be ashamed of. If anything, it shows determination. I know very few people who have published without institutional support, so I think this looks good on you.
Did you do all of the work for this manuscript while being unaffiliated? If you did a substantial portion of this work as a PhD student, at least in my field the custom is to use the affiliation of the PhD institution. If you did the work while not being affiliated, then good for you.
It used to be that people only used official email accounts (e.g. .edu) to submit papers, but it is now very common for corresponding authors to use gmail accounts. Nobody will think a thing about it.
On a psychological note: are the people you suspect will look down at you, are these people cutting you a check every week?  If not, the hell with them. You gotta make a living, and there's no shame in that. So you keep putting postdoc applications out there, keep publishing, and you'll land your job.

Not only ethical, but I think it's customary to list the affiliation of the place from where the bulk of the work was done.

You don't really have much choice, do you? To advance in your career you must publish. Being affiliated or not doesn't change that fact. An awful lot of PhD graduates are unemployed. When you're unemployed, you just have to keep making every possible effort to stay active in your research, writing, publishing, and job search. This is normal and not a reason for embarrassment. Getting your name in print is much better than being invisible!!

The thought of senior researchers and faculty members in my field coming to know that I am unemployed once I submit a paper without an affiliation, is killing me. It will be very embarrassing and shameful for me.

There is no problem with senior researchers or faculty members knowing that you are unemployed.
It could even be positive.  If they're impressed by your paper and have some funding available to hire a postdoc, they might contact you asking if you are looking for a job.


text:
How long does it take "Accept (minor edit)" to final decision?
I received a decision letter from IEEE ACCESS from two reviewers, stating "Accept (minor edits)", but the editor's decision is "reject and resubmit".
So, I have revised the manuscirpt and submitted it.
My question is, how long does it normally take from the time I submit the revised manuscript (with minor edits to only 2-3 paragraphs) until the final decision is made?

I don't know about IEEE Access, but I know journals in which this is the final decision, i.e., they are just asking you for a potentially edited final version in this way.