text:
What would be the possible consequence of concealing an incomplete degree?
I attended a 2y MSc mixed mode (Coursework+Thesis) program which is incomplete as of today. I have completed two semesters and still 2 more semesters to go.
I have dropped 3rd semester and never attended the 4th one. Coz,

I ran out of money.
I didn't like the program as it contained too much coursework. A whole load of coursework unrelated to my area of research interest was hindering my effort towards getting into research. Suppose, I am interested in Machine Learning. But, I have to study Economics and so on.

Now, I found that I, actually, can apply to Ph.D. programs without completing an MSc program (there are a lot of universities which accept Ph.D. students without MSc). I have good GRE score, so the chance of getting into a Ph.D. program is very high. But, I am worried that my previous incomplete MSc program will discredit my CV and statement of purpose as the dropped semester would be considered as failed courses.
Would it be a crime to not to disclose the incomplete MSc program? What would be the possible consequence of concealing an incomplete degree?

I wrote about this here.
Short answer: yes, it is considered dishonest, and the possible consequences are severe.  You could be dismissed from your new program, or, if it's discovered after you finish, have your degree revoked.  The likelihood of this actually happening is hard to evaluate, but those sorts of sanctions will certainly be "on the books" and available if the school decides to enforce them.
You'll be much better off if you submit the transcript and explain in your application why you decided to drop.

It's dishonest, but not a "crime" unless you're receiving funds from the department or a federal grant.

@aeismail, i will be receiving funds.

@why: You could be sued by the university to recover any funds paid to you as a result of the deceit.


text:
Not asking for Letter of Recommendation from Masters thesis supervisor
Recently I finished my Masters. My relationship with my thesis supervisor is very bad. He is a professor.  I am very disappointed with his mentoring. He is very lazy and always kept himself busy with work other than research. I expressed my dissatisfaction to him directly. That made him furious at me. I have planned to pursue my Masters degree at a university in North America. Three reference letters are required. I don't want my thesis supervisor as a referee. Other faculty members in our department have agreed to refer me. But will it affect my admissions chances negatively if I don't submit a reference letter from my thesis supervisor?

It will look a bit weird, yes. And the other faculty members in your department probably do not know you as well as your thesis supervisor, so their letters of recommendation will not be very specific. But I've never seen this be reason for an immediate rejection, which means you can make up for it in the rest of your application.
Probably an unnecessary tip, but: don't express your dissatisfaction with your supervisor in your applications.

I found few teachers 3 years in my undergraduate and graduate level. They know me very well. Those teachers are good at research and their profile are also good. Will their good profile compensate?

Unluckily as my supervisor didn't allocate me time for consulting (he only gave me a topic), he knows my strength and weakness less than my other teachers.

I have wasted a lot of time working with this supervisor. I don't want to waste any more time to mend the relationship with this bad supervisor.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Collaboration on a suggested project - problem with a colleague
I would like to ask you for an opinion on how to act in the following scenario.
A year ago, some colleague PhD of me has suggested an open problem to me. This problem was already published in his paper, which is on arXiv.
He suggested that problem to me and invited me to collaborate on it.
However, he is not very hard-working and I personally suspect that he is just waiting for me to prove it.
He is working in that way quite often.
I, somewhat blindly, agreed to work on it. However, I do not like the way he
“collaborates” and I would like to work on that problem on my own since he is not helping at all and only waits till the problem is solved so he can write it as a result to his grant.
We are very far from being published. Actually, not much work was done yet. I want to work and solve this problem on my own.
How should I proceed?

Simply ignore him (he didn’t speak about problem for months) and publish the results?
Tell him about my opinion, quit, and publish the results?
Proceed and publish the results with him as a co-author.
Do something else.

Are you at a similar point in your careers? (It sounds like he may be senior and consider his matching you up with the problem part of his contribution to the project.) Is there anyone (mutual friend, coworker, etc.) who could credibly mediate this?

"We agreed year ago .... Actually, not much work was done yet. I want to work and solve this problem on my own" Just curious: and what makes you think that the separation from the other guy will enable you to miraculously succeed after you've been failing for one year (or, perhaps, you also just sat and waited until the other guy would come up with a bright idea of how to do it? Are you sure he has no reason to reciprocate your attitude towards him?).

@cactus_pardner We are both PhD students.

I will come at from the other direction. I will assume that your summary is correct, and that this person truly did nothing other than point you to a question that had already been posed in published work. In this case, you are under no obligation to work with him. You must be careful to cite his work appropriately, and probably acknowledge him in the acknowledgment section as having suggested this line of research, but I don't think he has a legitimate case for co-authorship.
That said, he could still create a messy, public confrontation. So, I would send a note like this:

John,
Some time ago, we discussed collaborating on an effort to prove [blah] as an extension of your work in [blah]. So far I don't think either of us has made much progress, so I wanted to reach out with you about resurrecting this work.
At this point, I think it would be best if I tackled this on my own. If successful, I will write up a paper that cites your paper, and will acknowledge you in the acknowledgments. What do you think?*
-Name

Depending on whether you are willing to consider working with this guy, you could also replace the last sentence with:

If you would prefer to collaborate on this paper as a co-author, we can discuss, but I am hoping to publish in the next ~6 months, so we should meet ASAP to discuss what you will contribute and when it will be ready.

Then there are a few possible outcomes:

If he ignores you, or says "good", then all is okay.
If he claims to be interested in collaborating with you, you will have to discuss this with him.

You may need to be fairly aggressive in telling him that you don't think collaborating will be feasible, but better to have this argument now and in private, rather than after publishing without him.
If you are willing to give him a chance, you can try to define his contributions and the deadlines now, and let him know that if doesn't have satisfactory material by the deadline, you will publish your results without him. If he is serious about working with you, then this is reasonable; if he is lazy as you say, he may withdraw his objections.

If you cannot come to terms, or if he reacts very poorly, then you can decide whether you want to risk a nasty, public fight over authorship, or whether you want to drop the line of research.

Interesting ideas but wouldn't a phone call be a better medium to start a sensitive negotiation?

Depending on the personalities involved, quite possibly; personally, I would prefer in-person, then e-mail, then phone. In any case, I would suggest following-up by e-mail so as to have a record of the agreement in case of a dispute later.

I agree about email follow-up; if the two people collaborate remotely, I'm thinking in person might be difficult.  What bothers you about the phone, by the way?

Agree. RE the phone -- to me it seems like the worst of both worlds -- I don't get to revise my thoughts or have a transcript as I would in an e-mail, but it's harder to build a relationship or read body language as I would in person. But I often resort to it when the other person isn't good with e-mail...which is a decent fraction of the time in academia and government.

The collaboration so far has apparently steered you to an open problem that you're interested in solving and have an idea of how to solve. You and your colleague have discussed the problem, and part of where you are is due to him.
Make note of how much you and he have each done to this point, and what interactions you've had. By the broadest definition, this is potentially joint work. Do not invest further effort into it until you talk to him about authorship and/or dissolving the partnership.
If he wants this to count toward his grant, then perhaps there's a creative way he can get credit for the purpose of the grant without being a coauthor. Or can you give a joint presentation about the problem and what you've found so far--something that gives him credit for work to date--before you take over as a solo project? Because you are both doctoral students, your supervisor(s) may have wisdom they could share, or they could help break apart the problem into two chunks, or find some other way to mediate.
If you cannot find a way to continue the collaboration on terms you both agree to, then the best course of action, though hard, is to find a new problem for yourself. This reduces the damage that may happen to your reputation.
I am skeptical that he has malevolent motives, but if he does tend to try to take credit for others' work, then he probably knows how to fight over authorship, meaning that you do not want to appear at all to be taking his work. Further, if he doesn't intend to actually do any of the work, you have the most leverage and the least to lose before you do any further work, so this is the right time to try to figure out an amicable solution.

You may like to introspect on how much you need this problem. It is not known from the question (presently) at what stage of career you are in, as previously mentioned by @cactus_pardner. If you are a busy mid- to senior- academic, this may not even be worth the time to think about. If you are in the early stages, you may be looking for problems to solve and advance your research, and may be in even if waters are a bit muddy.
Either way, as not too much work has been done so far, you are not in a very tricky spot right now. If you want to tackle it alone, do consider if you have the resources necessary for it (not just skills, even financial - as you mentioned his grant). Also keep in mind that he may bear you some ill-will for 'taking' his idea. While no science belongs to anyone, he may feel entitled since it was his paper that highlighted the problem, and more importantly, he pointed you in that direction. So consider if you (a) have a good chance at solving it, and, (b) are alright with a potentially sub-optimal relationship.
I am leaning towards (3), in the hope that if he sees there is good potential in your work together, and you bring in some interpersonal skills, he may contribute more productively. If he absolutely doesn't,  maybe because he doesn't have the time, then you can publish by yourself (after telling him about it, of course).

It seems he wants to take your findings as his own. There are numerous laws against it. Consulting a lawyer might be helpful.
Scientists record everything, It's easy to record data about your findings to prove it was you who actually completed them.
Plagiarism is considered one of the worst in the scientific community.
Here's a good article from Berkley:
If you get caught, they banish you.
http://w.astro.berkeley.edu/~kalas/ethics/documents/redan08.pdf

I don't think a lawyer is a good solution here - the collegue apparently is not a thief, but the "lazy guy in teamwork". So before escalating (=hiring a lawyer), one could simply part ways with that person.

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

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


text:
Is it suitable for an MS student to ask teaching faculty for a recommendation letter for PhD applications?
During my masters degree, I was a teaching assistant for undergraduate course 'X' two times. The professors in charge of the course are titled 'Senior Lecturer' - they are not research faculty.
How would my PhD application look if I had a recommendation letter from one of them?
Bear in mind:

I have worked extensively with them: meetings, created lecture content, handled student issues, etc.
I have two other LoR's from research faculty.
The other options I have (for my third LoR) are: Undergraduate faculty (from a different country) or graduate faculty who's courses I took, but did not interact very significantly.

Thanks!

Was the undergraduate course X basic or very specialized? Does something about teaching this course say something about your research potential (e. g. you had to research a lot with them because the subject is very new)?

Is this person a PhD holder?

@user90948 - It was a course that involves specialized software used to model chemical processing plants/ oil refineries. Honestly, I don't think it says that much about my research potential. I and the undergrads often sat together figuring out issues in the software and discussing engineering/ thermodynamics.

@Dawn, yes. From a top school (if that matters).

The fact that this person has completed a PhD from a top program means that he/she can speak with authority in your letter because he/she knows what it takes to succeed as a student and researcher in that environment. So I agree with the posted answer that this is a good choice.

(I'm assuming that the application form says you need three letters, but does not specify more).
As you already have two letters, I think a third one from teaching faculty is completely okay. Most PhD programms do not expect you to have collaborated with three different researchers before admission.
Make sure they mention your work ethic in their letter (that is, if your work ethic is good), about special knowledge you have because of teaching this course (if any) etc.
If they can say those things, this is more significant as a letter from faculty you didn't interact with.
However, if you also did serious research with the undergraduate faculty and you have a good relationsship with them, consider asking them.


text:
Is obtaining a PhD from an Asian country really a career suicide?
There is a proverb going around for a long time

Doing a PhD from an Asian country is a career suicide.

What is the significance of this proverb in case of Computer Science?
Does this also include high ranking universities in Russia and the middle East?
Does international ranking have any positive effect in this regard (e.g. there are some universities from China and Singapore among the top 20)?

Reference

What are some down sides of doing PhD in a Japanese/ Korean/ Chinese university than that of the USA?
Are there any professors with PhDs in Humanities from Asian Universities working outside of Asia?
Why is a PhD from a university outside of the white sphere called ‘career annihilation’?

Of course not. Put it to the extreme, do you think doing a PhD at Tsinghua under Andrew Yao would be anywhere close to career suicide?

People who make the kind of blanket statements you quote aren't concerned with such details.

I learned that Moscow is west of the Urals, and therefore in Europe.

As someone who did his PhD in Computer Science, am I the only one to never have heard of this so-called proverb? This isn't a throwaway comment, I just want to highlight that it seems far from a universal opinion.

@NajibIdrissi because those details are irrelevant to the main question.

I am bothered with tag computer science, can we remove it? I recently met computer scientist that finished PhD in computer engineering or software eng, paid by company in USA, in some strange place in Asia. they even offer SUPPORT and funding!

@SSimon, HK, Korea, China, Singapore,...all of them pay good PhD scholarships/studentships/funding. Sg is asean.

@why yes, but this is country where english is not mother tongue!!! also this company paid him to go obtain phd there!!! such a strange choice

@SSimon, then, I can only guess Thailand. Other countries' education bases are lower.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Yes and no.
Jeff Huang and his student at Brown University compiled data from over 2,200 computer science professors in the United States. The data is only from the top 50 CS graduate programs. A writeup is available here, and the raw data is available here.
If you believe the data, then out of over 2,200 computer science professors at the top 50 programs, many got their Bachelor's degree from Asian universities, but only a few got their PhDs there:

8 from China
17 from India
1 from Singapore
47 from Israel
11 from Russia

In fact among all universities with at least 10 graduates who went on to become CS professors in the US, only one, the Hebrew University in Israel, is not in the US. In other words CS professors in the US, at least in top programs, are overwhelmingly likely to have gotten their PhDs from a US university.
That's the yes part. Now for the no part: this data is only in the US, and it's natural to expect that the data for any country is biased in favour of students who did their PhDs in the country (for example, there are only 16 CS professors in the US with a doctorate from France). The students awarded PhDs by these Asian universities can't have just disappeared; they must've gotten jobs elsewhere. In all likelihood, they were successful, just not in the sense of becoming a professor in the US.
So what is career suicide to you? If your aim is to become a CS professor in the US, then you should get a PhD from a US university, preferably MIT, followed by UC Berkeley, Stanford, Carnegie Mellon, and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in that order. If you don't mind working elsewhere or perhaps taking on a different job, then there's nothing wrong with studying elsewhere also.

These statistics are influenced by significant self-selection.  If my department is indicative, only a tiny minority of applicants for American CS tenure-track faculty positions got their PhDs outside the US, and most of those do postdocs in the US before applying.  But those applicants seem to be successful at roughly the same rate as applicants with US PhDs.

Well, your question is broad, but to be on point, Asia needs PhDs, if you have the competent advisor and the relationship is not "master and servant", then you have high prospects to become a good independent scholar. Competition for the job is lower than in West.
About ranking, I really can't comment if it is beneficial in future employment, I think what is important is the ranking and the impact factor of the journals where you publish.
That being said, there are departments in obscure places in Iran, Thailand, Turkey, Taiwan that have higher H index than well know and regarded departments in West.
Also as far as I noticed, gender relationship and position of women in STEM is much better than in West.

Is it personal experience or ... ?

Departments don't have h-indices.

@Greg  Yes. It is.

@Jeffe cumulative H indexes as shown on RG and GS.

There are known metrics to evaluate students' PhD performance regardless of where they studied for their PhD. One of such is the quality of their publications, where they publish their work and the level of impact in their research domain. Another is the supervisor and his/her reputation. So whether obtaining the PhD is from Asia or the West is not a strong yardstick.

tl;dr - Because of an expected cultural mismatch between East x West work practice.
Disclaimer: I am from a Western culture background, but I have worked in China for 2 years.
As mentioned by @SSimon the question is too broad, but I will drop my two cents. In principle I do not agree with the premise of career suicide in the broad sense, but I do see how graduating from some faraway, poorly-understood university may damage one's career.
I take the question from the standpoint of someone earning a PhD in the East seeking a job in the West. Originally the OP used the term "East" instead of Asia, which was culturally more appropriate, here. There is a large cultural gap between the "East" and "West" directly affecting on how professionals interact. Apart from a number of stigmas associated with distant cultures, one would expect frequent misunderstandings central to teaching practices (as per Academic jobs) and work relationships in general.
Taking a PhD in a radically different cultural background associates such cultural traits and perceived stigmas with an important line of your CV. I will that illustrate with key examples below.
(i) Western culture is strongly influenced by Greek philosophy and Christian principles. That results in that doubts and disputes are expected to be sorted out with logic and open dialogue. Also one is not morally accepted to seek usury, in the sense of short-term openly-declared advantages at the expense of one's partners. This mentality can be radically different in distant cultures. For instance, in Eastern cultures some unofficial hierarchy (e.g. age, status, caste) may dictate teaching/decisions overruling any objections, and even imply that a "leader" always expects advantageous deals. It is easy to foresee how that will quickly turn professional relationships awkward to an employee or manager coming from a different cultural background. For instance, anyone openly seeking advantages over the other part in negotiation will be perceived as a cheater in my country. Another simple example, I can say for sure that most of my colleagues would immediately refrain from hiring an Asian teacher, for fear of his/her methods.
(ii) Eastern cultures are strongly emphatic on a fashion "face culture" which is hard for Westerners to understand and accept. Again, this can quickly render a professional contact sour, as a westerner feels skating on thin ice without a map. Asking direct questions may offend like demanding explanations; the meaning of silence in a conversation is an emblematic example of communication mismatch. ...which bring us to the next main point.
(iii) Finally the language barrier is expected to be large. By language I mean both the idioms and the logic behind communication. Western languages are dominated by Latin eloquence and Germanic precision. One can fairly easily shift as a francophone to communicate ideas in English and still be understood clearly. Many Eastern languages emphasise on (face) interpersonal formalities and appraisal, on the need to communicate implied messages. These can be easily seen as undisguised flattery followed by "beating around the bush" which are behaviours frequently frowned upon at the work environment in the West.
The above list should embody associated issues, such as different methods and approaches to problems, mutually intrinsic behaviours perceived as arrogance, a mismatch regarding gender differences, etc. Therefore I believe an expectation of major cultural mismatch is the main obstacle to someone coming from , for instance, Asia seeking work in an American institution. As a closing remark, I emphasise I do not think a career suicide exists where one stays within the same cultural sphere where he obtained his PhD, as illustrated by the majority of employed residents having graduated at local universities, to be found anywhere. Also in such cases I believe the preference for local culture and standards are dictating the edge of locally-educated candidates.

I disagree, the point is to get a better idea of what Western perspective you are coming from, with an understanding that someone from different locations in the 'West' (USA, Brasil, Cuba?, if we limit to 'new world') may have different perspectives. Also, the OP does specifically mention countries as well as sub-regions, so your suggestion that they are not discussed is a bit puzzling, and I find it a bit rude to compare this inquiry to your favorite food. Like Pete, I do not understand your coyness.

I am always a touch sceptical that "the West" is helpful as an umbrella for the academic and societal norms of USA, UK, France, Germany, Spain, Netherlands... do we include Poland? Russia? (And before you jump to any conclusions based on my name, I am English.)

"Western culture is strongly influenced by Greek philosophy and Christian principles. That results in that doubts and disputes are expected to be sorted out with logic and open dialogue." Hmm, French Wars Of Religion, anyone? How are you fitting in the Enlightenment with this summary of intellectual history?

"Western languages are dominated by Latin eloquence and Germanic precision" - oh, this is just silly now. Try watching episodes of Yes, Minister. And your claim "these can be easily seen as undisguised flattery followed by "beating around the bush" which are behaviours frequently frowned upon at the work environment in the West" - this strikes me as at best naive about how actual workplaces actually work, and I again refer you to Yes, Minister (Or just read some La Rochefoucauld)

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


text:
Rote learning in South East Asia
I knew from some newspapers that Taiwanese education system prefers rote memorization over creativity. This culture was imported from Japan. This problem is also present in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Korea.
Although late, China seems to be the only country which is reforming its rote learning culture.

How can rote learning, in the universities of those countries, affect someone who is not used to with rote learning?
How do they maintain their quality of higher education with rote learning (apparently, a lot of universities from South East Asian countries are sitting in the top 50 positions)?

Note. I am talking about computer science.

Are you sure the pressure comes from the culture of preferring rote memorization over creativity? The way I read your source, the pressure comes from society + family.

I was born and educated in Taiwan. I went to US when I was 24. I came back to Taiwan when I was retired. I took a look at the first link you provided. Honestly, I was LOL. This is one of the reasons I am always against studying East Asian Studies in the countries other than East Asia, like US, in English. I don't think "Taiwan favors rote memorization over developing creativity." is true unless memorizing multiplication table is considered unnecessary. (Yes, you must memorize the table so you can pass the 3rd grade math). There is no reference a the end of the article.

So, I don't know how to find out why the author said it. I don't even know how to answer the question, it's very broad and opinion-based. I could write an article about it. But, I won't vote to close this question with the hope that somebody can provide a shorter version of the answer.

I'm considering writing an answer, but am stymied by what exactly you mean by "rote learning". Googling for it yields rote learning as memorization based on repetition, which doesn't seem related to creativity at all. There are some things that have to be attacked by rote learning, e.g. the multiplication tables. What exactly are you referring to?

Do you know the Chinese name of the college mentioned in the report you link about the reform in China?. I could not find the college by baidu. It looks like it's a  small college and probably does not exist anymore.

Another note. TSMC hired 1983 PhDs. They are one of the major chip suppliers of iPhone. Most of the PhDs were educated in Taiwan. So, yes, you may have a good question. If they were educated by rote learning only, how could they manage to produce those high tech chips?

I noticed there are not alot CS programs in PhD; my uni dont have it and is in top 10 in SAE

As a European doing a PhD in Hong Kong, I've had the occasion to TA a few CS undergrad classes as well as take my own higher-level courses. I honestly can't say that I noticed much difference in class structures beyond the fact that people are much more shy about talking in class.
So, how will it affect someone not used to it? You will stand out a bit if you ask questions in class, or if you are the type to yell out answers immediately when the lecturer poses one to the class (this is usually met with resounding silence). If you are someone affected by peer pressure, you may end up asking less questions during lectures. Join the trove of students surrounding the lecturer after class for answers.
How do they maintain their educational standards? As far as I can tell, "rote learning" mostly is code for "exercises out the wazoo" here (newspaper articles abound about kids having 30 minutes a day of play time, the rest being occupied by school and homework), and there's nothing better for learning to do a thing than doing it over and over.
TL;DR I'm sure people here had a radically different experience in primary school, but by the time they reach university it seems to all come out in a wash.

Thanks for giving us the observation from a Westerner's point of view.

which country r u from?

@why: Germany, but starting from middle school I was educated in the French education system.

@nengel, do HK or Germany's universities use curved grading system?

@why, grading is at the discretion of the professor. AFAIK they could choose to grade on a curve if they wanted to, but I haven't seen it happen in either place (but my most extensive experience with  grades is from France).

This problem is not specific to these countries mentioned, or merely computer science.
I am from Turkey and 16' Chemistry graduate from Middle East Technical University, and currently M.Sc. student in Earth System Science in METU as well.
Two-fold issue.
If one is not disciplined to do otherwise, he/she will always choose the shorter path (in)/conciously to overcome struggles. Same with learning; understanding the issue, "analyzing its components and connecting these pieces of information with other information and synthesizing a bigger part of knowledge to comprehend the real picture more" etc. takes time, effort, besides no one will give you any credit for doing all these more than they give to the ones who does rote learning.
The other, also most problematic part is creativity is , by its nature, unpredictable. Not only it cannot be controlled but also it can very well outshine "rote" ideas, may very well be one's advisor's ideas, and again no one will get over it. Current academic institution favors extremely ambitious people over anyone and this is impeding creativity, and of course the pace of the science


text:
Can anyone compare US and Singaporean higher education systems?
On the surface, Singaporean university system looks exactly like US system.
Can anyone compare US and Singaporean higher education systems from their own experiences?
E.g.

Quality of lectures
Stress
Cooperation/friendliness of professors/supervisors/TAs
Campus culture
Etiquette
Creativity vs rote learning
etc.

I am interested in Computer Science.

Given this quedtion here and this one, are you getting us to do your essay / presentation? https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/107967/72855

@SolarMike, nope. If you are bothered, don't answer.

Quality. Comparable, and certainly not inferior. The curriculum is not substandard and its graduates are able to meet international standards. You can expect to learn everything a US undergraduate will also learn, up to minor differences that depend on the department's unique specialties (this does not apply to graduate studies). For example, Singapore undergraduates are capable of passing the GRE.
Stress. Stress comes when you have high expectations for yourself and want to meet them. Accordingly, you can get as stressed or as not-stressed as you desire, by adjusting your expectations. This is no different from anywhere else in the world.
Professors/Supervisors/TAs. No different from elsewhere in the world. Professors are in general an approachable lot.
Campus culture. Within the class itself, the most important difference is that in Singapore, students don't participate that much during lectures. A lecturer who says something like "can anyone tell me what the significance of ____ theorem is" is likely to be met with silence. If students have problems which they need help from the professor, they're likely to approach the professor after class. Outside of class, attitudes tend to be pretty conservative. In the US a "free hugs" campaign might work; in Singapore, nobody is going to participate. You might have trouble making friends since you'll probably have to initiate the conversation (especially if you're not Chinese).
Etiquette. What is regarded as polite is generally transferable across cultures. Because Singapore is a mish-mash of cultures, Singaporeans are pretty accommodating, and you'll probably have no problems.
Creativity vs. rote learning. You already have a question about this.

If you're thinking about studying in Singapore, here're a few more factors to consider:

Singapore is one of the world's safest countries. Crime rates are extremely low. Every now and then there will be mass shootings in the US, including at university campuses, but those never happen in Singapore.
Singapore's public infrastructure is one of the world's best. Everywhere is easy to get to in Singapore. The high population density makes public transport sometimes crowded especially during rush hour, but it also means you will generally be able to e.g. find food at 11pm at night, get top-class medical care, and enjoy all sorts of entertainment. Singapore internet speeds are some of the world's fastest.
Singapore's university infrastructure is also excellent. In fact after having visited lots of universities, including several of the world's best (by THE / QS / ARWU ranking), I've not seen anything that beats Singapore's infrastructure. The lecture halls are well-equipped, well-maintained, and modern; the campus buses run frequently including on weekends; the libraries are stocked with floors upon floors of books, etc. It's as though the Singapore government knows its universities are not yet regarded as among the best in the world, but they're determined to make sure they have the facilities to get there.
Singaporean universities apparently operate with a Bell curve. That is, the average grade is a B. This might come as a culture shock if you're used to everyone in a class scoring 80+.
Staff-to-student ratio is relatively poor. There are tens of thousands of students.

Bell curve alone is enough to deter prospective students.

@why I think people go to college to pursue knowledge, grade is the byproduct.

@scaaahu obviously you don't know the Asian culture, and Singapore's 'afraid to lose' mentality.

@Prof.SantaClaus Why do you connect 'afraid to lose' mentality to grading? I thought they would give students sweet grades if they want to attract students

@Prof.SantaClaus hahaha :D AMEN on that, also xenophobia!


text:
Bell Curved Grading
I have two questions:

How can I know which university/school uses Bell Curved Grading system,and which one doesn't?
Suppose, I have two acceptances from two schools (a) one applies Curved grading, and (b) another one doesn't. Is there any reason I should choose the one without curve so that I can be on the safe side?

(i) You can ask them? (ii) That depends on how the other school grades and on your personal goals and abilities.

(i) most are online, disclaimer: https://www.fastweb.com/student-life/articles/what-to-know-about-professor-rating-websites (ii) I think your metric is REALLY THE WRONG one. At university level, grades are not absolute. They are important, but only in the context of the school. The quality of learning and reputation of the school are as and more important. The networking starts being important too.

There is simply no way to know, because there are no uniform grading standards within universities. I know that I do not enforce bell-curve grading, and neither do many of my colleagues, while others do.
Also, many universities do not recommend bell curve grading, because it makes grading more challenging, because technically you’d have to change lots of grades if you make a grading mistake. Instead, they recommend choosing one “fixed grade”—for instance, the mark between passing and failing—and the increment to the next level.

All universities use bell curves to some extent.

Sometimes they are very clear about this, stating in the syllabus: "the top 15% of students will get an A", etc.
Others claim not to curve: "if you get a 90%, you get an A. I'll give an A to everyone in the class if everyone gets a 90%." But in practice, the difficulty of the exercises/exams reacts to the students' performance, so as to reverse-engineer the desired bell curve.

So, I would argue that this is a  false distinction.
That said:

Some universities may have guidelines or culture that encourages one or the other. As noted in the comments, the only real way to find out is to ask them (though they may be confused by the question)
Things will vary even within a university. In my experience, some graduate programs will give an A to everyone who completes the course, while some intro-level science courses in the same university have a bell curve such that the average grade is a C. Decisions about how to grade generally lie with the instructor.

I wouldn't say that it's a false disctinction. The fundamental difference in the second approach is that the grades of an individual student do not depend on the performance of her fellow students. The first approach is more conducive to a competitive, and potentially hostile, environment.

The second approach may "trick" some students into being less hostile (which is maybe a good thing!). But even in this case, if everyone else is doing well, the final will be harder, and I will do worse. The only way around this is if the instructor pre-sets the assessment items and grading scheme at the beginning of the course and then doesn't change them -- but this is very rare; most instructors haven't taught the course often enough to know what is fair, and so rely on students' performance to adjust the difficulty level.


text:
How to expedite? Compensation? University still hasn't provided alternative formats after 9 months
Facts
My visually impaired brother attends university ("UNI") in England. In Jul 2017, he requested Alternative Formats. As of Apr 11 2018, UNI's Library still hasn't contacted the publishers, but avowed that they probably can by May 1. They haven't explained this 8-month stonewall. Still without PDFs, he deferred exams to Aug 2018.
The Chief Librarian emailed that he must wait patiently for the publishers to email the Library the PDFs, which can take weeks and will delay him further.
We filed a formal complaint, but UNI denied wrongdoing and any financial compensation. The Student Union uselessly couldn't help.
Questions

How can he convince the university to expedite?

How ought he seek compensation? We worry that litigation may offend them and make them victimize my brother. But haven't they infringed Consumer Rights Act 2015 s 52?

(2) In that case the contract is to be treated as including a term that the trader must perform the service within a reasonable time.
(3) What is a reasonable time is a question of fact.

It is for the publisher to supply the pdf files - that is not the Uni’s fault.

Similar question : https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/107269/72855

Firstly: Legal advice is not in the scope of this site. Secondly (and @SolarMike) over 10 months is clearly not "weeks". Does the answer by the Chief Librarian mean, that they are unable to request/buy the PDFs without a decision by another entity (then this entity is who you need to contact) or does it mean that they just didn't do/delayed it (then it might be their fault) or they did in July 2017 and the publishers all did not send anything yet (sounds unlikely).

@SolarMike Please see the edited post.

@skymningen Please let me know if the edited post answers your question? The answer: 'they just didn't do/delayed it (then it might be their fault)'.

Your answer is not the same as your comment. Your answer does state that you do not know if they just didn't do it (libraries fault) or they weren't allowed to (somebody else's fault). You need to contact the people who are responsible for accepting the request for alternative formats first. The person which told the library that they can request PDFs after May 1st.

Although it might appear that you are purchasing services from the university, I don't think this is true, legally (although I'm not a lawyer).
If you have complained to the university through the official channels you can lodge a complaint with the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (http://www.oiahe.org.uk/).

Do you have a human rights tribunal? In Canada, this would likely go to a human rights case around discrimination and accessibility. Usually universities have clear policies on this - is their an omsbudman? I would perhaps think about contacting a lawyer to see their opinion.


text:
Evidence of adequate funds for U.S. university
I am  an international applying for graduate studies to some US universities. As part of the application process I need to show evidence that I, or a sponsor, have enough money to cover the cost of living and tuition fees.
However, I need to provide the university with this evidence before they even consider my application.
My question is, is there any way I can apply for a loan and access the money only if I get an offer?
I want to avoid taking out a loan then not getting into any University and having to pay that loan back.
Any other solution is welcome.
Thank you.

Maybe a letter from you financial institution that says that you allowed for a loan of X amount? This would confirm that you are able to get the loan in case you are accepted. A bit like you can get a mortgage pre-approval before actually submitting an offer to buy a condo or a house. That might be country dependent though.

I know some people that borrowed the money from their families for two days: put it on a bank account, sent the university the bank statement, and returned the money.

What level of graduate studies will you apply for? Admission to most PhD programs in the US in general includes a tuition waiver and stipend. Some masters programs have financial support as well. I am surprised that they are asking for this information with the application. I would suggest contacting the departments in question to ask whether submitting such information is really necessary,

From my experience, during the application process, you only need to sign the form that you are responsible and have the necessary funds to cover the tuition and living fees. You will need to have this evidence (scholarships, own funds, RA/TA assistantships) only after the admission and mostly for the F-1 visa application.
I would definitely contact the department you are applying to for additional information. If they actually require the firm evidence, you are limited to the following options (as far as I know):

Applying for a loan in your home country. – In this case, the letter stating that you are approved for XX,XXX USD will be enough. Depending on the regulations within the financial institution, you might only have to cover some fees in case you don't need the loan.
Applying for an education loan in the US financial institution (tricky, but possible).
Borrowing money from friends and family for a short period. Can be the cheapest option; however, it is not a firm evidence of sufficient funds. One might actually require the statements for the three-five months period and it will become obvious that this amount of money is not really natural and probably an instantaneous pump.
In some cases, you might state that you own some property (house) in your country that you will sell in case of admission. It might satisfy the admission committee (though again, asking for financial documents before considering an application is IMHO too much).
Finding a guarantor (preferably in the USA, but maybe in your home country) that states he is responsible for your tuition and living costs. You will have to submit the documents for his financial situation then.

To sum it up, I would definitely confirm with the department the requirements as they seem to be a little harsh. They might also offer some other options, I doubt it's their first case.


text:
How to email the heads of a department asking about whether they accept applications from undergraduates from a different discipline?
I'm an electronics engineering sophomore at an Indian university, particularly interested in quantum computing, quantum information theory and quantum engineering. However, the problem I'm facing is that we do not have the possibility to take up extra theory courses in computer science (e.g. complexity theory, analysis of algorithms) or mathematics (topology, differential geometry, discrete mathematics, etc). I feel these theory courses are extremely important to understand quantum computing properly (more so, with stuff like topological quantum computing and relativistic quantum information, coming up). By the end of the 4 years of my undergraduate course while I'll likely be having sufficient background for further study in the area of quantum "engineering", I feel I'll be lacking in the theoretical aspects. For the record, I do have some experience with research in the area of quantum computing (I'm currently pursuing a undergraduate research project at a nearby university in my city). Also, I've been trying to learn some of the mathematics and computer science topics on my own, using various online resources.
For that reason I was thought if it would be possible for me to apply for a masters degree in computer science/mathematics, after my undergrad, before directly applying for a PhD in quantum computing. I feel that such a masters degree focused on the theory would make my PhD application stronger. A course like the one offered by Oxford: MSc in Mathematics and Foundations of Computer Science would probably be perfect for me (at least that's what it seems from a reading of the course contents). But, I'm a bit worried because the acceptance rate in such courses is already very low (for example Oxford has only 17 places available in this course while on average 115 people apply for it per year).
So, in short my question is: Is it okay if I mail the head of the Math/Computer Science department head, asking whether they accept applications from electronics engineering students and what I can possibly do as an undergraduate, to improve my odds of getting accepted to such a course? (For example, the heads of activity of the Oxford's Quantum Group are listed here). Also, if yes, how should I frame my email? Suggestions are appreciated. Thank you.

There is nothing wrong with sending an email, but it should not be sent to the chair or head of the department. Instead, the relevant contact person is either:

the chair of the admissions committee, or
the head of the graduate studies program

Either of these officials in the department should be able to provide you with the requisite information. Sending it to the chair of the department is a waste of everybody's time.

I would advise against emailing them to ask this. The masters program has probably admitted EE students in the past, but their willingness to do so will depend on the specifics of the situation. They will likely be inundated with emails and may have to refrain from commenting on an individual case; they may or may not have time to answer your query about improving your odds.
Why don't you look at the descriptions of the courses in the masters program, including requirements of prior courses needed. If there are just one or two courses that you have not taken, you may be able to handle that. But if all the courses you mentioned are stated prerequisites, then you are unlikely to get admitted to this program. If the websites, application, and course descriptions do not provide clear answers about what courses are required prerequisites (or what is assumed incoming knowledge), then that may be a good, specific question for someone from the program.
Because you've already done research in this area, you may have a chance of admission. Good luck.

I feel that the linked website does not state the pre-requisites clearly. What exactly do you mean by "then that may be a good, specific question for someone from the program" ? Do you mean the students who are enrolled in that program? I don't think it is possible for me to contact them.

Also, I've not particularly done any research on mathematics or pure computer science as such. The project I'm participating in, is based on quantum computing.

The website does seem vague, but I think that is to your benefit: the subject of your degree should have "significant mathematical content." This probably also signals that they want to see you take and do well in a class that involves proofs. Also, the page has an email address for an MSc administrator, who should be your primary point of contact for questions like this. It's great that you're figuring this out early, so that you can plan your courses and/or outside research.


text:
What are possible outcomes when a PhD cannot be completed during the funding period?
Suppose a university provides a five-year PhD studentship (i.e., tuition waiver and monthly stipend). What are possible outcomes if the student doesn't complete their PhD in five years?

Will the university continue waiving tuition and paying a stipend?
Can the student complete their PhD?

Country, field? I guess this varies also across universities.

Why are you asking such broad questions. Here is another one from you: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108181/how-is-a-student-perceived-if-he-took-more-time-to-graduate Are you serious about getting an answer?

How is this off topic? The help center explicitly says "Life as a graduate student, postdoctoral researcher, university professor" is on-topic, and this question is relevant to graduate students. Too broad maybe, but off-topic doesn't make sense. Voting to reopen.

Could we compromise and specify country or at least the part of the world?  Hopefully that would narrow it down enough to be reopened.

@Allure If you had read a little bit more, then you would have seen "The answer to this question strongly depends on individual factors such as a certain person’s preferences, a given institution’s regulations, the exact contents of your work or your personal values. Thus only someone familiar can answer this question and it cannot be generalised to apply to others. (See this discussion for more info.)" If you are not happy that this reason to close is sorted under "off-topic", you need to talk with the SE developers.

@Allure I dont understand why, but I see the patern in close vote, I dont know if you noticed also?

@Allure hard to say, sometimes there are questions that are closed due to being too broad to answer even after someone has given a specific and suitable answer. Trigger happiness.

I'm not sure which country this is in, but for Germany and Austria, this question can be answered at least in part; it is not too broad.

When a school makes a funding commitment, it is generally true that the commitment is contingent upon a student making satisfactory progress to the degree, as judged by the department.
What happens when a student can't finish in the stated period depends upon a combination of factors:

Where the funding to continue supporting the student will come from
If the student is, in fact, making adequate progress and will finish in a reasonable period of time
What the regulations of the department or university are with respect to enrollment (that is, is there a limit to how long a student can be enrolled)

So long as a student is making satisfactory progress, and a source (such as PI funding or teaching assistantships) can be found to pay the student, departments are usually not inclined to dismiss a student based on failure to meet an arbitrary timeline. Usually, the student, supervisor, thesis committee, and department will agree on some sort of timeline to finish the degree program as quickly as possible.

Almost everyone who wants a PhD and sticks around long enough ends up getting it.
You can imagine what happens if the student isn't able to complete during the funding period: he or she has to self-fund. If they can't do that, then they have to leave. If they can, then they just go on and on and on until they complete. Here's an example. I quote: In justifying the conferring of doctoral degrees to the Bogdanovs, Sternheimer told the Times, "These guys worked for 10 years without pay. They have the right to have their work recognized with a diploma, which is nothing much these days."
As for whether or not the university will continue waiving the tuition fee: no. Supervision takes time, hence it's only normal that the university charges for it.

Yes, one may need to find external grants, on-campus or external jobs, or loans to pay tuition. Though depending on your supervisors and policies, you may not need to be continuously enrolled if coursework or supervision requirements are met, and thus you do not need to pay tuition during that time. Someone on my committee had a student delay revisions for 12 years while working, then enroll for a term to defend and graduate. (There was almost certainly a paperwork hurdle to jump to be reinstated, but it's easier with the prof's support.)


text:
How is a student perceived if he took more time to graduate?
Suppose, a student completed his MSc in 4 years, instead of 2 years, but has a CGPA of A.
Would he have any disadvantage as a Ph.D. applicant?
Edit:
I can think of two possible reasons:
 1. financial difficulty.
 2. took some time to develop the necessary knowledge to cope with some courses. For instance, he has to complete a course X (e.g. Stochastic Process) but found that he doesn't have the necessary background knowledge (e.g. Probability and Statistics) to obtain a good score. So, he took some time studied at home and then came back, and he scored an A or A+.

No can say about how people or universities would feel. Could you be more specific to get an answer?

I think this question is quite clear:  Would taking 4 years rather than 2 be  viewed negatively by a PhD admissions committee?  I cannot fathom why anyone views this question as too broad.  It's a simple yes or no question that should be answerable by those who've served on PhD admissions committees.

@NicoleHamilton: As long as there is not at least a country tag, maybe even more specific information, it doesn't seem clear to me at all which expectations on the variability of MSc duration can be applied.

@NicoleHamilton this question is too broad.  In my field, and in some countries but not others, getting any kind of masters is a mistake.  It also depends on if the student was full time or half time, or any other reasons why it took two extra years.

What if the student had a prestigious corporate lab or consulting job while they were getting the master's, which made it take longer?  In that case, taking longer might be an advantage.

A student that completed an MSc in 4 years, rather than the expected 2 years, would (regularly) be disadvantaged against any student that completed in the expected 2 years and achieved the same or better grade.

@AnonymousPhysicist the question still seems fine to me. What I'm getting from your comments is that the answer is "it depends on the reason for the extra two years", which is absolutely a suitable answer to the question.

Would he have any disadvantage as a PhD applicant?

Yes of course. But how big this disadvantage is, or if it is even relevant at all, depends on many factors:

country
field
courses taken (that might actually be an advantage!)
reason for the long time
was that long time used properly (e.g. to produce a really good Master Thesis)
other applicants
how common an A-Master is in your field/country/at your university
...

I would personally say that the disadvantage is not that big, but that is only my personal opinion, and chances are low that I will sit in your PhD admission committee...
I don't see how you would be able to get a general answer even when providing all these answers and I would suggest asking someone who knows your situation (e.g. your advisor, if you already have one).

I don't think it deserves a full answer, but - the norm with which I grew up and which was drilled in me for years (east of Europe) was that only people who do their studies in time can ever be considered excellent students (deserving to continue their studies for example). Anything less and you cap yourself at good (also the reason I never did an exchange during masters: bad organization, etc., I'd probably gain experience but lose a year). I was delighted to find out that manyplace in Europe, much more diverse paths (years off, years employed, changing fields) are completely accepted.


text:
What do universities get from students with valuable research ideas?
I recently stumbled upon an obscure economic theory. Currently, I'm trying to understand whether or not it makes sense. If it does, I intend to build a certain simulation of the economy (using some concepts of that theory). This software will allow to better understand the economy than existing approaches. Let's assume that everything went fine and I do have a simulator of the economy in my hands, plus (someone else's) theory which explains, why it works.
The next step would be to find a scientific institution (university), which could check my findings and officially confirm that they are scientific (look through the stuff I wrote, find logical errors, verify that this is not some hocus-pocus pseudoscience etc.). Thereafter it may be much easier to spread this knowledge. A little book published by a nobody (even if it contains breakthrough knowledge) won't be noticed and its wisdom won't be applied. When the same information has been verified by some prestigious university, it's a different game (there is more trust in these findings).
If I want the university to invest resources in such check (and do it better than many professors who don't even read the theses of the students they supervise), they must have some incentive. Let's rule out money (paid by me) as such incentive.
What do universities get from sound theories developed by people who study or cooperate with them?
In other words: Imagine, some of that university's professors looks through my writing, checks how the simulator works and comes to the conclusion that it, indeed, does what I promised. No fatal flaws are discovered in the work and they agree that this method is valuable (should be researched further).
How exactly does the university, its professors, and other people doing research and teaching there benefit from this discovery?
My answers:

Better rankings. If this discovery is truly valuable, it may increase the university's prestige and help them get more (or better) students, money from public and private sponsors etc.
The professor may publish a paper (together with me). If the findings are truly new, the paper may get cited and improve the professor's h index.
The university may get consulting contracts for applying my findings to client's problems.

Notes:

I need the answer to this question in order to determine whether or not I have a chance of "selling" the cooperation with me to a university. You can only sell something, if the buyer's (university's) benefits are greater than the costs.
I have very little academic background therefore the answers above may be wrong.

Universities benefit from knowledge.  The real question is, how do I pick the most valuable way of generating knowledge?  The answer is different for every research project.  It's up to the researcher to figure out the answer that fits them.

Universities do not check research, and so the fundamental assumption of this question is incorrect. Individual professors may choose to do so, either through direct correspondence or through the mechanism of peer review, but the question itself fundamentally mischaracterizes the role of universities in this process.

(1) Your question title is ...  get from students. Then you say The next step would be to find a scientific institution (university), which could check my findings. Are you a student or not? (2) You use a word "sh**y" which is not allowed. Please delete it and replace it by a better word.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is based on fundamental misconceptions about what universities are and do.

@scaaahu I removed the bad word.

@wil3 Imagine I enroll into some academic program (e. b. Masters) and have to write a thesis. If the university accepts my work (awards me a Masters degree), it means that they have done at least some checks (or at least they should have). At the very least, they would check for plagiarism. If they do give me a degree, this means that some basic checks have been done. Am I wrong?

@scaaahu I am not a student. I'm looking for ways to work on that theory and bring it into circulation (provided that it passes my own sanity checks). Cooperation with a university is one possibility. There are at least two ways to do it: 1) Enroll into Masters or PhD program. 2) Cooperate with the researchers (students, professors) without studying (e. g. I give them the material and they help me publish a paper in exchange for co-authorship or something else).

Your question is based on a few assumptions, some of which are loose or close to be false. I'd outline some of them:

Ideas are valuable to Universities.  No, they are not. Universities may be interested in hiring people who have ideas and are able to convert them into working implementations and/or academic publications, thus generating prestige for the University and attracting more grant money and more students. But if the University does not have people to get your idea onboard, your idea, however cool, is wasted on them.
Universities can check my findings and officially confirm that they are scientific. No, Universities don't do this. The only `official' routes to recognise the scientific contribution is to publish it in peer-reviewed journal or patent it. Both require much more effort on your side than just formulating an idea.
Professors look through my writing, checks how the simulator works and comes to the conclusion that it, indeed, does what I promised. Normally, professors would not spend time doing this unless they see a clear benefit in terms of publications and grants. This basically means that someone checking your work would expect to become a co-author of this work and share all the prestige (and potentially profit) generated. Think twice if that's what you want.

Does the patent office really check the correctness of scientific findings?

@NajibIdrissi You are right - I don't think it does.

Thanks for your answer. You mention that co-authoring a good paper is one thing I can give to the university. Is there anything else I could offer them (something that's valuable for them)?


text:
Why don't most graduate schools in Eurasia and Ocenia accept/impose GRE?
Why don’t most graduate schools in Eurasia and Ocenia accept/impose GRE?
Suppose, someone completed his bachelor degree 10 years ago, or, someone had bad grades in the bachelor’s, he can still manage to get into a graduate research program if he can demonstrate a good GRE score.
On the contrary, non-GRE schools do not offer such advantages to the applicants.

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

The GRE general test covers college-level vocabulary and high-school mathematics. The GRE subject tests in specific disciplines have more relevance to their specific fields, but are also disappearing with time. They’ve shown to correlate only with academic performance in coursework. So their value as a predictive tool is limited.
Why aren’t they more widely required? In part because they’re not widely administered outside of the US—at least nowhere near as they are in the US. The tests are US-based, and the admissions processes that developed in other countries did not base themselves around testing. So there’s not an inherent reason to require them, nor would any PhD admissions committee use GRE scores as the reason for accepting a candidate.
Some schools may use the security measures imposed by the GRE to help combat fraud in admissions—to ensure the person who is interviewed is the person actually applying. This used to be and can still be a problem in admissions.

But, some German universities accept GRE.

There’s a difference between accept and demand. If you want to send me GRE scores when I don’t require them, that’s up to you.

TUMunchen demands GRE quantitative score in order to be accepted. https://www.in.tum.de/en/for-prospective-students/apply-for-admission/masters-programs/

Apparently it’s not a universal requirement, in which case it may be a means to reduce fraud in admissions.

Many of the premises of this question are fundamentally wrong. The GRE is not a good predictor of university success and does not measure someone's ability to do research. You’re also ignoring the plethora of people in the opposite position, who demonstrate good skills on a day to day basis at school but test poorly or had a fluke or didn’t get any sleep the night before and did poorly on the GRE. My example is far more likely to be hurt than yours is to be helped, as universities primarily use the GRE as a filter to throw out applicants rather than a way to improve a bad application.
The GRE does little to predict research success, primarily correlates with test prep rather than intelligence or performance when one is not actively studying for the GRE, and does little to predict or explain graduate grades. It has a strong cultural bias in favor of white upper-class students, as evidenced by the fact that it punishes students who are Spanish/English bilingual as opposed to ones who just speak English (Bornheimer), under predicts the scores of Black students (Scott and Shaw), and exacerbates the effect of socioeconomic status in admissions (Pencock-Roman), further disadvantaging poor students.
Given all this, one obvious answer is "it's a bad test." A far better question is "why do so many universities in the US require the GRE"
Citations:
Scott, R.R. & Shaw, M.E. (1985). Black and White Performance in Graduate School and Policy Implications For Using GRE Scores in Admission. Journal of Negro Education, v. 54 (no. 1), pp. 14-23.
Bornheimer, D.G. (1984). Predicting Success in Graduate School Using GRE and PAEG Aptitude Test Scores. College and University, v. 60 (no. 1) pp. 54-62.
Penncock-Roman, M. (1994). Background Characteristics and Futures Plans of High-Scoring GRE General Test Examinees, research report ETS-RR9412 submitted to EXXON Education Foundation, Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

... GRE does not test ability to do research - I never said it does.

@why how can you test someone’s ability to pursue “graduate education (most likely research based)” without testing their ability to do research?

how can you test someone’s ability ... without testing their ability to do research? - that is not my headache. Ask ETS, and  thousands of schools worldwide who accept GRE.

@why I've greatly elaborated on why the exam is a bad exam in my answer.

well, then, your answer is irrelevant in its entirety.

@why see here and here for explanations of why that's an acceptable way to respond to a question.  In any event, I do tell you why. It's because the GRE is a bad test.

Your premise seems to be that a good GRE score can compensate for bad grades. This is not how PhD admissions work. While a bad GRE score may sink your application, a good GRE score will not save it.
Getting to your title question: Fundamentally, the GRE is a weak predictor of success in research. The real question is why any universities accept it, not why some don't.
PhD admissions committees may receive hundreds or even thousands of applications. They may use the GRE to filter out applicants that are completely unqualified without wasting time reading their applications in detail.
Why does this reasoning not apply to Europe etc.? Firstly, the GRE is administered by a US organization and US universities are familiar with its standardized testing system, but this is not the case elsewhere. Secondly, in many places (particularly outside north america) the admissions model is different. Rather than a committee reviewing applications and admitting students to a program, individual faculty choose students that reach out to them informally first. Thus there is less need for a filter like the GRE.

Outside north america the admissions model is different. Individual faculty admit students and there is no committee. Thus there is less need for a filter like the GRE. - 100% untrue.

@why Sure, perhaps I over generalize. But the fundamental answer to your question is that the GRE is a bad test. You seem to dispute this though.

The subject-test mathematics GRE exam is a multiple-choice exam. Mathematics is not generally multiple-choice. Nor is it timed. Nor can the stuff asked on the GRE subject test really reflect important mathematics, since not everything lends itself to multiple-choice format. Not to mention the conflict-of-interest of having a for-profit corporation promote such a product. And it's not well correlated with success in grad school, in my observations over 35 years.

@paulgarrett I agree. (I took the general and math subject GREs many years ago.) I think the timing is the most difficult aspect of it. At best, a good GRE score is a necessary but not sufficient condition for being ready for a PhD.

@why: Not 100% untrue. Many PIs do not need to go through a committee to accept a PhD student.

@aeismail, that statement was 100% untrue, even though the information was true.

The simplest answer is that the GRE is administered in American English, and the test is normed on students applying to U.S. universities. I'm arguing that it can be a valid test measuring the exact subject matter that it covers, for the intended population (people seeking graduate study in the U.S.), without being valid for a wider set of uses. (Stella Biderman's answer suggests it may not be valid for U.S. use, due to test bias. I might argue that the citations are thirty years old and that ETS (Educational Testing Service) works hard to eradicate test bias, and that schools might appropriately inform their decisions based on the tests, even if they shouldn't set score cut-offs. (I do not and have not worked for the ETS, in case there are suspicions.))
Is English enough of an academic lingua franca that every academic in the world should be given a high stakes test in it? In particular, the GRE tests people on abstruse English vocabulary and on composition in English. I am not surprised that most schools outside the U.S. do not make the GRE mandatory.
It might be interesting to have a translated quantitative section or translated subject exams, though it is also valid for universities to choose what kind of information they value about applicants and make choices different than ETS.

"Simple" doesn't mean "correct". While the exam being in English certainly plays a role, it may as well be insignificant. Admission processes are simply completely different in the US compared to most of Europe or Australia (and this includes several English-speaking countries: the UK, Ireland, Malta, Australia obviously). In most of Europe the exam is "getting your master's degree", and doctorate admissions don't involve exams at all, English or otherwise.

In particular, the GRE tests people on abstruse English vocabulary and on composition in English. I am not surprised that most schools outside the U.S. do not make the GRE mandatory. - How about Alglosphere countries other than USA? Also German universities accept GRE (e.g. CS program in TUMunchen, etc). Also, most research programs are offered in English regardless of the country.

@NajibIdrissi Fair enough; but the path-dependent historical fact that other systems work differently than the U.S. isn't necessarily a strong response to "Why not?" It's sort of a, "This is how it is," rather than, "This is why it would be impractical, unnecessary, or undesirable to change." It sounds like there is room in the European system for GREs for admission to a master's degree, but it still may not be a desirable idea.

@why  Sadly, the students from other anglophone countries would lose points on the GRE for misspelling so many things, with extra "u"s and whatnot. ;) There are non-trivial differences in the connotations of words in different English dialects, which can lead to the test bias Stella Biderman mentioned; while ETS looks tries to weed out questions that have differential performance on their main audience, it would be harder to do so across all the dialects of English.  More importantly, the hegemonic use of academic English is something that many universities could rightfully resist.


text:
What could be the possible consequence if a professor knows about a student's review?
Suppose, a student left a negative comment about a professor in the university's confidential review page. Somehow the professor guesses who the student was.
What can the student do if the professor intentionally gives the student bad grades?
Can the student file a request for a exam paper review to the dean?
How would the whole situation work out for the student?

Generally, the professor have access to the reviews only after entering the grades in some system / after the grades due date. Also, paper filling for review is worst as far as anonymity is concerned: I personally can't guess who the writer of a review is from the style (except for a few exceptions), but I definitely know how to identify my student's handwriting. Also, as long as the student is not insulting, the vast majority of the professors knows how to deal with (and actually cares about) negative criticism, they help us to improve our teaching!

In most institutions in the U.S. and, I'd guess, elsewhere, you can always ask that a dean or department chair review an exam. It isn't necessary to mention a review or any other reason.  "I don't believe my exam was graded fairly; would you please look at it?" is likely to be enough.

A good rule of thumb, especially in small departments/programs, is to assume that the instructor can pinpoint exactly who is saying what in the end-of-term evaluations.

@Clément Your "generally" is too strong. Where I am the evaluation results are available before the course even finishes (see also the comment by Hdidi on their answer).

If a student is going to post a negative review then should not give enough detail to be identified.  Professor should still not penalize the student for a negative review.

The student needs to establish that the the work submitted is better than the grade received.

Understand the grading distribution for the class (should be in syllabus)
Collect the assignment/exam requirements, what you submitted and your grade
Honestly evaluate what you submitted and see if the grade matches the work
Check a classmate's submission and grade to get a sense of what was right or wrong
Ask the professor for clarification about the assignment/exam grade (within a week of the assignment grade being given)
Check that the final grade is calculated correctly based on the weights in the syllabus
If you still feel like you met the requirements, you can contact your student advisor, student support services or the head of the school. Be very clear about your concerns of bias, and offer to have others review your work.

Number 7 is a bit tricky. You should take local culture into account. All of this assumes you are at a university that does have some support systems for students.
Communication is really important. Sometimes the Prof makes a mistake in grading, sometimes the student didn't understand the assignment. Once you rule out both of those, then you could consider a review.

This totally depends on country, culture etc. (unfortunately, no country tag is given).
A student can of course always file a request. However, this situation sounds so unlikely (how should the student know that the professor guessed and takes revenge) that, without any more evidence, this request will always certainly be dimissed. (And there are also places where no stuff members cares at all about any requests, even if there was proof given.)

Well, the first step would be to talk to the professor, look at the exam (if possible/allowed) and then ask the professor why your grade is not as expected. However, if the professor has an explanation (may it be a true or false one), it is very likely that the higher ups believe her/him and not you.

@Clement: Unfortunately I cannot comment above, so I must do it here. This is not universally true that professors only have access to reviews. In my university in Austria, the reviews are given back as soon as they are evaluated - sometimes before grades are given. And in most courses, you do not have to register and can do the exam at any time (eg 30 years after the course). It would not be good to wait for the evaluations until then. Again, a country tag would be useful.

In the US, at least, in general: there should be some mechanism for disputing the grade; and there will likely be something in your university policy about retaliation not being permitted.
The important thing is to check your university's online catalog and conduct policy, to find out how you're supposed to proceed when you wish to file a grade dispute.


text:
Can future works sections be similar in different papers?
A simple analysis method was proposed in an already-published paper. I am working on a more complicated version of the same method. The future works section of the published paper and my future works section have the same goal. Is it acceptable for both papers to have similar future works goals?

Isn't the main objective of writing just to tell the truth as you understand it? Of course not, and we all know it (just read your favorite newspaper) but have we really fallen so low that we would be ready to lie not for a purpose, but just to avoid accusations of "self-plagiarism"? I hope not. If the goals are the same, I see nothing that prevents you to openly proclaim it. It makes sense to emphasize that those goals have already been proclaimed earlier in [X], but as long as they are not achieved, I see nothing wrong with proclaiming them over and over again.

@fedja I mentioned the existing works in my papers many times. Also, I mentioned that my new work is an extension of their work. However, both our works can have the same future works. However, each in its main idea. Their future works is for the simple version while mine is for the complicated version.

Future work or goals may be broadly similar, there is absolutely no problem there. But if they are identical, the natural question is, what objective does your present work achieve?
You have extended the method (simple to more complicated), so you have already advanced something. Your future work and summary should reflect that - from a writing point of view more than an ethical point of view. If a reader were to only glance at your abstract, conclusions and future work, it should be clear that you have accomplished some goal that was previously unmet.


text:
Is it appropriate to email a professor saying you enjoyed their class, after doing well in it?
I recently finished taking an undergraduate class and I enjoyed it. I was thinking of emailing the prof and saying this, but I don't know if it's appropriate or not, for a few reasons:

I would have already said this in the class evaluations, which the prof will read.
More importantly, I recently received my final grade and it was good. If I email now, it might come off as an implied "thank you" for giving me a good mark, even though I mean nothing of the sort.

My question is whether or not such an email would be appropriate.

I would just add, to all the answers telling you to definitely do it. Honestly, if you did so well in class, and especially if the professor managed to pique your interest in the subject like it seems, it could also be a great opportunity to mention that and ask the prof if he could suggest more extra materials / a follow-up course / opportunities for projects where you could further your knowledge of the topic even more - especially if you are worried about sending an e-mail without a "good reason" (tho thanking your prof is good enough, like everybody says).

Tangentially related: Should I send an email to authors of a paper I enjoyed reading?
i.e., the answer to "May I show appreciation to person X for their effort Y?" is almost certainly yes.

Moderator’s notice: Only post an answer or comment if you have something to add to the existing answers. Also, please refrain from posting an answer as a comment. New answers in comments and redundant answers will be deleted without warning.

If your institution has an undergraduate thesis, this professor might be a good place to start. Incidentally, having left academia, I always ask about an undergraduate honors thesis or special project in job interviews (Exception: tag team interview where other questioner asks it). One answer gets you a lot closer to a job offer than the other.

As my experience of being a TA for multiple courses with various profs, such personal gestures of appreciation are welcomed by the professors. I have actually heard professors refer to the email as something that "made their day". As long as you don't refer to your grades, I don't see a reason why someone would misjudge your intentions, especially after the course has finished.

To add, you could even include what your favorite segment was, whether there was a specific piece that you particularly enjoyed, or what concepts you found interesting.

Teaching can sometimes seem like yelling into the void. Gestures that show you appreciated the material, and how you actually use what you learned outside the classroom, are definitely uplifting. They provide validation for effort that we typically do not otherwise receive.

Once a classmate told me he had enjoyed a lecture and I suggested he tell the professor. He later told me she responded by asking him to meet with her to hear what he had liked so she could get some ideas on what was effective about it.

I'll add a small anecdote to what @AndyW said: a professor of mine, who is a frequent guest speaker at other universities, gave a small talk to early-career professors in which he made the comment that teaching can often seem to be a thankless profession. Students will readily tell you if you do a bad job (ratemyprofessor and the like) but will much less often tell you you've done a good job.

Email the professor, they are human too, they like hearing that you enjoyed their class.

1) I...said this in the class evaluations, which the prof will read.

Class evaluations are presumably anonymous, an email from you is more personal.

2) More importantly, I recently received my final grade and it was good...If I email now, it might come off as an implied "thank you" for giving me a good mark...

You've done well because of your hard work, the professor hasn't done you any favours. (Regardless, if the class is sufficiently large, then the professor won't remember your grade and is surely unlikely to go to the trouble of looking it up.)

I will just throw in my personal experience about this subject. Three years ago I was taking an undergraduate course with a great professor. I was at a point where I didn't want to continue studying (I won't go deep in this subject), and he changed my mind just by the way he was teaching. He always gave more than he needed to, always pushed us forward and had a great way of teaching.
Half way through the semester, I asked for a meeting with him during the office hours to ask about a subject in his course. He answered all my questions and gave me more than he had to.
At the end of the semester, and after getting all my grades I decided to email him because I wanted to thank him for such a nice semester I had with him and for all the push he gave me to continue my studies.
He was so happy that I shared all the information with him because he didn't really know the impact he had on me. He invited me to his office and we had some discussions not regarding the studies. He even asked me to stay in touch (we're still in touch).

A professor might not always know the effect he had on his students, and he would like to get all the feedback possible (Class evaluations are not enough IMO). It's always good to give a push and a "Keep going" sign for a good person.
Bottom line:
Yes, it is appropriate to thank a human being for their effort, being it a professor, a doctor, a stranger you met on the road. It's just a nice and good gesture of you and it will surely make them happy. Believe it or not, it will.

A quite moving answer.

I've gone through something completely similar: I was attending uni at an older age than the average norm, and the lecturing professor was a young lady (younger than me), who was absolutely well versed in her field, I also sought her mentoring on the subject (which I didn't quite excel at), many a times stayed after the lecture to ask about problems relating to the field, also contacted her via email to assess solutions, etc. Hadn't for her support, I'd fail the class. Hoping to not go overboard, sent her a thank you and feedback email - she was grateful and happy to helf, also "made her day".

First, yes, I think you should email them. If you enjoyed their class so much, then it is likely that quite an ammount of work, and effort went in preparing them.
Learning that it was enjoyed, and that this work and effort did not go to waste is probably going to make them happy.
If you want to avoid any misjudging on your intentions, you should specify a few thing you really enjoyed in his class.

Hello professor X
I'm Emailing you to let you know that I found your classes particularly enjoyable. I especially enjoyed your lessons on X and Y, and I learned quite a bit during the lesson on Z.

Telling them about specifics parts of what you enjoyed will show that you are honest, and, more importantly, that their classes stuck with you.
All in all, definitely email them, everyone likes having their work aknowledged from time to time.

I've done similar things to my different professors, where it was accurate ;)

The second part of this answer makes it best one. The professor provided you a service, of which some specific things you particularly enjoyed. Absolutely fine to thank them for it.

You're overthinking this. It's almost always appropriate to thank somebody if you appreciate the work they've done.  In this case, where the professor has made a specific effort to help you personally, thanking them would be absolutely appropriate.
Note: "appropriate" not "mandatory". It would also be appropriate to not thank them, since they were "just doing their job". It's completely up to you, though it sounds like you want to thank them, and if you want to, you should.

One of the joys I had when teaching was a student acknowledging the course was "useful". The level above was a course described as "interesting", "great", etc.
I remember two specific cases:

one student coming personally to thank for the course. It was the last of their years, and after marking, so the "thank you " was genuine. It was not even a great student (he got something like 14/20 which is a so-so mark)
one other student coming to say the the course was interesting, that she learned a lot and that if she was to ask one thing for the future students, it would be for me to speak slower (the course was in English in France). That was a fantastic feedback: a nice one and constructive on top.

So definitely yes - tell him/her you enjoyed the course without overthinking.

The only reason to add my answer to the long list of "yes" answers is to note that as a professor I sometimes get that kind of thank you years later. It always makes my day.

This is a very interesting question and it has received some very good answers. Therefore, I intend to provide my personal experience and draw a conclusion from it.
Theory of Complex Functions was one of the courses that was dreaded by most of students in our department during my undergraduate studies. It was not because the course was too difficult (though it was not any piece of cake) but because it was taught by one of the most stern professors of the department. The course was one of the most unpopular ones but when I took it, I found that not only I enjoyed the course very much, I found the teaching method of the professor and also his manners and the meticulous attentions that he gave to mathematical concepts of the course very constructive for me. The professor's teaching method was unorthodox in the context of our department but there was nothing inherently wrong or unreasonable about it. For the course I received a very good score and when the semester finished (and I graduated), I went to his office. When I entered, he gave me the same stern and distant look as always. I briefly explained to him why I enjoyed his course and teaching method and then sincerely thanked him for it. The reaction of the professor was very interesting. He smiled genuinely and became warm and friendly, thanked me for my gratitude, asked a few friendly questions about me, my career and future plans and gave a few advice regarding them. At the end of our session, he shook my hand warmly and walked with me to his office door.
In general, I believe professors are humans and like any human being, they enjoy and appreciate any form of sincere gratitude. This is something that good professors need and deserve so that they can know that their efforts are noticed and valued by their students.

As TA myself and as someone who has done that. I would say yes, it is certainly welcomed. As an aside, whenever I come across an academic article that I really liked - I would email the author(s) to let her know I really enjoyed it.

Of course, this will probably make your teacher's day :) However, if you're going to do this, don't go overboard and bombard them with cheesy compliments. If you're going to do this, ensure you make yourself come across as genuine.

If you feel like sending such a note — then definitely send it! There's absolutely nothing inappropriate about doing that.
So I agree with all the answers above, which made a number of great points. But let me add my five cents anyway. As a college teacher myself, I've received a number of such emails (and even postcards) from my students — and I enjoyed every one of them, and each one made my day! Each such message made me feel happy and appreciated, and as humans we all need that.
Look, ours is not an easy job. It has its perks and its moments, as well as a fair share of its challenges. Whatever we do, we can't predict the outcomes of our work and our efforts — because we're working with people, our students, not with inanimate objects. So feedback is extremely important to us. Maybe it's just me, but I feel that we get more than enough negative feedback, sometimes deserved, sometimes not. We certainly need your positive feedback too!

I would have already said this in the class evaluations, which the prof will read.

That's not the same thing. Your feedback, because of being unsolicited, but rather something that you felt compelled to do as a sign of appreciation, is much more valuable than the officially requested student evaluations. Besides, the tone in evaluations is typically different — students tell the school about the instructor, as opposed to your writing directly to the instructor. Not to mention that evaluations are anonymous (which can be a good thing and a bad thing), and that your comment there is just one in a pile of all the other comments, which often paint a mixed picture.

More importantly, I recently received my final grade and it was good (A to A+). If I email now, it might come off as an implied "thank you" for giving me a good mark, even though I mean nothing of the sort.

It sounds like your professor is a good one, so I bet he knows that your success belongs to you and your own hard work. So don't worry, he won't misinterpret your message. But he will be happy to know that he assisted you in it, and that you know that too.
One more thing. In fact, by sending such a message, you will be doing a tangible favor to him — which, judging by what you said, the professor deserved, so nothing's wrong with that. When we're evaluated by the school's administration for the purposes of promotions, contract renewal, tenure, and such, for a teaching faculty his/her teaching portfolio must include students' perception of his/her work. I save all these emails, and I always include them in my portfolio. And I know from informal conversations with administrators that, while not decisive, they do play a tangible positive role.

"save all these emails, and I always include them in my portfolio" So your students feedback may not only become tangible benefits (career-wise), you're actually making them part of your history! Kudos to you!

@CPHPython: Thank you! To be honest, I exaggerated a little: I don't save absolutely all of them, but I do save many of them. The rest of my post is true, I swear! :-)

Also consider including your future plans in brief so that he knows where you're heading , he might shed some light into what you can do to enhance your career path. Its always good to know professors right from the start , he might be a source of LOR's in the future !

Do it! It's useful as more specific feedback (I've known very few lecturers/professors who actually read all the feedback).
Also, it allows the professor to know that you are interested in the subject area - and coupled with your good grades - may lead to further work/study in that field.
You could always ask for extra reading since the course is now over. That's sometimes a nice way to email.

There's no harm in saying you enjoyed the course. And I'm sure the teacher would be glad to hear it. Therefore, by all means, say that you enjoyed the course. A wider issue, of course, is whether students should email their lecturers at all. This never used to happen, when there was no internet. Why not say thank you in person?

We live for this. Please, please do.