text:
Was a professor correct to chastise me for writing "Prof. X" rather than "Professor X"?
I emailed Professor X regarding typos in, and questions on, his book. I've never met and contacted him. My email commenced with this salutation:

Dear Prof. X

He replied

It is customary to address professors by their title in full, just as most people would not abbreviate the full names of people whom they do not know well.

His unpleasantness startled me. Is he correct though? If he is, wouldn't we have to write Mr. in full as Mister or even Master?
My response to comments:
I'd rather not impart more particulars on Prof. X, in case he persecutes me! I'll just say that he's Caucasian, and in Australasia, North America or UK. English is definitely his native language.

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

One possibility is that Prof. Mill is attempting make a general point to you about communication.
Perhaps he found your message trivial, petty, or condescending. (Whether or not that is justified, I have no idea, since you don't include your message; but regardless, it's possible he took it that way.) He may have felt that "showing" you how that comes across was the best way to respond. (Again, I don't endorse that, but I think it's a possibility.)
So, he may have just taken the first "petty" response that came to mind, and settled on that, intending to demonstrate to you that your own tone was not particularly effective at gaining a sympathetic response.
I agree with the (downvoted) answer from @Artoo. Unless you have reason to cultivate a relationship with this person, I think you'd do well to avoid worrying too much about what he thinks of you. If you do have an interest in cultivating a relationship, you'd do well to develop a full understanding of why he said what he did, rather than trying to evaluate its accuracy.

I concur. It's a pity that a college-educated adult, never mind a professor, conflates the procedural with the substantive. However, as you point out, this could be a learning experience for the OP.

While this is certainly possible (I mentioned it also in my answer), we should perhaps avoid deifying professors and assuming that every syllable is intended to make an important point that students should learn from. I think it's more likely that he's just a jerk :-)

There's a reasonably big gulf between "I don't endorse that" and deification ;)

What a jerk! No, writing "Prof." is perfectly fine; his reaction is both incorrect and completely inappropriate. I cannot imagine any professor I know (even the ones I don't like) writing such a thing.
What country is this guy in? Some countries (e.g., Germany) have stricter rules for such things, but I'm still shocked he would respond like this.

regarding typos in ... his book

Ah. Is it possible he's being snarky about your abbreviation since you criticized his typos? If your e-mail had a condescending tone, maybe he is trying to "bite back." That's the only thing I can think of.

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

As others have mentioned, this of course depends on context, some societies may be more righteous than others about this issue.
Also, I'll be assuming that the issue was about "Prof." and not about including degrees/other titles. If the issue is the latter, I assume it is really standard and that the prof has them clearly displayed somewhere for you to see?
Regarding "Prof.", I did a search over my emails looking for the exact string "Prof.". What I found: I have been addressed as "Prof. Argerami" in emails a bit more than a thousand times. There were emails from (many of each)

Scientific Organizations (including the International Mathematical Union and the American Mathematical Society, for instance)
Conference Organizers
Journal Editors/Editorial Systems
Students
Other professors and researchers
University staff

In summary, in my experience "Prof." seems to be extremely common.

+1 for data!  Just out of curiosity, would you have numbers for how often you've been referred to as "Professor Argerami", "Prof Argerami", "Dr. Argerami", etc.?  I mean, even if you've been called "Professor" far more often than "Prof.", it wouldn't invalidate your point that "Prof." has been common; just curious.

Indeed, I checked that briefly. In my emails from the last 17 years, I found "Prof. Argerami" 1095 times, and "Professor Argerami" 754 times.

Surely 'Prof.' is as valid as 'Mr.' or 'Dr.'?

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

I disagree with the vehemence of other answers. My experience has been that some students understand very little of the very tiny amounts of protocol we tend to follow in academia. As a result, the way that they address faculty, both in writing and in person, varies between rather informal and somewhat insulting. I think it is perfectly reasonable to try to address this problem right from the start, to avoid future issues. It is nice that some professors are perfectly fine with informality. But that does not mean that their view is the correct one and if some colleagues disagree they are then jerks or anything of the sort. You sort of have to learn to navigate between different levels of comfort.
My advice would be to address faculty in a formal way in general. Many will quickly request that you 'relax' and address them differently.  Others may not tell you directly but it will be clear from their interactions.  Still others may appreciate the formality and welcome it.

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

Are you sure they meant professor instead of Prof.
It could be that this person is a "Mr. Prof. Dr. Eng. " and they expected you to use all, you can look at how they have signed the book.
Even in the latter case, Prof. is absolutely fine.

Even in countries that do us all these titles obsessively, it is enough to use just  Prof. in most circumstances (certainly when addressing a person).

Correct, that is what I was trying to say. I edit my response to be more explicit.

If you want to write in a gender-neutral way, you can use "they" instead of "s/he". Ie: "Are you sure they meant..." "... and they expected you to use all..." "... how they signed the book."

Thanks @Aaron, text edited!

The ONLY way I can see someone getting ticked at this is if you said "Prof" without a period showing an abbreviation, and that wouldn't be justified.
"Dr. Octopus"  is a perfectly formal address line. You would rarely see "Doctor Octopus".  I think it borders on archaic use.  "Dr Octopus" is just about the same as "Dr. Octopus", but someone has gotten just a tad casual about the period.
"Doc Octopus", however, is very informal, probably too informal for some situations.
Now, lets move to "Professor".  "Prof." is a fine abbreviation, and maintains a level of formality.  I'd say "Prof" is the same, with a slightly casual drop of a period, but suggest the person you're interacting with might be placing it in the "Doc" category.
Of course, such things will differ by background.  Take a peek at https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/71086/20457 regarding the use of "Herr Professor Doktor" and the lack of formality of dropping "Herr"
All that said, perhaps this was just displaced annoyance, and the real issue was the letter pointing out typos in a book.

Thanks, @MontyHarder

"Dr Octopus" is just about the same as "Dr. Octopus", but someone has gotten just a tad casual about the period": Note that in British English it's common to drop periods in abbreviations and initials (see e.g. Dr in the Oxford dictionary).

Looks like he's trying to pick you up on your grammar in retaliation. To me his response seems half serious, half ironic; so I would take it as such.

Although I find it very unusual the professor doesn't approve of you using the Prof. abbreviation, he is able to state his preference for how you address him.  Some people are VERY particular and some people are highly functional despite having psychological problems. I think the key takeaway is that the professor clearly has a preference for how to be addressed and directly communicated that desire. I would advise you not to use the Prof. abbreviation with this professor, but feel free to use it for others, since it is generally accepted.
As far as the reasoning the professor provided, it's complete BS.  We abbreviate Mrs., Dr., Mr., PhD, etc.  It's not customary to provide the full title.

The professor isn't stating a preference here but arguing that OP was wrong about failing to respect their (unexpressed) preference. If they had written "I would prefer if you would address me as 'Professor X'" it would be pretty weird but would not be the same thing as claiming that OP was wrong to not do it.

His reply is a little pompous, but he is correct that you should not abbreviate professor (within a salutation).  Don't abbreviate senator either when writing to one.
I'm not sure that "chastise" is completely accurate.  Maybe "correcting you" is kinder wording.  Also, not sure why this is so important to you to come to Q&A site with wounds to show.  It's not a big deal.
Since you are trying to get some help from the person, I suggest to drop YOUR woundedness AND ignore HIS pompousness and just soldier on and discuss the content.

Not knowing proper etiquette and asking about it does make a good question. First and foremost because now I know if the situation ever arises for me.

Could you provide a source for your first claim? I've been a professor for more than 20 years in the US and have never heard of a distinction between spelling out "Professor" and using the abbreviation "Prof."

(1) [citation needed]. (2) Who is wounded? Kinder wording would be that OP is probably wondering whether he should avoid using "Dear Prof. X" with other professors [and I see no reason why he should avoid the construction]. (3) Hard to say without the full context, but this snippet is so bizarre and hostile that I would carefully consider whether I wanted to pursue a relationship with this Prof. [sic] Millar further. This may be another reason why OP posted here.

authors: Vladimir F Героям слава


text:
Is it typical for adjuncts to have a higher salary than postdocs?
I've been noticing that sometimes adjunct lecturer salaries are higher than those of postdocs, in math. I was wondering if that is typical and why that is the case.

That's what it costs to get people?  Adjuncts expect payment since they are off the tenure track whereas postdocs can still be exploited by the vanishingly small chance of grabbing the brass ring?  [In any case, it's about supply and demand not "fairness".]

Adjuncts are usually paid per course.  They do not have a salary at all.

It's usual for experienced, full-time, teaching-only faculty to be paid more than postdocs.  Even forgetting real-world factors, wouldn't you think this should be the case unless you thought research was a much more valuable activity than teaching?

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
The Formality and Informality Relationship in Academia
To the point, I think I am suffering from the lack of the interpersonal skills and especially while working with supervisors. My character is quite good, I can make good connections and etc, however, I looks dumb while dealing with supervisor and I think this would leave a negative impression.
My new supervisor asked me to call him with Dr.X, and I felt so much shy to call his name directly, he didnot comment later, but I do think their actions said I am boring, dull, and maybe end hating me as happened in my previous PhD, my ex-supervisor commented once time, that he didnot like that I am using " kindly" in email,  in the end , I feel I am not likeable even if I did a good work.
Another issue is my tone of voice shows that I am arrogant person, and this happened today, another senior professor had a facial expression which wasnot good, although I would like to deliver the idea, but I fail apparently.
I am so afraid to commit another inadvertent mistake and it seems academia policy is harsh. I dont know whether with my personality I can keep in academic world, I dont want to be an ordinary lecturer, I want to be a leading researcher in my research field, but given the facts, I am way off.
The question:Is there coaching techniques that could help me, I am very sensational, kind, but supervisors apparently see me dull, boring, and arrogant which hinder me to deliver my ideas and suggestions.

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

I think that interpersonal skills are about as important in academia as they are everywhere else. Unless you are a monastic hermit, any workplace is about dealing with people. Academia is really no different in this regard.

I would not normally use "kindly" in an email. "Kind regards" is fine, but something like "please kindly do something" sounds like a request from a payment reminder letter ("please kindly pay the overdue bill within 7 days").

I do think that interpersonal skills are important in academia. A few ideas:
1) Tell your supervisor you would like to improve at this. Ask for suggestions on improving your verbal communication and email communication. Consider asking if there is a particular person who is effective at this that you could learn from.
2) Ask your friends to read over your email and have “practice conversation” with you while you are working on improving this. In important situations I always have friends read my emails before sending (common among my group of Asst Professors who are trying to climb the ladder).
3) Keep examples of effective correspondence. I have a coauthor who is loved by everyone and who is a master at asking for things in a polite yet firm way. I often refer to his emails to get ideas for my own.
4) For the arrogance problem, be careful how you state your facts. I have a student who will often state his opinion as a fact. Or will state something I taught him the day before as a fact he is explaining to me without acknowledging that I was the one who taught it to him! I know this is a cultural difference, so I try to be patient with this, but it is difficult because really dislike it. Consider using phrases like “As you know,...” “As you explained to me...” “I recently read in X journal that...” “To the best of my knowledge,...”
5) It also seems that your supervisors don't respond well to your disagreements. First, you are right to "pick your battles" as you have stated. In some cases you might decide not to disagree. My old boss used to say, "This will become self-revealing," by which he meant that the incorrect party will eventually realize the problem without a direct disagreement (it will become clear in the data, from other sources better positioned to disagree, etc.). Second, you need to learn to disagree diplomatically and tactfully. One approach is to distance yourself from the disagreement. Instead of saying, "I think this approach is wrong." you might say, "I understand that many people use this approach. I have also read some papers recently that argue that another approach is an improvement on that method in certain cases." You might also try to lead them in the direction you want to go by making it their idea. This usually comes down to asking questions. "Are there any extensions of that method in the recent literature? Are there any cases where that method is less preferred? What feedback about that method have you received from reviewers?" Basically, you want to disagree without being disagreeable and always allow the other party to save face.

I always show respect to people, I do think sometimes professors dont like argument, or finding a mistake in their work, they need to be a copycat and do something which isnot quite true and there an improvement can be done. I tell myself, you can shut up your mouth and dont deliver ideas, maybe I am wrong, but thats what I am perceiving in academic world.

In that generality that statement is just not true. In any part of society there people who are more functional and people who are less functional. It might be that you ended up with less functional people. In addition you seem to have trouble communicating because of cultural reasons. Your situation could be due to either one of those or (most likely) both.

Of course! Noone likes people who "argue" with them or find mistakes in their work. It is unpleasant. However, most people know this makes their work better and are willing to accept it as long as it is done tactfully. I will add something about how to disagree tactfully.

Regardless you seem very unhappy with your current situation, so you need to do something about it. The problem is we do not, and cannot, know all that is required for you to solve your problems.

@MaartenBuis, It isnot about cultural reasons, because I have lived in different countries rather than home country, but I dont feel comfortable so easily to open up, but indeed I need to trust person first and I felt that my ex-supervisor was a jerk person, but it seems to be a trend in academia, that you have to be hypocrite and shut up your mouse. I have also to acknowledge I am suffering personally because of some events happened in my life.

@MaartenBuis, I think you missed my point in the question, I didnot say I am unhappy in my current position neither asking to solve my problems, I just need guidance and advice how to avoid committing inadvertent mistakes as I highlighted.

I just read a comment that my English could be a problem, I dont know whether this right, my writing isnot very good, however, I can speak fluently, I know this weird, but this based on feedback on people I am working with.

@Dawn, thanks so much for adding the last advice, which is really important for me to bear in my mind.

Fluent or not, your English may be idiosyncratic enough that your inadvertently communicate things that you do not intend.

@paul garrett, maybe I have to study the vocabulary again, I am trying to do my best as much as I can.

Word choice is very important to conveying respect, tact, and diplomacy. In addition, you will find that using more words almost always makes you sound more polite in English. This is difficult for language learners.

You might also google “More polite English phrases for work.” to help to identify phrases which might be too strong or too direct.

@Dawn, thanks so much for providing those information, I think there a lot still to learn.

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


text:
Using university's resources that are online
A lot of the time when looking for information about a topic online I come across another university's resources that are publicly available. Some have a full listing of all the resources available for that course and others just have a PDF for one topic of the course. Can I read them or download them?

What are you concerned about?

If they did not want you to have them, then you won’t find them...

It is fair to say that if someone publishes something on the net then you can download and use it freely for personal use just as if you check it out from the library. At least, I've never heard any opinion that would challenge that.
Beyond that, you have to consider a few things. In the US, at least, authors gain copyright (all rights) to anything they create. If you don't find another statement to the contrary, then you have to assume that "all rights are reserved." To use something for other than personal use, for example republishing it in any form, you need permission: a license.
Some web resources are explicitly licensed with the terms carefully stated, such as through Creative Commons. Some are explicitly stated to be "Public Domain". But in the absence of such statements, assume that all rights are reserved.
It is easy enough to ask educators for permission to use their materials and most will give you some sort of license to do so. But you can still plagiarize people even when you have a license.
But for academic resources there is another consideration. If you found it, so can your students. So, reusing found exams and homework questions can be a bit risky. You can safely mine the resources for "ideas" of course, as ideas are always free to use.
I would like to say that you can freely link to found resources, as that seems sensible to me, but there are laws, especially in EU, that are bringing that idea into question. It is unlikely that you would be challenged for linking to an academic site, though you could possibly be for linking to a news site. The world of copyright is a bit weird and getting worse.
In the not too recent past, "fair use" permitted some limited reuse of the work of others, but only for specific purposes (and with attribution). One of the fair uses was scholarship, but that has been going away ever since the Xerox machine was invented, with "content owners" working through governments to limit use more and more. The bigger problem is that the rules of "fair use" are too variable to make general statements about them. What is allowed in EU may be forbidden in US, for example.
Personal use: fine. Beyond that, look for a license, ask, or beware.

You can read and download them. They made them publicaly available so that students from their institute and other can read and download them.You may be worrying about the copyright crap. Don't worry about it, Just do what ever you want.

Don't worry about the "copyright crap" is extremely poor advice.


text:
Graduate student salary increase only for new students
Graduate student stipends on our campus were low, and our new president increased some stipends. This applied to our department. However, I figured out it only apply to the new students. So we are currently getting paid $1,800 per month, they will get paid $2,200 per month for recruitment purposes.
What would be the best way to approach this, so that current student can also get an increase?

I'm surprised they can do this at a state university. Shouldn't everyone be treated the same?

@Buffy Probably depends on state laws; though I don't see anything in the OP specifying that this is a public/state university (low salary implies it, granted).  If there's no union then everyone negotiates their contract on their own, and ostensibly there's nothing wrong if one or more people negotiate a better contract than other people do, as long as there are no discrimination violations.

@zibadawatimmy, see the OP's profile.

Check to see if you have a graduate student union at your institution, and if not then check for the student government association. Salary inversion isn't rare among faculty, so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that it might also become a thing with graduate stipends. I'd like to think the people making the decision to do this weren't unaware it might cause a problem, but one never knows what they considered and if they planned how they would react when the complaints started to roll in.

If your institution has a graduate student association or some kind of student government, have you discussed it with them?

For research assistantships, it might well be impractical to rebudget for the higher stipends.

Other means of raising attention to the issue are your university student senate and/or publishing an article (w/ data) in the school newspaper.

@Buffy everyone should be treated fairly, but no one is.  The way I see it, the new graduate students are being exploited slightly less than the old graduate students and the university president is happy that the peons are fighting over scraps.

Assuming the poster is in the United States:

You can request a salary increase.  Sometimes requests are granted.
You can leave the university to get higher pay elsewhere.
You can organize students in to a union, which will strike if an acceptable salary is not provided by the university.  Most universities in the United States do not have a graduate student union which negotiates an employment contract.  These are different from the student union which offers campus recreation at universities in the United States.

On your own, a PhD student has very little bargaining power.

I believe that student unions exist precisely for the purpose of wage disputes. Perhaps you could get involved with your local student union and see if they have any thoughts about the issue.

The asker appears to be in the United States, where a "student union" does not usually negotiate wages.  This would be correct in parts of Europe, I think.

@AnonymousPhysicist: "student union" is an overloaded term in the US.  It is the correct term for what the answer is saying, but the answer's usage is not the only concept for which the term is applied.


text:
How feasible would it be to transition from a Master in Finance to a phd in Pure Maths?
I know this sounds weird. I'm getting a Master in Business (MSc, not MBA) with emphasis in Finance (in my country you can't officially get a master in finance, logistics or marketing, they are all called Master of Business but still different based on what you want to research for the thesis).
Thing is, I really became interested in research and academia recently and have been thinking about changing my plans completely (I was working in business management before starting full-time grad school and wanted to go back to the industry, but not anymore, I found out that I like academic research a lot).
I have two college majors, one in Business and one in IT. Do you think it is possible to start a DSc program in Europe in pure maths with this background? Would I have to go back to 0 and get another, more closely related, college degree or maybe masters? I just don't want to get my hopes high and invest time and effort pursuing something unrealistic. I'll finish my masters when I'm 26 next year, if I had to go back to college for a degree in maths I'd be 30 by the end of it. Is that too old for a career as researcher?

I strongly recommend you not to, nowadays people in the last year of math Ph.D. programs want the type of jobs you used to work, because there is very little open positions in academia. No matter how hard they work and how much they like to do research.

If you really want to "become a professor" you will find better chance by doing doctoral degree in business or some highly applied field. In those fields not so many people are interested in academia, supply and demand makes the competition less severed.

What math courses have you done?

Why exactly do you want to get a PhD in pure maths in the first place? I mean, there must be a certain area you are more than highly interested in - which is it? Because trying to get a PhD in pure maths without knowing what pure maths actually is might be a very long shot.

Bottom line is that it will be very hard since you lack a bachelors in math (or even the math training of a physicist).
My advice would be instead to go work for a while.  It seems like we get a lot of degree change requests which are prompted from not wanting to leave the nest.
If you don't follow the go work advice, I would at least look for something a little closer to your training.  Something in quantitative finance or econ or at least applied math or statistics.  Not pure math.

Thanks for your input. I'm puzzled because around here we consider doctoral research as "going to work", though. I have worked in business in between college graduation and grad school, so the fear of leaving the nest is kind of in the past by now. I figured I'll really need a degree in maths, so I'm planing on getting an online degree while working for the 4 to 5 years after I finish my master's theses (which will involve machine learning and may also help me to get into a pure math's degree afterwards). Very long road ahead but I think it will be worth it!

A general answer to your question is probably complicated and it is likely that someone in your situation will need to get a new undergraduate degree.
But, since you are in Rio, you have another option. Take a summer course at IMPA on one of the introductory courses (e.g. Real Analysis). If you can manage that, then you might be able to switch to a M.Sc. there. With an M.Sc. from IMPA you have a chance to be accepted for a PhD in Europe.

As others have mentioned, answering in general is quite difficult and in reality depends a lot on which University you plan to enroll. It is also dependent on the kind of Mathematics you were exposed to during your undegrad studies.
You mention having a degree both in Business and in IT. Many IT courses I am aware of provide a solid-and given the appropriate choice of extra classes a quite strong-background in mathematics. Also during your business studies you were likely exposed to Math as well. That said, the typical prerequisite is a relevant MSc in Mathematics or a field like Physics, being the most related.

To provide a real example, the University of Athens Math Department allows students with an Msc, but not necessarily in Mathematics, to participate in the exams it holds for PhD students, and in special circumstances-i.e. if you can prove you are realy worth it-even someone without an Msc can apply. The only other prerequisite is submiting beforehand the general outline of what your research topic is about. And of course succesfully participating in the exams which can be quite challenging and in practice require someone being exposed and well-versed to what is typically studied during an Msc course in Mathematics. (And knowing Greek is a must..)

Finally, concerning being somehow "late" at Math research, perhaps you will find this stack post enlightening- Mathematicians who were late learners?


text:
Does a gap of 10 months after Master's degree affect my chances for a future academic career?
I am soon to submit my PhD thesis and I am currently looking for postdoc positions. I would eventually like to stay in academia and was concerned if my past gap year would harm my chances in getting a position.
After my master's degree, I got an R&D job and worked there for 4 months before quitting it as I did not enjoy it there. My plan was to join my master's lab as a research fellow, and I had an offer for that from my advisor. But, I got a bad disease and I fell ill for 3 months. I was not hospitalized, but had to live with my parents for the period.
As I always wanted to pursue PhD, I was searching for a position in the meantime. During the 3 months, I gave GRE (scored poorly, thanks to my illness) and applied to universities and professors. I got a positive response and I was sure of getting a PhD position.
However, it was already February and if I were to join a PhD program, I would have to wait till September. Also, the visa process and other formalities take time. So, I decided to not go further with the research fellow, and take time to complete the visa processing, spend time with parents and travel around.
I had a blast of time. Learned so much during that time. But, I don't have anything concrete to show for that 9-10 months period.
My concern is, how much will that affect my future career?

It is really hard for me to see this as an issue. Relax.

Possible duplicate of Will taking a gap year after my Master's degree improve or degrade my potential of doing a PhD? See also: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17033/gap-year-before-post-doc and https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11320/what-is-the-perception-of-students-who-take-a-gap-year-between-their-graduation

This will have essentially no impact on your career. Clearly it has no impact on your research productivity. So I don't see why anyone would take issue with it. Many professors have taken circuitous routes to get where they are, thus suggesting there are no expectations you complete all your degrees without any breaks in between.


text:
Students' illicit access to answers for online homework systems
I teach physics. Back in the 90's, people teaching freshman physics were pioneers in creating open-source systems such as LON-CAPA for checking students' homework answers. Today the use of open-source or home-grown systems has become uncommon and has largely been replaced by the use of MasteringPhysics, a product of Pearson which functions both as a revenue stream for the publisher (students pay per semester) and as a way of killing off used textbook sales. During this same period of time, we've seen the advent of web sites such as Chegg that sell students access to answers to homework. Physics homework seems to be the killer app for Chegg. If you read about Chegg et al. in the media (example), physics homework seems to be a dominating presence.
In a 2010 paper, Palazzo et al. study students' cheating in MasteringPhysics using an ingenious technique applied to their classes at MIT. They make the following claim:

Our survey shows that copying written homework is more
  prevalent than copying electronic homework. [...] This may be because the most common self-reported
  mechanisms for copying written homework on our survey,
  “copying a borrowed assignment” (58% of survey responses)
  and “finding the solution online” (34%, often using the MIT
  Open Courseware site), are not available avenues for the
  electronic homework.1 Furthermore, online students who are
  stuck on a problem or unsure whether their solution is correct benefit from the feedback and hints available, reducing
  the need to “borrow” others’ assignments.
  [footnote 1] Pearson
   regularly searches for posted solutions to its Mastering-
  Physics problems and requests that they be removed from the web.

Question: Does anyone have any reliable information about whether it's true that Pearson is (or still is) successful at this?
It seems unlikely to me, given what I've read in the media and what I've heard from students. However, I'm not in a great position to evaluate this for myself. In my classes, I use an open-source system rather than MasteringPhysics, and I also haven't paid for access to Chegg, so although I can search for the text of a problem in a printed book and see it pop up in Chegg, I can't see what the solution is. I also don't have access to the text of the problems in MasteringPhysics, so I can't search on the text of those problems. My impression is that most of the problems in MasteringPhysics are actually just minor variations on the problems in the printed text, but I don't actually know for sure. I wonder whether this statement by Palazzo is out of date, or was perhaps unrealistic even in 2010 and influenced by assurances from Pearson's sales reps. From what I can tell, Chegg's business model is designed to make it practically impossible for a textbook publisher to do what Palazzo claims Pearson does. It seems like it would be an endless game of whack-a-mole.
Palazzo et al., "Patterns, correlates, and reduction of homework copying," Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 6, 010104 (open access)

I only award grades on controlled assessments never on homework...

10 percent is already my idea of a small weight for homework. Whatever benefits they get from cheating on it will be more than countered by lost points on the exams due to missing the opportunity to practice and get feedback. You might instead try making the grading really generous, like give full credit as long as they appear to have given a good try. Then less incentive to cheat for the points.

It's even worse than you think.  I have heard that there are web sites out there that, if you give them your Pearson log-in and password, will automatically do your homework for you.  (They recognize the problems you have been assigned and automatically submit the answers from their answer bank.)  You don't even have to do the copying.

Honestly, I think that any weight greater than 0 for a homework assignment is too much, because, indeed, people will cheat. My policy on homework is this one.

My original question had some tangential remarks, which led to a discussion in comments of whether homework should be graded, and if so, how much it should count. I've deleted that part of the question, since that's not really the point of what I'm asking about.

Could you do me a favor and briefly describe your open source work flow to deliver online homework outside MasteringPhysics? I'm actively looking for an alternative to the Pearson universe...! Thanks so much.

@user2705196: I'm using Spotter: http://www.lightandmatter.com/spotter/spotter.html . Webworks and Lon-capa are also open-source possibilities. If you want more info, drop me an email: http://www.lightandmatter.com/area4author.html

I talked to a group of students about this, with the understanding that of course they would have no personal knowledge of it, but ... er... they might know someone who had experience with Chegg.
Before I had even finished explaining the question, some of them were already laughing. They say that 100% of MasteringPhysics questions are on Chegg, including both the conceptual questions and the quantitative ones.

Doesn't surprise me.


text:
Will it be too late to start looking for postdoc positions once I am about to submit my thesis for review?
I am going to submit my Mechanical engineering PhD thesis in July, with defense probably scheduled in September or October this year. I am about to submit few papers and I was thinking of applying for postdoc positions after submitting them.
My question is, as I am already late in applying for postdoc positions, will it be wise to wait till June before searching for the positions?

I absolutely agree with emory's answer: the earlier the better. That being said, I didn't apply for a single postdoc position until the date of my defence (I was looking at that time already, but haven't found anything interesting).
There are several factors that may differ from person to person, so make sure the advice you take fits your situation:

some places, you actually work on your manuscript or thesis presentation until the day of your defence (e.g. France). In some places, there is a big "waiting period" between submitting the manuscript and your viva (e.g. UK)
funding: do you have funding up until the date of your defence, or does it finish earlier?
connections: the people you have met in conferences, through your supervisor, etc. Some people establish strong enough connections during their PhD that their postdoc search simply comes down to contacting those connections. If you have to search "blind", it could take much longer.
location and/or immigration: A perk of looking for a postdoc in a country/locale you are familiar with is probably knowing where to look, understanding the language and familiarity with the system. A perk of looking broader is that you have more options (and a lot of places value mobility during postdoc even if you do return to your country of "PhD origin" afterwards); but depending on your nationality and target country, immigration documentation might take some non-negligible amount of time.
finances after the viva: How easy it will be for you to get along if you have a few months of gap? Do you have enough savings (as a PhD student, likely not); is there a good social support in the country you're in (in France, I could get a very nice unemployment package for some months which allowed me to search in peace); are both you and your parents happy for you to move back in with them for a few months, etc.

So, when you start looking will depend on the above factors. I.e. if you are in a system where months leading to the defence are very work-intensive (no "waiting period"), it might simply be too stressful to look right now. That was my case: I was not sleeping regularly (in the holy trinity of work-rest-social, I opted for work+social and ignored sleep...), under a lot of stress, and my social activities were absolutely essential to keep me going. I think I would've had an easier time if somebody told me: don't feel pressure to look if you are already under too much pressure from finishing.
Some additional advice for looking for postdocs at the end of your PhD:

if you find yourself in a pinch and have a good rapport with your supervisor, talk to them. It is not uncommon for PhD supervisors to "magick out" a short-to-mid-long postdoc for their former PhD students. My supervisor (France) was able to offer me a short 4 months contract, which gave me the "buffer time" I needed for a proper search while I was not stressed about my defence. My current lab (UK) has offered some of the PhD students a 1+ year postdoc after graduation.
a lot of places will happily offer you a postdoc position even before you have a PhD diploma in hand (i.e. as long as you show them you have submitted your manuscript and are just waiting for the defence; in case of "waiting period" type systems), and let you take a few days off for your viva, so this should not be a limiting factor.
almost all institutes everywhere are used to receiving applications from different academic cultures, and therefore are accustomed to different "standard" dates applying elsewhere. This is especially true for postdoc positions which typically have little to no teaching obligations.
almost all advertised postdoc positions typically have a contact e-mail for questions. If unsure about how strict the starting date or any other criteria is, asking can only help. If I was worried about whether the advertised starting date could be a problem, I might send something like:

Hi, I'm X, currently finishing my PhD on topic Y from University Z, and am very interested in applying to your open postdoc position on topic M. As I see that the advertised starting date is in September, I would like to ask if you can offer any flexibility with the starting date. The reason is that the likely date for my defence is early October, and I was wondering if you would still consider my application under these circumstances if I applied?

some applicants manage to establish a really good relation with their examiners, and I've heard of PhD students obtaining postdocs from them (with the connections established during their defence). I find it a risky option, but it is one.
talk to your supervisor; he could have more specific advice either on where to look, when you can expect the bulk of open positions, stories form older students.

In general, the earlier the better; but there is no "too late."

Advertised positions will have deadlines and application procedures. You should start looking for those now and work to meet them rather than waiting. If you are looking for unadvertised positions then it will take time to make contact and establish rapport with any research groups and PIs.
But make sure you also pay attention to start dates and can meet the requirements if you are offered a position. It won't do you any good to be offered a position that you can't accept because of timing.

At the moment, I am a bit uncertain of when I will get to defend this year. It must happen before December this year in order to graduate. And my advisor (who's on sabbatical) has told me that he will check and okay my thesis for submission by July end. Every open position I check at the moment has a start date of May or September. I don't know if I will defend till then. What should I do in that case?


text:
Disappointed with my own level of performance in group projects and activities
I'm attending a CDT (Centre for Doctoral Training) course and am very nearly finished with the first year of my DPhil programme. Part of this has involved doing scientific group projects with other students in my group. We have had all sorts of group projects from the very first day, including group challenges lasting from one day, to a fortnight.
A common feeling I have been getting from these group projects has been one of disappointment and feeling like I haven't made any meaningful scientific contributions to the group other than things like presentational aspects (which are not scientific). Although the goal of the projects is not to produce groundbreaking results, they are meant to be an opportunity to demonstrate how we can come up with novel ways of modelling certain phenomena and representing them mathematically. I consistently feel like I am too slow when it comes to this; by the time I have thought about what could be done to tackle a problem, someone else has already done it, and when I get stuck on a problem (either due to not understanding the maths or simply being rusty as I took some years out of study before embarking upon my DPhil) others manage to take over and suggest other ideas, so I end up feeling lost. No other student or staff has expressed any concerns to me about my group contributions, but this is either because (a) they are conflict-averse and don't want to risk upsetting me, (b) they are aware of my slow contributions but understand my situation of having had a gap between my studies, or (c) there are genuinely no issues to speak of (but I don't feel is the case).
Even though I manage to raise valid points in groups discussions, which others may agree with, I am personally unhappy with my level of contribution to my small group projects and it is most oftem the other group members who make significant strides in actually providing meaningful results. I am not lazy or anything, but it's just that I consider myself to be very slow and rusty (and sometimes incapable) compared to my peers, and near the end I become despirited and lose track of what is going on. I feel like the other group members are much more "switched on" in knowing what to do at a certain stage (e.g. deriving a PDE from a recurrence relation and then applying transform methods) and it could be that because they've come straight from an undergraduate degree that they are more recently well-practiced with their mathematics.
How can I remedy this situation and contribute more in group projects?

I think it is pretty hard to give any meaningful advice since it probably requires some observation or a very long description of what you actually do now. Keep trying, I suppose, though that isn't very helpful.

First up, don't devalue your current contributions. I can only judge you from your post and it's hard to sum up a year of experience in a few paragraphs. Similarly, it's hard to give objective advice when I think your post might be biassed by your own Imposter Syndrome, but I feel for you, so I will try.
From your post, here is what I see you are contributing:

Presentation skills. Don't devalue them just because you have them. People agonise over these.
Feedback for other team members. Peer review is a big part of science and you are the instant reviewer. I am grateful for the team member who has my back and makes sure I'm not talking nonsense.
You contribute to group discussions. In my experience, it's not difficult to find someone who doesn't.
Experience from outside of academia. Because a big confirmation echo chamber isn't always desirable.

You also seem to have knowledge of your own skills gap. This is good, because identifying a problem is half way to solving it. If you feel you're rusty on PDEs, find yourself some resources - your old text books if you still have them, or shiny new online courses (that you can skip half of because you remember it!). I don't know about PDEs in particular but some YouTube tutorials for maths have a solid grounding in applications (I really like 3Blue1Brown for showing not only the maths, but how it is useful). If you see and understand enough applications, you'll eventually start making the leap between problem and possible solution.
Your first goal should be to understand (mostly) everything that your group submits. This helps your knowledge but might also help the team's communications skills. You can't overtake if you can't keep up. But don't sweat the specialist field - you don't have to learn the fine details of something that is ultimately irrelevant to you.
Don't worry about making the leaps of logic faster than your team mates, do worry about ensuring the solutions they (you) propose are valid and well communicated. Be brave and keep asking questions.


text:
Should one stick to their expertise/experience area post PhD?
I am currently writing my Mechanical engineering PhD thesis. My research was based on modeling a 3D printing process. The work was interesting but I feel that there's not much rigoresness in the modeling aspect of the work. I tried to think differently from existing published works by other researchers, but still the inherent problems with the actual process makes it hard to develop an accurate model using current theories and modeling techniques.
Thus, I want to explore different topics post PhD. However, on discussing my future career with her, she advised that I should stick with my area of expertise/experience and should also pursue similar endeavours during post doctoral research. According to her, that would make you stand out as an expert in the modeling aspect of the field.
I don't know what should I do? Should I deviate from the PhD research area post graduation or should I listen to my advisor and stick to my 'less rigorous' area of expertise? I would eventually like to stay in academia.

One of the advantages of academia is that, in general, you get to follow your nose into whatever research corner you want to explore. You can change incrementally over time or you can make big jumps. Of course, you probably want to stay employed, so it is requires a bit of finesse and maybe negotiation.
But the big lesson is that your early work doesn't constrain your mind from think other thoughts and your past doesn't constrain your future if you are willing to work for it. But the same thing is true for people outside academia where such change is possible, though possibly harder. Resource constraint, for example.
Do what you love if you are able.
That, actually, is what keeps a lot of people (most?) in academia even though the pay may be less than what they could earn elsewhere.

I passed the PhD, but I was in the same situation as you as an experimental physicist at the beginning of the post-doc phase. During your PhD you have to focus on your specialized niche-topic to graduate successfully and in time, the post-doc phase (especially if you want to stay in academia/get tenure) requests a different mindset and seeking and taking also calculable research risks by broadening the type of research questions you want to tackle and interdisciplinary approaches you want to undertake. Still, your PhD work might be so prospective that you can work the next decade on this topic, but if your feeling says, and you should now have more expertise and overview on this topic than your advisor, that there are no fruits anymore on the tree, I think you have to look for other scientific challenges in and around your field of expertise.
In my post-doc phase I'm also actively looking for questions and applications where I can apply my acquired experience by reading journals and attending conferences I didn't even know of during my PhD. I also visited other research groups at my university to know available instruments and took a look at their recent papers for possible collaborations.
My point is, you have to go deeper AND more interdisciplinary with your scientific approaches and questions. But a successful strategy will depend strongly on what you did and your field. Many physicists became chemistry professors and won the chemistry nobel prize, not because they intentionally switched over to this field or took chemistry courses, it just happend naturally that their experimental expertise paid out very successfully in solving theoretical/eperimental/application questions in the field of chemistry. I see also many professors with a PhD in physics in microelectronics or sensor systems departments. But you will not find many PhD chemists/engineers being physics professors. I just tell you this to prove to you that broadening your scope of interest is in my opinion crucial to stay in academia and be successfully in it. In my opinion your advisor is very wrong here. Physicists have a very broad education, but are often unable to solve any real-world problem in comparison to a engineer after bachelor/master degree, at least in a fast and in the best way of the state of the art. But, especially for interdisciplinary high impact research they are often much better educated and trained.
I don't think you can become professor of mechanical engineering by being solely an expert of 3D printing. Professors are hired for the next 3 decades. Maybe then we have molecular self-assembly ;-) Some scientists become professors with a very specialized but narrow expertise due to current trends in technology, but I'm sure it is by far the minority and getting there is like winning the academic lottery. Therefore, you have to look for prospective fields and questions linked to your expertise under any circumstances.


text:
Is there any anonymous website that authors can rate journal submission experience?
Yet again one of my papers is just stuck in limbo at a journal for over 6 months now. One referee has seemingly returned his review and the second referee is playing truant.
I knew this after a polite email to the administrative secretary 3 months after submission. She promised to send an email to nudge the late referee.
Now, after 6 months, I write to the editor in chief to get to know what is going on and he has not bothered to reply for over 2 weeks now.
When I review for this same journal, all of my reviews are returned in time. I setup a google calender reminder 2 weeks prior to my the deadline that I accept and then push everything aside for those 2 weeks to turn in a high quality report. I am going to politely decline any more invitations to review from this journal. The journal is prestigious but there are other less prestigious journals that offer faster review times. At some point in time, the prestige of the journal has to make way for faster dissemination of important results.
I also suspect that the journal is clubby. I have seen rotten articles written by folks in "elite" universities while I have had rejections from that journal even though I proved more theoretical results on a problem (I am an operations researcher) that was published in the same journal. I suspect the journal worries about the authors' zipcode. I published this article in a different journal eventually.
Is there any website where one can anonymously record such experiences for various journals? Once the website gains sufficient traffic, the editorial board of the journals would hopefully be forced to take notice and set right some of the rotten processes.
Frustrated_researcher.

Perhaps you should run a blog such as http://www.cs.sjsu.edu/faculty/stamp/securityJournals.html. Unfortunately, this is the case for all of us. Recently, we had a submission in a prestigious venue that after 80 days Editor-in-Chief sent a letter to inform us that the manuscript is not in the scope of the journal!!! I believe there are always some bias in reviewing and accepting papers.

That is a good site, but SciRev posted by the answerer below is perfect. Hopefully, such horror stories such as yours and mine can be made available for public so that we don't suffer in silence! Good luck in your work.

Of course, I see no happy end for that :(

Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2677/how-to-let-a-journal-know-that-its-submission-process-is-very-painful

Does this answer your question? Is there a place to review journals or conferences?

SciRev comes to mind – is this the sort of thing you're looking for?

Thank you. That is just what I was looking for!

do you know if that website allows anonymous reviews? It seems that one has to register with his real university ID. That would destroy the purpose. Just like peer review is blind, so should authors' ratings of journals.

@Tryer I haven't registered on the site so I'm not sure, but it looks like the reviews are at least displayed anonymous (so I suppose it would be difficult for the casual reader to figure out who wrote the review). I don't know what SciRev's privacy policy is beyond that – maybe worth emailing the team?


text:
In a 5 years PhD, is it possible to get a postdoc position with one publication? I can really use some advice
I am a 5th year Mechanical engineering PhD.
I just have 1 published paper and 3 others are pending with my advisor
I was wondering if I can get some advice on what should my approach towards postdoc applications without publications be like? Almost all of the positions requires sending a reference work to prove for competence.

Yes, I am mostly interested in how to get a postdoc with my current published record. Industry is definitely a fallback, but highlighting productivity is a crucial aspect of securing a industry position too. Lack of work experience adds to my predicament. I have edited the topic and content to be less dramatic.

@Nat I realize that my future is not as gloomy as I am making it sound, but I am really worried and disappointed with my PhD outcome. I will have to struggle quite a bit longer than initially planned to some stable future.

You may want to specify the country and field to the extent you feel comfortable, as the length of and assumptions about productivity during PhD studies vary a lot.

I think that any position as a post doc won't be awarded based simply on who has the highest publication count. There is more to it than that. Most positions expect you to fit into a given department or lab in some way and there can be a lot of expectations on that beyond research record. While publications may be important, and more so in some situations, it is unlikely to be the entire story very often.
Read whatever the offering institution says about the kind of skills and person who is desired and match your own skill set to that as best you can. It may be something as simple as expertise in a field, but there may be an expectation of participation in the educational process, especially of grad students. How well do you fit the expectations, however they are. Some special experience may be needed that you may have or not.
Of course, you should list your work in progress as such without overstating it. If the papers are written, then you have titles for the work and abstracts. Try to get something submitted so that the process toward publication is started, at least. Get good letters of recommendation, preferably tailored to your suitability for the specific positions you seek.

[Misunderstood the question in the first version, edited]

I just have 1 published paper and 3 others are pending with my advisor

I agree with Buffy's answer, but it would be useful to clear the backlog of publications with your advisor anyway. With 3 publications waiting, I assume that this has been going on for months, so talk to them to identify the issue:

if they think the papers are not good enough for submission, ask them for general guidelines about how to improve them.
if they simply don't have time, ask them for a quick proofreading and if they are satisfied enough the paper can be submitted as is. In the worst case it gets rejected and you can improve based on the reviews, this is still better than leaving papers waiting in a drawer.

When you apply for positions you should mention your pending publications, either as "submitted" (under review) or "accepted, to be published in...". The community is well aware that the publication process can take time and that PhD students tend to produce more publications towards the end of the PhD. If possible, you can also give a link to a preprint version of your paper.

@Anyon right, I can see that now. I'll update my answer


text:
Accepting a scholarship for masters just to get the money and fund a future masters
I have been offered a scholarship for a masters in theoretical physics at my home university, the scholarship covers the fees along with a decent stipend but I would rather pursue a masters in maths at a different university.
I feel alot of pressure to take the money for finical reasons but ultimately its not what I want to do. Part of me is considering accepting the offer and using it to save for a masters in maths. I feel I will be at a disadvantage trying to do a PhD in mathematics if I take this scholarship since I will have effectively spent 2 years of my prime going doing the wrong route.
If do a masters in maths I will likely have to take out a loan of about 8000-10,000. I'm afraid this will be too much to pay of with a PhD stipend and result in me having to work for a year or two again delaying my career.
Would the time spent doing a masters in theoretical physics put me at a disadvantage when applying for math phd's?
Do typical PhD stipends have enough room to pay off loans?

is your bachelor's also in physics? Because then switching to math could be viewed as making one change of direction instead of two.

First, my advice is to never think of a graduate school stipend as a way to earn a living (or to save for future goals). Stipends are design to barely cover minimum costs of living, and often fall short of that goal.
Second, I'm not sure whether a Master's degree in theoretical physics will help or hurt an application to a maths Ph.D. It seems that it could be related, depending on the subfield of maths that interests you.
Third, in many fields you can apply to Ph.D. programs directly without a completed M.S. degree first. Maybe that is also possible in your case.

I wasn't aware that any field required a MS before you can apply to the PhD program. Some fields/schools do require a Master's as part of the PhD training if you don't have a Master's already, but they combine them in a "MS/PhD" track.

@A Simple Algorithm in Europe, almost all PhD programs are research only (no classes), and you are required to have a master's first.


text:
Nominating my Supervisor as a Speaker in a Workshop Conference
I am interested in nominating my female supervisor to be a speaker in a workshop for women in an international conference, she is quite intelligent, helpful to other female students and that triggered why I cannot nominate her.
Currently, I am a Ph.D. student and I am one of the organizers of the workshops. I have nominated other speakers and writing an invitation email on behalf of our organizers team to the potential speakers.
I am quite afraid as I am still new in my position and maybe she could think that I am licking shoes or being a hypocrite person. I am also thinking that she could consider likely humiliating as her student nominating her.
I have never been in such position like that, but I do think she deserves, but I am afraid that this could be counterproductive in our relationship.
The question is: Is it impolite to nominate my female supervisor to be a speaker in a workshop for women?

Are you wanting to nominate your supervisor or not nominate your supervisor - this is unclear from what you have written.

@SolarMike, I am interested to have her, but I am afraid to nominate her because of my position as a PhD student.

@FedericoPoloni, thanks I was about to add the missing details, I edited my question. BTW, I am responsible for sending invitation email on behalf of organizer, but in my case I dont know whether the idea itself could be accepted by a supervisor.

I don't understand how "female" is an element here. "Should I nominate my supervisor for X?"

Because the workshop is centered about the female contribution in science

I am sorry, I think I have to edit it, but I didnot mean any thing behind mentioning the gender.

Why don't you simply ask her about her willingness to be a speaker? If you explain it properly to her, I think she might see it as a nice gesture (especially if she is as helpful and intelligent as you describe). However, I personally wouldn't nominate her as a speaker without her approval, since that gives off a vibe of you deciding over her head, which you should avoid.

Of course, I wouldn't nominate her without her approval, but I feel afraid to ask her willingness to be a speaker. It is the first time in my career, it don't whether it is okay for a new Ph.D. student to ask her supervisor.

I think it's perfectly fine for you to ask your supervisor. Why wouldn't you seek out for the best speakers at your workshop? If that happens to be your supervisor, it shows that you got yourself a healthy work environment for your PhD. As long as you reason genuinely with her and don't appear as if you just wanted to get imaginary bonus-points, it should be fine.

Of course, I am not kind of person who licking shoes, I cannot do that. When I said that because genuinely I feel she deserve to be a speaker, BTW I have nominated other excellent female speakers and they will appear in the workshop. I was afraid because of my situation as her student.

As long as the nomination is manifestly justifiable in academic terms, I do not think it would be "counterproductive". To take an analogy, I often cite work by my supervisor (as well as work by other authors whom I do not know) in my papers without consulting him first.
If the nomination were justifiable yet counterintuitive, be prepared to explain your rationale to the nominee and to the rest of the committee, since it may come across as awkward if the nomination would be a "wildcard" (e.g.: speaker not a specialist in the discipline under discussion).


text:
Future prospects at the moment seem bleak after PhD. What steps can I take now to make best use of the next 1 year?
Suppose, I want to add machine learning proficiency to my current skillsets. What should my strategy be like? I already have done two machine learning courses on Coursera, but without doing actual projects, I have nothing to show to my future employers. That should be one of my targets during my next 1 year.
What other things I should do? Basically, I  have now come to my senses about the reality of the world and I have realized that I could have prepared well for it. But I don't want to live in regret and be in same position after a year too.
I understand that the question is vague. But specifically, I want advice of improving my profile for (1) an academia future  (2) A fallback option of industry.

I do not see how you can get good advice from people who do not know your record in detail.  Ask faculty who know you well.

If you want to stay in academia, you should keep working on your research portfolio. Ideally, you should do that as part of a full-time occupation, such as being a postdoc in an university or a scientist in a research lab.
Given that you have already studied the basics of machine learning, I believe that using machine learning in your research projects would be a good way to acquire further practice, since you will be driven by a research question and will end up getting hands-ons experience with ML techniques as you try to tackle something you care about.
That said, you should keep in mind that carving a niche is very important to succeed in academia. Hence, as you consider new topics to master, you need to think about how they would fit with what you have done up to this point and what kind of academic position would that lead to.

Even if your Ph.D. is less than stellar, you can still have a career in academia.  In the US there are many lesser universities, where the emphasis is on teaching rather than research.  This can still be an intellectually rewarding career for many.

It depends on the field, but the competition for jobs in teaching-oriented colleges and universities is usually also quite stiff, and people who were average as PhD students probably aren't competitive for these jobs either.


text:
I am taking a Bachelors in Information Technology, but I have a massive fear of public speaking
So I am attending a polytechnic(Tech school), getting a Bachelor's degree in Information Technology, I am wondering if I am expected to do presentations/speeches and if so, am I able to somehow not do them but still earn my degree.
I am diagnosed with General Anxiety Disorder(On my medical records it says I have Extreme Anxiety) so in my bias opinion this is beyond the " Fear " aspect and is mentally scarring. While attending middle school/High School I failed and outright skipped 99% of the presentations I had to do so I sort of digged myself a grave in terms of experience and preparing for this.
Side note, I remember in middle school I told my teacher about my distress towards having to do a history presentation, and although she made me do it(And I failed), she let me practice infront of her and another student instead of the whole class, which helped a little.

Does your school have accommodations for people with disabilities? Seems like with your diagnosis it might be worth checking out.

When you think about it, public speaking is identical to private speaking except there happens to be a bunch of people somewhere nearby looking at you. Seems like it should be solvable with the right therapeutic technique.

https://www.mostlymaths.net/2011/05/book-review-even-geek-can-speak-low.html?m=1

I don't know anything about your specific condition, but for some things that seem similar there is a possible solution.
It may not be possible to overcome the actual fear of speaking, but it may be possible, with practice, to overcome the appearance of fear, so that you can actually be effective in spite of it.
Unfortunately most careers, even those that are quite technical, require some interactions with people that may be very stressful. Autism is a different condition in which people don't pick up the cues that others do, making them awkward in public situations. Fear isn't the issue for them, but the solution is similar - or can be.
The trick is to learn to "play a role" when you are forced to speak in public so that it is your "character" standing in front of those people, not you. You deliver the lines as if you are Romeo on the stage, simply separating yourself from your role. In fact, one way to learn to do this is to join a local theatre group and take a role in a locally produced play.
But one iteration isn't going to make much difference. Your experience with the prof who let you give a more private presentation is a start, but from there it is possible to branch out to put yourself in other situations so that they become more familiar and you learn to quickly turn on your "speaking role" that you hide behind.
Not easy, but others have done it. Most people can do hard things if they want it badly enough and find a path to the goal, even if it is difficult.
It is even possible that with enough practice, in safe environments especially, you can learn to overcome the actual fear.
It would be wise, of course, to check this advice with your advisor/physician.

The general answer is that, in most degree programs, you are likely to encounter the need to do a presentation at least a few times. Some of these may be expected, like when you do an undergraduate / honours thesis and are asked to present it at the end of the project duration, and sometimes it may come out of the blue. For instance, quite a few courses in our program have presentation elements, even if the courses themselves are not in any direct way related to presentation technique. In a nutshell, being able to give short presentations is often seen as a general tool that can come up in virtually any academic context, similar to writing academic essays.
If you are indeed unable to overcome your fear, you need to get in touch with whatever office handles special needs students in your university. They may require additional documentation, and the entire process may potentially be somewhat of an annoyance, but if your condition is medically diagnosed you typically have a right to an examination procedure that replaces all assessments that you cannot partake in with a suitable alternative. For instance, you may be asked to report on projects in a one-on-one session with the teacher rather than presenting project results in class, videotape your demonstration, or write a report rather than presenting.
However, of course, your life would be significantly easier if you could overcome this fear, because realistically it will remain a constant problem that will continue to haunt you for the rest of your professional career in many jobs - and unfortunately industry will oftentimes be less forgiving on your inability to use this basic tool.

“Industry will oftentimes be less forgiving” Not if they have a competent HR department. Laws like the ADA dictate otherwise. Of course, first you need to get the job, which would likely require a job interview...

Your college should have something called LAP which you are eligible for with your diagnosis. Usually this will allow for testing accommodations, extra time to complete tests ect. I will say this, I too have your diagnosis, and I too am not a fan of presentations however, if I want to complete my degree they are necessary. Getting more time to do something is not the same as getting out of. In your field, you will likely have to do presentations, so I would suggest finding a way to work through this rather than avoiding it. It really isn't as scaring as you think it may be in the long run, it will help prepare you for actual work experience. My brother in law has your degree, he in fact has to run meetings. Go to your colleges LAP, see what they can do. Good luck.

While studying for bachelors in Information communication technologies in UK I had to do project presentation once in my first year. And presentation for my dissertation in my third year. That was it. Both times it sounded lore scary that it actually was. I used to hate public speaking but something changed and I don't mind it any more. I doubt you will need to do many of them.
Of you feel that public speaking is letting your grades down is there no department you could speak to about this to make some exceptions for you? Especially if you have doctors note saying you been diagnosed with particular illness. There should be an possibility for you to make suitable changes in order for you to achieve best you can.


text:
What do I do when my TA workload is more than expected?
Last year I was offered full funding for my PhD program to TA two courses a semester for the duration of my program (education psychology). Key words, Teaching Assistant. I expected this to mean I would be working with a professor each semester and teaching a recitation section twice a week (one for each course). This was all fine and great in the fall.
Then this semester, I was told I would be instructor of record for two courses (aka, I would be teaching these two courses entirely on my own and responsible for everything).
I feel extremely overwhelmed by this workload. My research has been suffering as I've had no time to work on anything outside of TAing and coursework. Next fall I was also told I would be instructor of record for two courses again (these two courses I have never taught).
I e-mailed the person in charge and asked if it would be possible to actually TA a course as the workload was a lot to manage and was hit with

As TAs progress we expect them to take on full classes

From speaking with other TAs in the department, this is very common at the school. I was not aware off this before taking the TAship, as at the time I thought TA meant teaching assistant and not being expected to take on a whole class. Very few are only TAing (most of my colleagues are responsible for their own classes), so from my perspective it feels like an exploitation because they don't have enough professors.
Is this a common practice? Nowhere in my offer letter does it say instructor of record. It distinctly says TA. Any advice from anyone in a similar position?

It will help if you add country/region and general subject area. In areas I'm familiar with being the instructor of record as a student is extremely rare, and when it happens it's once or twice and requested by the student to get more in depth teaching experience. This seems... Very extreme to me.

I am in the united states at a public institution in the northeast. The subject area is education psychology. From speaking with other TAs in the department, this is very common at the school. Very few are only TAing (most of my colleagues are responsible for their own classes), so from my perspective it feels like an exploitation because they don't have enough professors.

@BrianH: It is quite common for graduate students to teach in, say, mathematics in the United States.  In most such departments I am familiar with, the majority of PhD students are instructors of record starting in their second year.  In general this is viewed by them as being better than a TA, though of course not everyone need agree with that.

Seconding what @Pete L. Clark said, being the instructor of record is fairly common in mathematics. However, lower level mathematics courses are often very formulastic to teach, and having this experience is often important for students in mathematics (because many will be primarily teaching after their degree), so the workload and the resume-building aspects of teaching will be different than is the case for many other fields.

What's your total in-class instructional hours and total prep + office hours per week? And what does your program say it should be? Most grad programs expect that instructional duties should total no more than about 20 hours per week, especially if you're still doing coursework.

How are courses assigned? The easiest option seems to be to get reassigned to courses you have taught before.

i added some info from the comments to the question, please consider and edit as necessary

It's hard to imagine anyone seriously defending calling an instructor of record a "teaching assistant". Whether the total workload is reasonable or not, it's pretty clear to me that the department is being dangerously misleading by conflating the two.

@Dawn it's completely random from my experience. We just get e-mailed "here are your placements". That's it.

In this case, I would put your energy toward getting reassigned the same classes as your previously TAed or Taught. You will find the workload much more manageable.

@PeteL.Clark The wide variance between fields in academia still surprises me! I could see how that could make sense in math, and I suppose education psychology as well (given the focus on, well, teaching and learning).

@aquirdturtle In my department, all of our funded PhD students get what are called "GTA" (graduate TA) positions, though they may be teaching, TAing or grading (sometimes even a combination thereof) in any given semester.  What I think is the problem here is a lack of clarity of what teaching duties were expected, rather than the TA title specifically.

Could it be that you are taking the teaching aspect too seriously? For instance, perhaps the other TAs are simply using powerpoints, while you are trying to give more interactive lessons that take more time to assemble. At the very list, I would ask for the teaching materials used by the previous person that taught the class

You should consult with your department, asking explicitly:

How do you want to proceed, I feel like these conditions are excessive and were not part of the deal as far as I know.

Come to the meeting with your signed contract / TA paperwork.
I assume, your department cares about quality of the education they provide. Don't let them pin this on you, you are a student first of all. If they employ you, they are responsible for your performance as a teacher.
Other answers didn't pause here:

I feel extremely overwhelmed by this workload and my depression has made this worse I've cancelled class at least 5 times this semester because I couldn't get out of bed

I suggest you immediately seek professional help. Your university must have services available for students (and be paid-for by university's health insurance), especially given recent attention to mental health crisis in academia. That is your responsibility to take care of yourself. You are also a real person, not just a robot TA, don't let mental health issues fester.

If the department hasn't already taken some action over "at least 5" classes cancelled for medical reasons, maybe your assumption is wrong. (I'm not talking about "taking action against the OP" of course, but taking some action to give the class the education it expected to get, which wasn't a series of cancelled lectures).

Not to defend your high teaching load, but yes, heavy teaching loads like these are fairly common for TA's in the US in my discipline (mathematics) and in other disciplines that teach lots of students in general education courses (freshmen composition, world civilization, introductory courses in science, etc.)
Keep in mind that Ph.D.'s working as full-time instructors in the US often teach 4 or even 5 sections of such courses per semester.  Thus teaching two sections of such a class at a time is roughly half of the workload of a full-time instructor.  This is work that you should be able to accomplish in 20 hours per week, but you may well have to compromise your standards and carefully manage your time and effort to get the work done in that time.

Keep in mind that Ph.D.'s working as full-time instructors in the US often teach 4 or even 5 sections of such courses per semester. Maybe it also depends on what field somebody is in. As far as I know, full-time instructors generally do not have any other responsibilities, such as research or extension. But if you do have those extra responsibilities, then you generally teach only a class or two, and that too generally with the help of a TA.

The fact that your offer letter says "teaching assistant" without defining it probably does not contractually exclude being assigned as instructor of record (although you could check with a lawyer to confirm this). It's likely that the university does have some written policy somewhere that does define "teaching assistant" to include "instructor of record." Even if they don't, using grad students as instructors is a common practice at US schools and is evidently a common practice within your program, so it would be hard to argue that you were misled by the offer letter. Is it exploitative? That's a different question.
Moral 1: Before accepting a funding offer, always ask for a detailed description of your duties, regardless of what the funding is called. Many "fellowships" come with teaching duties.
Moral 2: The best way to know exactly what you're signing up for is to go to a school where the grad students are unionized.

The load seems heavy to me also. But there may be reasons why you are "trusted" to handle it and not all are necessarily bad. I was in grad school half a century ago and one was trusted to teach a course as instructor of record only in the final years of study when you had proven yourself. But at the time, the expected time to finish a doctorate was much shorter. We treated such situations as an honor, not a burden. I think your situation is actually one of the reasons why the time to completion has extended in the interim.
Perhaps you are seen by the university/department as being especially able or already advanced. Perhaps the courses are seen to be especially easy. Or, on the other hand, perhaps you are just being exploited because the department has insufficient regular faculty to handle its obligations.
You may be stuck and just need to learn to cope if the department won't help you. Cancelling classes seems to be a no-win situation and might lead to your expulsion or withdrawing your funding. You need a way to avoid that.
Let me make a couple of suggestions about how to handle the teaching load.
Look for available materials that the department has used in these courses in the past. Another grad student or a prof might be able to provide you with working notes to ease your preparation.
Put more of the responsibility for student learning on the students themselves than on your own shoulders. At the end of the day the students learn themselves. You don't "learn them". Group work helps in some fields. Fewer, larger, projects that you monitor can help. A flipped classroom can be a big help.
Find a way to schedule your time better. Yes, easier said than done, of course. Your university may, however, have a counseling center that can provide advice. Most of the advice is time scheduling for students, but they may be able to offer some suggestions. In particular, find a way to take advantage of "lost moments" when you could be doing simple, but productive, things. Five minutes waiting for a bus can be productive if you carry your notes with you at all times, or always have an important book that you can browse.
One aspect that you probably aren't considering. If you set aside time for your different activities and stick to that schedule, you will find that sometimes (maybe often) you don't complete what you thought you would at the end of the scheduled time. Don't extend the session, however, but go on to the next scheduled activity. Quitting before completion will be at least partially compensated by the way the mind works. It is likely that giving topic A a rest while you go on to B won't result in a loss for A, as your subconscious is still at work and is capable of filling in a lot of things without your conscious effort.

I expected this to mean I would be working with a professor each
  semester and teaching a recitation section twice a week (one for each
  course).

Generally, yes, unless specified otherwise. Usually it also included quiz/exam grading, holding office hours, organizing field trips etc.

My research has been suffering as I've had no time to work on anything
  outside of TAing and coursework.

This is a red flag. You won't be able to use your TA workload as an excuse for your down performance in your research project. Therefore, I suggest you talk to your project supervisor as well as your TA supervisor about this situation. I was once in a similar situation, but because I talked to both of my supervisors, we were able to come to a solution that was mutually beneficial.

"as TAs progress we expect them to take on full classes". Is this a
  common practice?

In my experience, no. I have been a TA at two different US universities, and in both I assisted the professor with aforementioned duties. Sometimes, I had to deliver lectures when professor had a meeting or so. But taking on a full course seems like too much for a PhD student. Especially, if it just say TA on the record.
However, that being said, if you want to stay in academia, this is in reality a blessing in disguise. Time management is a great skill to be successful in academia. But I would still talk to the person in-charge of the courses about the workload and explain how it is impacting your research.


text:
PhD Mathematics, University of Hagen
I am 30 and work for an IT company in Germany as a software developer.
I did B.Sc. in Mathematics (pure) and M.Sc. in Computer Science. Since then I've occasionally spent time with solving math problems or learning new topics.
I've long been dreaming of doing a PhD in Mathematics and I'm especially interested in the Analysis.
If I had financial freedom I would've started a full-time PhD right now but it's not possible, since I'm financially responsible for my own family and for my parents.
At my current job I have a 6-hour schedule, which means that I'd have about 3 hours in the morning and about 2-3 hours in the evening to work on my dissertation. On the weekends I'd be able to give another 10 hours combined. So this makes about ~35 hours per week that I can carve out.
In Germany there is a public (and the largest) University of Hagen, which offers onsite and remote education. It specifically focuses on people, who might not have the possibility to be onsite. It is about 2h of driving from me, so I'd be able to go there from time to time.
Has anyone had experience with that University and what you think of the feasibility of my plan? I understand that it'd be impossible to finish the studies in a regular time of 3 years. I'm talking more of 5-6 years of work.
Almost forgot to mention. I'm also willing to spend about 3 hours / day while in vacation or on holidays with no exceptions.
Another thing that I thought of is going with the dissertation while saving some money in that time and then taking a leave of absence at work for about 1 year while surviving on that money (maybe even combining it with a scholarship if that is possible).
So if it goes well, I'd definitely accelerate in the end by switching to full-time for 1 year and finalizing the work.

Talk to them, the advisors will have met people with all options / constraints...
Or go and see them...


text:
What's the purpose of writing one's academic biography in the third person?
I see some academics – both professors and grad students – write their biography on their university webpages in the third person, and it sounds really weird.
What's the purpose of writing about oneself, e.g. research accomplishments, research interests, in the third person?  Is it considered more professional to do so?
It reads very arrogant and self-indulgent, so I wonder if I'm just missing something.

The only time I knew someone had read my bio was when I was giving talks and they read it as an intro.  (sometimes leaving it intact, sometimes editing out the more random things I left in there to see if anyone at work would bother reading it)

Maybe this is a personal quirk, but sometimes you hand them off to random administrators and they get edited. I don't want people editing things written in the first person without sending them back. Third person seems a bit less off to me.

Would second person be a compromise?

When I wrote a biography of myself, it was because someone in administration asked me to so they could put it into a prospectus, where there would be lots of biographies in a row all in the same editorial voice.
It was specifically required to be in the third person for that reason: all the profiles are presented as though they have been written by the omniscient author of the document. It wasn't written that way because I wanted it to be, but for an actual purpose.
Once written, that biography went on file and was put everywhere that needed one. That includes the university website, future grant applications, other advertising material, commendations for students, reports, papers, and sundry other places. Sometimes I copy it there, and sometimes it happens without my even being involved (sometimes without any actual person being involved!).
In particular, it's useful to put it up front on a public website so that collaborators can easily just copy accurate pre-written text in when they need to provide a profile of me for one of their own purposes.

There are places that I've written a first-person biography, which is generally a lot shorter. Those are places that are 1) in my voice, and 2) where it was worth the fuss of rewriting something tailored to the situation. In general, and particularly for things published by the university, my "official" biography just goes back in again, because it's there, it's been edited, and it's comprehensive enough.

Ahem. "When Michael Homer wrote a biography of himself ..."

@TasosPapastylianou: I was never able to put this feeling into words, why so many (auto) biographies sounded unnatural. Thanks a bunch. +1

The other common use for bios, closely related to this, is when you're being introduced for a talk - the introducer often looks online for a summary and it's nice to have something accurate ready for them

@iayork Sure but the introducer isn't going to have any difficulty translating from "I am an expert in higher-dimensional widget theory" to "S/he is an expert in higher-dimensional widget theory."

I wrote biographies of academics for the same purpose and also in the 3rd person.  OP should not assume that the academics are writing about themselves.  Some of the academics were disinterested in my bio - so OP should not even assume the academics have reviewed the bio.

@DavidRicherby exactly my thoughts, too ...

@emory I think you mean "uninterested" (i.e., bored). "Disinterested" means unbiased, and nobody is disinterested in a biography of themself.

@DavidRicherby I think they thought it was a make work project for a peon and until the bio gets injected into a document they care about - they are correct.

accepting this answer.  your photo makes me think of Lloyd Christmas ... what a great movie that was ...

@DavidRicherby There are occasional difficulties, as possibly indicated in your own comment... I once attended a talk where the introducer said "he has done this, he published that, he comes from wherever blah blah blah..." - and then it turned out that the speaker was female.  (She had a slightly unusual given name, not immediately recognisable as female.)  Admittedly, very remiss of the introducer not to even have bothered checking.

I’d always considered it a means to achieve uniformity throughout the bios when one person is writing them. That is, if you have to write a short biography for each author of a paper, it makes more sense to do it in the third person.
Also, a lot of academic writing styles discourage the use of the first person (or used to). It’s more likely that the web page third person bios are a copy-paste, or simply written in a style to which the author is accustomed, rather than an attempt at a stealth brag.
They’re biographies, not autobiographies.

Hahah. I liked stealthbrag; nice play on "humblebrag"!

That is why biographies should be written by somebody else, and not by the person impersonating somebody (anonymous) else.

@virolino, in an ideal world, yes. And every biography would be specifically targeted to the platform where it is presented. But, the easiest way to source info for the bio you have to write and to avoid offending the subject (by inadvertently missing their greatest accomplishment) is to ask them to write it. Never attribute to malice what can easily be explained by (ahem) "efficiency".

My This author's own opinion is that occasionally this is due to how ingrained 'academicspeak' is in academia. 3rd person / 1st person plural is the norm when writing journal papers.
In this sense, the reason may well be in fact the opposite to what you state: people avoid writing in the first person, in order not to come across as self-serving and arrogant and claiming personal recognition, but rather appear impartial and recounting events dispationately from a third-person perspective.
This, along with 'bio reuse' from contexts which specifically required the use of third person narrative, may be a reason why you might see such bios even in contexts where third person narrative would seem less relevant.

Biographies in theater and concert programs are typically also in the third person, yet do not necessarily appear in an academic context or one in which "academicspeak" would be expected.  @WGroleau it's not possible to change one's vote on a post more than five minutes after casting the vote unless the post has been edited in the meanwhile.

In addition to the key "written for use by others" reason put forth by @MichaelHomer, another reason that many academics have a 3rd person biography is that many organize their online present not as "Prof. X" but rather as "Prof. X's group/lab, including Prof. X, students, postdocs, and alumni".
If the group is the subject, rather than the person, then there is no "I" to narrate, and it's appropriate for all to be listed in 3rd person.

To somewhat build up on what Jake Beal said, consider the following two texts:

Cunningham Group
I am Iocasta Cunningham and I did my PhD in Astrochelionology on “Great A’Tuin is a black body” …
    I am interested in all sorts of interesting topics from the vast field of theoretical lepidopterology, ranging from the quantum butterfly effect to flapping dynamics.
    My group consists of:

Aaron A. Aaronson wrote his master’s thesis on “Analogue search-engine optimisation – a shameless self-study” and is now a PhD student investigating trunk manifolds.
…

Group for Theoretical Lepidopterology
We investigate all sorts of interesting topics from the vast field of theoretical lepidopterology, ranging from the quantum butterfly effect to flapping dynamics.
    The group consists of:

Aaron A. Aaronson wrote his master’s thesis on “Analogue search-engine optimisation – a shameless self-study” and is now a PhD student investigating trunk manifolds.
Prof. Iocasta Cunningham is the group’s leader. She did her PhD in Astrochelionology on “Great A’Tuin is a  black body” …
…

Both texts convey the same information, but (for whatever it is worth) the first one leans more on the arrogant side.
Now, webpages may have a more complex structure, but the general style is translatable and you can find analogues of both texts out there:

Professors who name their group after them and whose webpage puts the primary focus on them – which is not completely unjustified since the professor is not only the boss but usually the only constant.
Professors who focus on presenting their group, whose leader they happen to be.
In this light, it makes complete sense for them to use the third person – for a reason that is quite the opposite of how you are perceiving it.

Note that I do not want to say that one of the variants is generally better or worse here. (Perceived) arrogance or modesty are only one reason to choose between these styles.