text:
Is "Cambridge Scholars" a fake publisher?
Considering the fact that I'm a graduate student with a couple of publications, here is the email I've recently received from this website (I found it in my spam folder):

Dear Dr. Robotocist, ------------> (I'm not a doctor!!!)
Firstly, please excuse this unsolicited email.
I’m sure that like me you receive too many as it is and so I’ll keep
it brief.
I was recently appointed as Commissioning Editor for
Cambridge Scholars Publishing with a brief to expand the subject areas
in which we publish books. As such I am in the process of developing a
collection based in the field of Robotics. As I believe you already
have some experience of academic and scientific writing, I wondered
whether you would consider us as your publisher should you decide to
put ‘pen to paper’ and write a book at some point in the future?
We
are also developing Editorial Advisory Groups to help ensure that we
only publish high quality texts. If this is something that you would
like to become involved in, please do let me know. As I promised, I
have kept this message short, but would be delighted to talk or
correspond more if you feel you would like to explore possibilities.
Kind regards,
Helen Edwards
Commissioning Assistant

To me, this is a miserable fake thing, and I just wanted to know whether or not anybody has encountered this organization before.

I don't know that specific publisher, but there are a couple of related questions here, including With Beall's List gone, how can I tell if a journal is spam?. Generally, the use of the Cambridge name while being not associated with Cambridge University is a darkly red flag for me.

I now found the "Advisory Board" on the website: At least in my research field, the "highly respected academics" are total nobodies (no offense intended).

If you get a mail from a publisher asking for submissions or similar it's a predetory, fake or at least terrible publisher/journal. Except for invited papers publishers of good journals won't write to you asking for submissions.

I looked at the titles in mathematics, and while they skew heavily towards the philosophy and social sciences, the two I looked at more closely don't come close to the Beall'ness found here (see the comments). In particular, to me this book seems at first glance to be scholarly --- see this excerpt. (continued)

This book was also reviewed by Mathematical Reviews (MR3026739; publisher's summary only) and by zbMATH, although the fact that the author has no other publications reviewed by either of these two reviewing journals is a red flag. But maybe the book is based on the author's graduate work, and the author had to leave this field due to lack of jobs. This doesn't show the author is a crank, but it does show a lack of prominence that might warrant further investigation.


text:
Starting PhD without Bachelors
If I'm already at a decent school but don't feel like graduating, and a professor at a university agrees to take me as a pure math PhD student, can I join the PhD program or must I get a Bachelor's. The universities I am interested in are medium-upper level math universities (Northwestern, Berkeley, UCLA, Ohio State, etc)

Did you ask someone in those graduate admissions offices about this?

Why would a graduate program want to take a student who didn't feel like graduating? Ponder on that, because you will have to answer that question to the committee's complete and total satisfaction.

This is going to depend on the department/university. Some may have formal requirements others may not care.

@JonCuster maybe because one finished all the math requirements and the only thing left to do to graduate is to take 10 humanities classes and biology and chemistry and labs. Not everything is as simple as you seem to think. "Oh he didn't feel like graduating. What a lazy individual"

And you are not going to simply convince an admission committee that you are more qualified then many other applicants who did finish their degree, including those courses you don't want to take (many of which will make them better writers and communicators). So, the burden is on you to convince them, whether you like it or not.

@JonCuster "And you are not going to simply convince an admission committee that you are more qualified then many other applicants who did finish their degree." I'm not claiming I'm more qualified for dropping out... I will convince admissions committees that I'm better the same way I would if I did finish my Bachelor's. I don't know why they are on a much higher playing field for finishing some humanities.

From experience I can tell you that even in maths a PhD will involve a lot of boring uninteresting busywork only tangentially related to your PhD and that nobody wants to do, however which needs to be done anyways. If you essentially tell the committee, that you are unwilling to do things that do not directly interest you, this will sit as a black mark with them. Apart from this, there are some reasons for the non-maths requirements. You may not realise it yet, however having a broader horizon and some knowledge about different topics is very beneficial for research, even in maths.

Under what exact conditions has the professor agreed to take you as a pure math PhD? Do you have pertinent non-academic life experience? The crux of any answer would depend entirely on your specific circumstances and those conditions. Having said that, I believe that the general education requirements for most bachelors degrees are not entirely superfluous.

The answer is that the 'finished' something. You continue to to respond as if my comments are attacking you. My intent is to point out the crux of your problem - you need to convincingly argue that your circumstances make you a better candidate then all of the other candidates the admissions committee is looking at who did finish. So focus on that point.

What's your long-term career ambition? Many academic job applications ask for undergraduate transcripts. You might be setting yourself up for difficulty later.

It is possible in theory and has happened in practice.  (As I have reported elsewhere on this site, my own former thesis advisor attended but did not graduate from Bronx Science and attended but did not graduate from MIT, and this did not stop him from being admitted to the PhD program at Princeton, where he received his PhD at the age of 22.)
However in recent years university systems have gotten increasingly formalized. Especially at public universities, many bureaucratic requirements are taken seriously and are difficult or impossible to waive.  For instance at my state university (UGA), one needs a bachelor's degree to be eligible to enroll in our graduate program.  Speaking as the Graduate Coordinator of the math department at UGA, we would almost certainly not seriously consider an application from a student who could not meet this requirement.  On the one hand, it would be an uphill battle to get such a student enrolled.  On the other hand -- why won't they arrange to get an undergraduate degree?  Because they "don't feel like graduating"?  It is hard to understand why we should go out on a limb for an apparently feckless student when we have so many other applicants who really give a feck...so to speak.  Berkeley, UCLA and Ohio State are all state institutions, and I would expect (though I am not completely sure) their views to be similar to mine.
In my opinion the strategy of trying to bypass your undergraduate degree could only work if you are a student who is so exceptionally strong that it is clear to the very top schools that they want to have you.  Having said that...I got my PhD in math at Harvard, a perennially top-ranked program.  All of my fellow graduate students had (at least) undergraduate degrees.  On the other hand, more than one or two of them were under 21 when they arrived.  So in trying this maneuver you may be competing with absolutely brilliant 18 or 19 year-olds who were nevertheless feckfull enough to acquire undergraduate degrees.  I really don't like your chances.
Finally:

and a professor at a university agrees to take me as a pure math PhD student,

That's not how it works at all.  You have to get admitted by the department and the graduate school.  In pure math in the US, it is very rare for admissions decisions to be made by any one faculty member: they have to be made by the committee as a whole.

Thank you for your answer. If you could help me understand why you care if someone has a Bachelor's so much. Let's say they apply to your program beginning of senior year but don't meet all the humanities requirements so can't get a degree. Are they mathematically worse off? Similarly, if someone graduates in 3 years instead of 4 years, rushing to fulfill all of the non-math requirements of the university, is this really better than someone who spent 3 years and then just dropped out?

And for the purpose of the applicant, why would the applicant care if he had a Bachelor's? He will be going to the PhD program and getting a PhD? I'm just really confused of the point of a Bachelor's from both sides of this issue. Thanks

"Thank you for your answer. If you could help me understand why you care if someone has a Bachelor's so much." As I said, one reason I care is because I don't think that the university will let me admit someone without it.  "Let's say they apply to your program beginning of senior year but don't meet all the humanities requirements so can't get a degree."  There are non-mathematical requirements for getting a PhD in mathematics as well, and likewise for academic jobs in mathematics.  If you don't care about that, you worry me that you'll be a poor grader / teacher / administrator / colleague.

"Similarly, if someone graduates in 3 years instead of 4 years, rushing to fulfill all of the non-math requirements of the university, is this really better than someone who spent 3 years and then just dropped out?" Assuming they took the same number of math courses: yes, of course it's better, for the reasons I described above.  The person who graduated is showing that they can do the other stuff necessary to succeed.  It would be better still to spend four years and take more math courses: that's what most people do.

Good answer and upvoted (and extra credit for "giving a feck"), but I must say I think you are jumping to a somewhat harsh and not necessarily warranted conclusion when you are describing OP as "apparently feckless". While it's certainly possible that OP is feckless, not every college dropout is, and certainly a college dropout whose motivation for dropping out of college is to go to graduate school in math is hardly a textbook example of someone who is (as my dictionary defines it) "lacking initiative or strength of character; irresponsible". Misguided, possibly. Feckless, it's less clear.

@Dan: Better to be somewhat harshly judged for a hypothetical action by people on the internet who don't know your real identity than actually take the action and suffer the consequences.  Bottom line: "I don't feel like graduating" is a truly horrible grad school pitch.  The OP deserves to know this...

@PeteL.Clark agreed.

@PeteL.Clark I appreciate your advice but I don't know why a lot of you keep on saying similar things about it being a pitch or something like that. I would apply with the same qualifications as if I had finished the degree. I'm not like "I don't know any math, just except me cause I dropped out of college!" like wtf

@mathworker21 they're talking about it as a pitch because that's exactly what an application to a PhD programme is. PhD programmes are intense and stressful, and dropping out isn't particularly unusual. You're asking them to admit a student who may be intellectually capable but "doesn't feel like" graduating. Compared to an otherwise identical student who does finish their degree, which will they think is more likely to be able to motivate themselves through the PhD programme?

It's also worth noting that Wikipedia says Barry Mazur didn't graduate from MIT because, at the time, MIT required students to enter the Reserve Officers' Training Corps. Even ignoring the more rigid requirements of today's admissions processes, it's much easier to see a university deciding to admit a student who did all the academic work required of them but was failed for some non-academic reason, than a student who "doesn't feel like graduating."

@mathworker21 I'm not like "I don't know any math, just except me cause I dropped out of college!": you need to realize that you saying "I don't feel like graduating" sounds very similar to how you just paraphrased it. The point is that hearing you say that is a huge, huge turnoff for everyone here and makes you sound like an immature kid. If you want people to respect what you are trying to do you need to focus not on what you "don't feel like" doing but on what you do want to do and achieve - your motivation should be positive not negative. Please keep that in mind, and good luck.

You should answer the the following question: if you were in the Admission Committee of Berkeley, UCLA etc, why would you take the applicant mathwork21?
How mathwork21 compares to hundreds, if not thousands, applicants who have perfect GPA, GRE score etc.
Nothing is impossible, there are always outliers. The question is if you are good enough to be an outlier. I can imagine a situation when this is possible. You simply need to win one or two IMO medals, and have a LoR from a Field medallist that says you are a genius.

This. Not being able to complete the requirements for a BA make an admissions committee worried that the candidate won’t be able to complete the requirements for their orals, let alone the PhD.

You can join a PhD program without getting a Bachelors degree.  Dr. Jane Goodall does not have a bachelors degree.  She has one non-honorary doctorate.
However, if you are at a decent school and the professors like you and you like them, then getting a bachelors degree will be no sweat.
If the professors are all like mathworker21 is the future of math then they can credit by examination/life experience/whatever all requirements away and fast track you into their PhD program.
In fact, if they wish they can bypass the PhD, post-doc, and tenure process and make you a full professor if they can sense the future Fields prize winner in their midst.
Returning to reality.  You are not a future Fields prize winner.  They do not sense it.  In order to have a traditional academic career, you are going to have to finish your bachelors degree.

Is this answer conditioned upon the event that a professor would be willing to work with me in my current state (i.e. without a Bachelor's degree)

That is a necessary but not sufficient condition.  Realistically these things are poorly defined.  Is it really important to you to get a PhD? (because I can get you one if you need it) / or do you want to study mathematics with the brightest minds in your field.  If you primarily want to study mathematics then your status as undergraduate student, graduate student, or faculty is of little significance.

It should be noted that there are undergraduate students publishing high quality original mathematical research.  (I was never one of them.)  There is nothing special about being a PhD student.

Jane Goodall got her PhD more than 50 years ago.  Academia has changed a lot since then, so I don't think her case is at all a useful indicator of current practice.

@NateEldredge I don't think her case is very useful wrt past practices either.  It can happen does not mean it is likely to happen.

There are a lot of things in academia that are possible to do in theory, in the sense that they have been successfully done by someone, but in practice are so difficult and risky to do, that the answer to a generic person asking about whether they can do them is, to an extremely good approximation, "no".
For example, it is in theory possible (or at least was, back in the 1940's) to get admitted to the math PhD program at Princeton on the strength of a 3-sentence long letter of recommendation, and to go on to write a PhD dissertation that ends up winning you a Nobel prize. But if an anonymous stack exchange user asks a practical question about whether they can hope to attain such things themselves, I would simply answer: "no, almost certainly you can't."
Now, what you are asking about is admittedly of a less tall order than winning a Nobel prize, but it belongs in the same category of achievements. For reasons explained in Pete's and others' answers, your plan will almost certainly not succeed (unless you know something about yourself that we don't, say that you have already been very successful in research, published multiple well-received math papers and managed to impress some well-known academics who are offering to help you get into a good PhD program without a bachelor's degree). Moreover, this plan is extremely risky, since once you find out that the plan didn't work your only option would be to go back to school and finish your degree, costing you time, money and emotional distress.
When weighing all of that against the option of just finishing your degree, however annoying and pointless that might seem to you, any sensible person would recognize that finishing the degree is the much more advisable option. Anyway, good luck!

Edit: there is another serious risk factor in your plan that occurs to me and that no one has mentioned yet. Even if you do get into a PhD program, it is far from guaranteed that you will end up graduating - even some very talented students sometimes end up dropping out (for miscellaneous reasons, for example loss of motivation). In the event that you don't finish your PhD, you will then be left without any degree, which could make it much harder to find a good job. So, I know your question was "can I" and not "should I", but it's something to think about...

I work in a research institution, there is a colleague who is trying to start a PhD without even finishing his graduate program. He is a smart man, our professors are willing to take him on board.
But it doesn't work like that. He can't be admitted without super strong evidence that he can indeed do research. Our professors don't have the power to admit him - they don't run the university. The university admission committee don't care how intelligence he is, they'd just look at formal documentation.
It's close to impossible be admitted into any reasonable university without any degree. You have to be an extraordinary exceptional, are you? If you're a rich man like Mark for Facebook, you can jump directly into a PhD degree!
How many academic papers you have with you as the first author? If you don't have any ... just finish your undergraduate degree...

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Appropriateness of dedicating my thesis to a Jewish mathematician who died in a concentration camp
I am a Muslim student in a non-Arab country. Would it be unwanted/inappropriate for me to dedicate my thesis on Tauber theory to Alfred Tauber, and more generally to all those Jewish mathematicians who died in Nazi concentration camps during WW2? I thought it would form a nice opportunity for some remembrance of the fact that so many people whose work we value today were affected. I was greatly saddened to learn about the fate of A. Tauber and wanted to do something with that. On the other hand, a mathematics thesis might not be the place to "confront" like this.

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

Aeismail’s answer is spot on: who you choose to dedicate it to is entirely up to you (modulo political expedience). I've read theses dedicated to martyrs and I've read theses dedicated to cats. Do what you feel moved to do. See answers here for some discussion.
As for how it would be received by the Jewish community and Jewish mathematicians, I am confident that the answer is "extremely well," based on my experiences and conversations about similar tributes. On a personal level, as a Jewish mathematician and descendant of survivors I would find this incredibly meaningful to come across and quite likely be moved to tears by a well-written dedication along these lines.
A tip about writing the dedication: one common mistake that people writing about the Holocaust make is to paint it as “unimaginable” or “unprecedented.” Although it is by far the single largest genocide in terms of total number of people killed (6M Jews, 5M others includes Poles, the disabled, and homosexuals) that usually rubs me the wrong way. The Holocaust is without a doubt the most socially prominent, but definitely not only, example of persecutions of Jews or of genocide as a whole. It’s also not the most recent or “last” (I see people use this term) genocide, nor has Nazism gone away. Today there is genocide in Myanmar against the Rohingya people and in Iraq against the Yazidi. Today neo-Nazis openly march in Virginia, USA while targeting Jews in their chants and waving the swastika. These facts are things people tend to be unaware of, and so people can sometimes accidentally take away from their tributes through inaccurate or dismissive words.
I think a dedication to Tauber and the others who were murdered would be lovely, but caution you to think carefully about the wording lest you accidentally minimize or dismiss the aforementioned facts.
A couple of people seem to have missed the fact that there’s a direct connection between Tauber and your work. To explicitly state that for anyone who is reading this: the field that is the topic of the dissertation is known as “Tauber Theory” and (presumably) Tauber’s work was foundational and central to the field and the dissertation.

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

Note that the uniqueness of the Holocaust is a somewhat sensitive topic; you'll probably piss off some people claiming that it was just one of the large genocides, and piss off others by saying it is unique. (Although probably none of those people read math theses.)

It may be worth noting that many of the mathematicians who perished in the holocaust did not die in concentration camps, Felix Hausdorff being the most prominent example.

@Mathmo123, yes, Hausdorff anticipated being sent to a "camp", and committed suicide instead. Maybe it would be better to say more directly "killed by Nazis" as an accurate umbrella.

Who you choose to recognize in your acknowledgments is up to you. If you would like to dedicate it to the memory of someone, that's entirely your choice. If you are worried about the political backlash, you could submit the thesis to the reviewer without the dedication and acknowledgments and then add those at the end.

a mathematics thesis might not be the place to "confront" like this.

No, I disagree. There are few ways in academia to draw attention to this crime more powerful than the acknowledgements section of your thesis. I hope you choose to do so!
Also, to speak to another part of your comment . . .

I am a Muslim student in a non-Arab country. Would it be unwanted/inappropriate for me . . . .

That you are Muslim does not detract from this in any way. Politically, to the Jewish communities, that you are Muslim would only add more power to your acknowledgement.

Do you genuinely think that the Holocaust needs more attention? It's not some unknown part of history.

Given recent events, such as the treatment of the Kurdish, Rohingya, and Yazidi peoples, I think that raising awareness of horrible events like the Holocaust that can occur when people fail to take notice of what is happening around them can only be a good thing, particularly in an age of relative desensitisation to current affairs.

54% of people in the world have heard about the holocaust, and 32% of people think it's a myth or greatly exaggerated. Amongst people age 18-34 these numbers are 48% and 39% respectively. So yes, I think the Holocaust needs more attention. http://global100.adl.org/info/holocaust_info

I don't understand the first bit you say. First you disagree that thesis is not a place to do this, then you say there are other ways more powerful do draw attention than the thesis. I assume that you miss the word "but", is this correct?

Also, it is indeed that there are other methods to draw other's attention to a problem, but it also needs appropriate contexts. OP might not be an activist, they might not be suitable for doing politics. And if OP's main "targets" are mathematicians, then where is the fittest place to "protest", if not in papers?

@Ooker Possibly you just misread, but in case this is a language thing: If you say "there are few foods I like more than ice cream", it essentially means "I like ice cream a lot". This is a bit of a quirk of the language, since if you say "there are a few foods I like more than ice cream" that has a meaning similar to your interpretation, more like: "ice cream is good, but we can do better".

That's right. @Ooker, I was just saying that your acknowledgement section is a really, really good way to tell people about what crime happened to this wonderful mathematician. I was also saying that your religious identity is definitely not a problem.

A lot of people don't seem to realize that acknowledgments are most often inserted into the thesis after the committee has read and signed off on it.  On the one hand this is justified because they are not part of the intellectual content of the thesis, and indeed the committee should not be swayed by the acknowledgments in either way.  On the other hand, this makes good practical sense because acknowledgments most commonly contain thanks and praise for the thesis advisor, and it's best if the thesis advisor doesn't see this until after she has read and approved the thesis.  In light of this I fervently disagree that the OP is accruing any non-negligible risk that placing this acknowledgment will jeopardize the outcome of his thesis submission or defense.
But more than this I fervently disagree with the idea that the OP would necessarily be wrong to incur any non-negligible risk to his academic career by speaking out on something that he believes in.  Shame on everyone who suggested or implied that the OP may not know where the Holocaust deniers / anti-semites / anti-Israeli leftists may lie and therefore should behave as though anyone could potentially be such a person.  That is exactly wrong.
I have led my professional life in open support of those who have feeling for their fellow human beings, even / especially those who come from different backgrounds than their own.  This has worked well for me, but if it had worked out badly then it would have been even more important.

Be the change that you wish to see in the world.  -- Mahatma Gandhi

I encourage the OP to be a pico-Gandhi by having the courage to honor the people he wants to honor in his own thesis acknowledgments.  Maybe this will serve as an example in particular to those who have advised against this here.

Gandhi was assassinated...

@PatrickT it sounds like you've completely missed the point of this answer.

I would argue that such a dedication is appropriate - it serves to memorialize a great person who moved mathematical study forwards significantly, and was killed by an oppressive regime due to his ethnic background. This would be akin to a computer science publication being dedicated to Alan Turing, the father of modern computer science, who was oppressed for being gay in 1940s England. It is not an exceptionally controversial dedication so much as one that recognizes our field's past and humanity's advancement in the face of adversity. I would not hesitate to dedicate a published document to a significant historical figure who influenced the entire field behind my work, no matter their religious or ethnic background. This is your thesis, however, so it is ultimately your judgment call.

A thesis is, among other goodies, a piece of literature.  I would include historical remarks into it, too - for the purpose of educating the reader. In the historical section, I would elaborate on the fates of the involved mathematicians.  This would make the thesis interesting to read even for non-mathematicians.  In particular, I would speak about Alfred Tauber there as much or as little as I wish - and make this section captivating. Yes, I would definitely mention his death circumstances. A dedication to Mr. Tauber may or may not be inlcuded according to your wish, but if you include it, it will certainly raise the literary quality of your writing.
The fact that you are a Muslim in a non-Arab country is irrelevant.  Being a Muslim is about your own, personal beliefs and your own, very personal way of thinking, behaving, and living, and has nothing to do with mathematics and the history of Holocaust, in particular, of Mr. Tauber. Mr. Tauber's death in a concentration camp, the worldwide sufferings of the Jewish diaspora, and, finally, the Holocaust are disgraceful, horrible pages of the history of mankind that are written with blood. The world should be aware of them, and it's everyone's duty to know about them and learn from them. Germany has already learnt, and the time will come when the other countries will also have to learn. "Never send to know for whom the bell tolls …" But, regardless of this shame on us, Mr. Tauber's personal life, in its core, is not directly related to your thesis, to you personally, or to your religion.

As a Jewish researcher in the Jewish state, I was profoundly touched by your post.  I agree with previous answers that you can make this acknowledgment. But at the same time, it may indeed potentially damage you, as Arthur Tarasov said. Probably you can make some more general dedication to all innocently killed or repressed mathematicians (or scientists, in general). At the end, it might not be that different whether a scientist (or any person at all) died in Hitler's concentration camp, executed by Stalin's regime (as for example, Matvei Bronstein or was prosecuted because of his homosexuality as Alan Turing.

The point is that the thesis is about Tauber theory, and Alfred Tauber died in a concentration camp. Dedicating the thesis to Alfred Tauber and all other mathematicians who were innocently killed sounds to me like you're trying to avoid mentioning the fact that Hitler's regime killed him because he was Jewish. I would personally find this offensive, and suspect it is more likely to be damaging than the OP's originally proposed dedication. (Although, generally speaking, either dedication would probably have little impact on the OP's career.)

@PeterShor: BrainResearcher is offering a solution if the OP is excessively worried about the reception of a thesis dedicated to a Jewish mathematician in the Arab world. While this shouldn't be an issue, I can certainly attest from personal experience that many older Arabs have strong biases when it comes to Jews.

The OP lives in a NON-ARAB country.

You should be careful when writing personal statements into public work. These include dedications, acknowledgements, even cover pictures in some cases. This is intended as general advice, without the political implications which other answers already discussed.
You should always ask yourself "What is the message I want to convey?" and "What am I achieving by conveying my message in this particular way?".
It is fine to care about causes or be touched by the fates of people. Most people will agree with your dedication. Few will not. And some, and this is the most important category, will question your intentions behind it, regardless of how they feel towards your statement. (Are you trying to gain favors with the committee? Are you trying to promote your political views through your scientific publication? Are you a provocateur? etc.)
The point is, strong statements in work where science is the focus reap no benefits from the positive effects, but can cause harm if viewed negatively. Your ultimate goal is to have your thesis approved and to graduate. People who are favorably inclined towards your statement won't give you "bonus points" for it, i.e. let you graduate if you would have failed otherwise. But people who are negatively inclined, might be biased enough to cause you trouble. The worst thing here is that probably nobody will voice their disagreement with your dedication directly, but will show their bias in other ways. Thus, you put yourself in a position where you might evaluate every critique whether it is a valid remark on your work or just some psychological reaction to your dedication.
Therefore, I would always advise against strong statements unrelated to the work. Your views are better and more professionally expressed (and bound to reach a broader audience) when included in your monographs or blog posts, for example, as opposed to theses or papers.

This case seems as uncontroversial as it gets. The only people who should be opposed to it are holocaust deniers, and we probably don't mind not pandering to them.

@YuvalFilmus you would probably very much mind if such a person was in the position to significantly influence your career. Keep in mind that most holocaust deniers do not publicly advocate their position and so OP would face literal silent bullying, where otherwise no problems would occur. I agree that this is wrong, unethical and much more, but can you say that it is impossible? What is OP's benefit that offsets the potential risk?

"Are you trying to promote your political views through your scientific publication? Are you a provocateur?" Because God forbid we advance the Jewish Agenda of recognizing the existence of history. That would be unacceptable.

"What is OP's benefit that offsets the potential risk?" Doing a good deed, not erasing mass murder, acknowledging the terrible tragic fate that was forced upon the man who founded the OP's field, potentially educating the handful of people who read the thesis...? Do none of those resonate with you? It's seems that something along these lines resonates with the OP.

@StellaBiderman Everything has its time and place. "Advancing the jewish agenda" is hardly appropriate for a mathematical thesis.

You seem to have entirely missed the point of my comment, which is that pretending that acknowledging the holocaust is part of a “Jewish Agenda” is fundamentally wrong and antisemitic. Acknowledging the fact that one third of my people were murdered in 6 years while the rest of the world actively chose to do nothing is the very least you can do, from a moral point of view, to address the horrible tragedy.

@StellaBiderman I don't deny the tragedy that befell the Jewish people (and indeed many other peoples) during WWII or any earlier pogroms. I'm from Europe, all our ancestors here lived through the carnage of WWII (my great-grandmother was executed in 1943 in the middle of the day by a Nazi patrol, with no trial or incarceration, and she was not Jewish), so I can't really understand that denying it is considered a serious argument. Yet, I stand by my statement about the appropriate contents of a thesis.

Is it important for you to concentrate on his death? I (personally) would rather be remembered for what I achieved and and not what was done to me. So rather "He was great mathematician and his research influenced hundreds of mathematicians in the following decades".

Hopefully you (personally) would not be murdered in a concentration camp due to belonging to the wrong ethnic group.

I tried to make it clear that I'm not not caring about it, or want to erase it. I just proposed to remember him for what he has achieved, how he lived his life and how he influenced the next generations and not was somebody else did to him.

I think that the idea behind this is excellent and highly laudable.
The only possible issue is that an academic publication should be purely academic and free from any personal political or moral (as opposed to ethical) stance.
With this in mind I think it would perhaps be better to restrict any acknowledgements to those which had a direct influence on your paper, as academic publication is not really the appropriate forum to express your personal opinions, no matter how morally justified.
Having said that I would certainly encourage you to do everything you can to promote the value of science, reason and humanist (in the general sense) discourse above racial, national  and religious differences in other forums.
But then again it is hard to see how a personal dedication, which is obviously separate from academic acknowledgements as a preface to the paper would be a bad thing. The key being to be clear that it is separate from the academic work itself.

Students have wide scope in their acknowledgements to dedicate their dissertation to whoever they wish.  Your proposed dedication is unlikely to be even mildly controversial; a much more interesting question is whether one would incur a backlash dedicating a thesis to a mathematician on the other side of this historical event (e.g., Ludwig Bieberbach), but even here, an acknowledgement should not be an issue, and a professional reviewer would ignore your acknowledgement in assessing the merits of your academic work.
Given your thesis topic, it makes perfect sense that you might like to dedicate your thesis to Alfred Tauber, since he is the progenitor of the field that is the subject of that thesis.  It also makes sense to mention his demise, and it is not at all unreasonable to mention other mathematicians who shared his fate.  The only possible negative is the decision to include other Jewish mathematicians killed in the Holocaust, but exclude other non-Jewish mathematicians killed under other regimes, but even here, this is a direct offshoot of recognising what happened to Tauber.  It would take a very tendentious person to be offended by this.

If your thesis is on Tauber theory then dedicating it to a man would be appropriate, so long as you do not do it for political reasons. However, it seems that at least in part you are doing it for political reasons. I would remove all that is not mathematics from your dedication statement. A simple sentence would work fine "I dedicate this work to Tauber."

Where did you get the idea the OP has political motivations? Please explain.

You're a Muslim? I'd definitely avoid it. Even if you weren't a Muslim, I'd tell you to avoid it because of how touchy a subject it is unless the person in question was directly related to the work you've been doing, or you personally were directly related to them, but when you add in the ongoing tensions between Israel and much of the rest of the Middle East, there's too big a risk that it might come off as mocking them or gloating about it.
Additionally, even if you manage to avoid falling into that additional pitfall, there's enough antisemitic sentiment among the Left-wing political activist types common on university campuses (e.g. the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement) that I'd recommend against referencing them at all, even in a positive light; you never know if one of the people marking your paper is one of the people that really, really doesn't like Israel.

I don't see how being a Muslim rather than, say, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, or non-religious, makes any difference.

Because of the ongoing ethnic tensions between their two peoples, and how that can color the interpretation that people might make of things like this.

I don't think the Holocaust is a "touchy" subject. It's not "touchy" at all. It is a great tragedy, yes. "Touchy" subjects are subjects who are, e.g., controversial, etc. Would you say that "Hurricane Irma" is a "touchy" subject? Would you oppose dedicating a thesis to gay people who have been murdered in some specific hate crime against gays?

I do agree about the far-left activists though.

"unless the person in question was directly related to the work you've been doing, or you personally were directly related to them." The OP specifically states that the field they work in is named after the man they wish to dedicate the thesis to. And the idea that someone could write about the holocaust and actually accidentally come off as gloating really confuses me. Sure there are more and less tactful or historically accurate ways to write about tragedies, but gloating? Can you give an example of something that could be meant as a tribute but accidentally gloats?

"You're a Muslim? I'd definitely avoid it." In counseling the OP how to deal with hypothetical people who might possibly discriminate against him because of his views, you are non-hypothetically discriminating against him because of his religion.  -1.  A really big -1.

+1 It's sad to say, but practically speaking, this is the correct answer. Not morally, but pragmatically. Coming off as pro-Israel labels you as a conservative (as absurd as that is), and that is academic career suicide in many modern western universities. This is coming from liberal atheist, incidentally. Being a Muslim will make it worse, unfortunately; firstly because (again, sorry, but realistically) Muslims tend to work with other Muslims, and 2nd the left cares about ethnicity deeply. This is why conservative gays are treated much worse than regular conservatives. But I say do it anyway!

Fellow commenters, do please remember that your cultural context is not everyone's cultural context.

@user3658307, what does this have to do with Israel? He is talking about the Holocaust. This happened in Europe/Germany.

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


text:
Lecturer in Australia - response to selection criteria
I am applying for a lecturer position in Australia in computer science. The application process asks for "a statement addressing the selection criteria outlined in the position description". An enumerated list of n (say, n=8) selection criteria is available in the job announcement. The criteria are heterogeneous, ranging from simple "PhD title or equivalent" to elaborate "a high level of communication skills". Which high-level structure is expected?

A continuous, consistent, logically ordered, literary perfect text, from which it follows that the applicant satisfies all the criteria.
A list of n paragraphs, one paragraph per criterion, that technically addresses the requirements, but not more.
A list of n sections, one section per criterion, that technically addresses the requirements, but not more.
...?

How large are the typical statements in each case?

The criteria are there to give an institution the required ammo to reject your application legally.

Well you may not get a notice in Australia too, depending on the university.  My comment relates to hiring laws.  Say a university already has a person in mind, a graduating student of theirs for example, and by law, they have to advertise for the position.  How does one reject all applications, except from said student, legally?

because every is based on 'merit' and 'fairness'.

Legally, we can't do that.  Due process must be followed.

It depends on the nature of the selection criteria. A criterion like

PhD from an accredited institution

requires only a paragraph, but

Research agenda with high probability of publications in leading journals

may require a whole section.
You see a similar thing with NSF research proposals; one question is (paraphrasing)

"what is the grant number of your most recent support"

and another is

"describe the research to be undertaken".

Some combination of approaches 2 and 3 is probably best.

Put yourself in the shoes of the search committee. If you have over 100 applicants (depending on the position not unreasonable), then anything applicants can do to make it easier on committee members will be appreciated. Which would you prefer to read? From personal experiences on search committees, the narrative passages start to run together, but the candidates who use headings that are the criteria stand out.
Bjorn has provided examples of what may require short answers and what may require longer answers.


text:
“Professional contribution” in Australia for the purpose of applying for a Lecturer position
For the purpose of applying for a lecturer position in Australia in computer science, what is actually a "professional contribution"? This phrase occurs among the selection criteria but seems to me way too broad from a purely linguistic viewpoint. According to the text describing the selection criteria, a "professional contribution" is supposed to be separate from experience in research, teaching experience, experience outside university, creative achievements, and technical achievements – they are measured separately.

Think of it as the "service" side. What adminstration have you done?

@daaxix There is service in committees of different institutions, there is service in program committees of publication venues, and there is purely admin stuff (e.g., project manager). Which of the above are you speaking about? Is there anything else you are wishing to mention?


text:
“Contribution to technical achievement” in Australia for the purpose of applying for a Lecturer position
For the purpose of applying for a lecturer position in Australia in computer science, what is actually a "contribution to technical achievement"? This phrase occurs among the selection criteria but seems to me way too broad from a purely linguistic viewpoint. According to the text describing the selection criteria, a "contribution to technical achievement" is supposed to be separate from research experience, teaching experience, experience outside university, creative achievements, and professional contributions – they are measured separately.

I don't really see why you need three questions here. You should be able to combine them into a single question that asks what the different terms mean. This is especially true since they're all associated with the same issue, and anyone who wants to see one would probably want to see all three.

@aeismail (One base at a time!) Let's not mix the concepts. Some folks may be able to answer only one question - they should get separate votes for that. This is especially true since there have not been overwhelmingly many replies so far. Some other folks may be interested in only one term, not three, and should get appropriate answers.

I suspect that "technical achievement", within the context of computer science, is a reference to the production and development of computer software/hardware.  Hence, "contributions to technical achievement" is a cue to allow you to give information on any contributions you have made to the development of software/hardware/computing problems (e.g., a program you wrote or helped with).  There is probably going to be some overlap with "creative achievements".

The job ad should list a contact.  You can ask them.
In my experience the selection criteria are not written very carefully.  So I would guess there is no precise answer to your question.


text:
Is it unethical to apply to/attend a PhD program knowing you MIGHT end up leaving it under a particular circumstance?
Hypothetically, suppose one applies to and is admitted to both a funded PhD program in Field A and a master's program in Field B at the same university, in different departments. Suppose there was a structure in place at the university for both programs to be undertaken concurrently (an implication of this is that I would not have to pay tuition for the normally unfunded master's program).
Is it unethical to attend both programs, knowing that depending on how the Field B master's goes, I may end up leaving the Field A PhD (after receiving my Field A master's) for the Field B PhD at the same university? Note that this is not my intention going in, but simply the one unlikely but possible situation in which I know that I would leave. I don't expect this is likely to happen - and if for whatever reason I don't want to or can't make the switch to the Field B PhD program at that university, I would see the Field A PhD through no matter what.
Furthermore, if it is unethical to attend both programs, is it also unethical to apply to both programs? It goes without saying that I would not misrepresent myself in my statements of purpose to either program (or to my letter writers).

Since it is unlikely that the university would let you register in both departments, I doubt you would end up in such a situation.

The university in question has a joint program that allows graduate registration in two departments, but not an interdisciplinary program.

It is not unethical to apply to both programs.
However, for most advanced degree programs, the possibility of doing multiple programs simultaneously is remote, unless the departments have already established a method for undertaking work between the disciplines. For instance, there may be an interdisciplinary program or a "joint degree" program. In such cases, though, you will find it very difficult to find a funded program that will pay for your studies to complete a degree in another department.

There are many "unlikely but possible" reasons you might leave a PhD halfway through. A family member might fall sick and need constant care, you might fall sick and be unable to complete, you might win the lottery, you might have a child, you might be offered an amazing opportunity in industry, your advisor might turn out to be insufferable, ... You never know what will happen, and it's a risk that everyone, including your funding source, has to accept.
There is nothing unethical to doing what's best for you if such a situation comes along, as long as you do not go in with the intention of leaving halfway through.


text:
How to submit an article (for example, on arXiv) without being affiliated to any institution?
The core of the problem is already in the title but I feel as i should add some more details.
I was doing some mathematics and, if there are no logical flaws or mistakes of any other nature (it seems that there are none) I managed to prove some result that, again, if it is proved with no errors, would, I believe, enrich the field in which it belongs.
Of course, I immediately started to think about arXiv.org and I decided that I want to submit an article there, but, when I was reading help section, there stands this, written:

Note: It is a violation of our policies to misrepresent your identity or institutional affiliation. Claimed affiliation should be current in the conventional sense: e.g., physical presence, funding, e-mail address, mention on institutional web pages, etc. Misrepresentation of identity or affiliation, for any reason, is possible grounds for immediate and permanent suspension.

But, as you are aware by now, I do not belong to any institution and as such, am not affiliated with any, I am just an amateur that among all fields thinks about mathematics the most. So, I have stumbled upon this cautious note quoted above and do not know what to do.
So, I decided to write to all of you here to see what can be done in this case of mine. I am not 100% sure that among all sites this is the one most suited for this problem of mine (for example, I could have written this on MO Meta or MSE Meta) but surely I will try to welcome opinions and help, even if they do not resolve this issue that I am faced with.
What should be done?
EDIT: This is not a complete duplicate of the question mentioned in such a way as this one is a duplicate of that one because the body of the question mentioned goes like this:
"Assume you have already completed your undergrad and have been working for a number of years. Does one need to be part of a university or a learning institution to publish papers?"
But, I did not complete my undergrad and I am working for a number of years (independently). so, there are some similiarites but the question is not exactly the same, although answers seem to fit well.

See here for answers: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/61628/do-i-have-to-be-affiliated-with-an-institution-to-publish-on-arxiv-is-arxiv-the?rq=1 https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19710/what-to-put-in-affiliation-field-when-submitting-paper-without-affiliation https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3010/does-one-need-to-be-affiliated-with-a-university-to-publish-papers https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/306/is-it-possible-take-take-part-in-a-research-project-if-im-not-a-part-of-a-unive

A question is marked as a duplicate if the answers apply equally. It's not necessary for every detail of the question to be the same.

The text you found tells you that you must not claim some affiliation which you do not actually have. So either leave the affiliation field empty, or enter something like "Independent Researcher".
You will then probably have to go through the endorsement procedure. For that, you need some researchers that have published in the category you are aiming for before to state that they think you should be allowed to publish to the arXiv.

My advice toward "what should be done" is to send the paper to a peer-reviewed journal.  Only by review will you learn (a) the value of what you've done, and (b) whether there are errors.  arxiv.org will not tell you this; it is just a repository.
As for which journal to send it to, that's another question entirely.  You should probably not try for the top journal(s) in the field, as they will have very high standards and little patience for someone without experience in writing papers.

+1 The arXiv approach is probably more suitable for someone who either has the experience to evaluate their own research, or the contacts to get others to review it. Sending a paper to a peer-reviewed journal gets some feedback.

@PatriciaShanahan I can evaluate my own research, because its mine, how could I even be able to do the research if I am not able to evalute it, right?

@Antoine Part of evaluating it is determining the novelty which requires a much broader view than just doing the research. And as for correctness, the hundreds of "proofs" of the Riemann hypothesis suggests that the author is not always qualified to judge that.

@TobiasKildetoft OK, we can agree that some experts are armed with enough experience so that they can say some things about my research, that, maybe, I cannot. But what if nobody wants to read my work?

When you send it to a peer-reviewed journal, the journal (its editors) will send it to other experienced researchers who will then read and evaluate it - from an independent position. Otherwise we wouldn't need peer-review: everyone should be convinced of their own research.


text:
How to explain the reasons to change Phd. supervisor
I spent a year with a Phd. supervisor. I am not happy from both aspects: relationship and academically. Is it ethical to change the supervisor? Should I explain the reasons for change in details to the prospective supervisor or just be brief? How to avoid getting the impression that the student is trouble-maker (if I explained details of problems) vs. avoid give the impression there is no real reasons for change or that the student is not serious enough (if I am brief)?

It's all in your question already, avoid going into details that could make you look like a troublemaker, and do specify real, preferably academic reasons for the change. Make clear why you see your PhD work in the potential new supervisor's research direction.

"Is it ethical to change the supervisor?": It's not an ethical problem. If the relationship with your advisor is compromised, it would be hard to complete a successful PhD, and it's better to change advisor. Depending on where you are, though, this could be more or less difficult.

Just say it wasn't a good fit.  Leave it at that.

You didn't say in what situation you need to explain this, which may change the answer.
If it is merely coming up in passing in a conversation, "It was not a good fit" is a good neutral way to give the general idea and leave it up to your interlocutor whether to pursue the topic or not.
If you are specifically asked for your reasons for leaving, a condensed 2-3 sentence version should be enough in most cases. Try to avoid placing blame, it is not a trial of who is right or wrong, you or your advisor. E.g. "our research interests do not align, I would really like to go more into topic B" rather than "he keeps making me do grunt work on things I hate". If you have academic reasons you probably don't need to go into the personal reasons at all, but if you do want to bring it up at some point, frame it as something like "our personalities do not mesh well". Stay carefully factual when recounting details. (This doesn't mean downplaying the issues. Think of a way to formulate it neutrally but still exposing the crux of the issues barefacedly.)
Generally, potential other supervisors will see themselves in the role of your current supervisor, so they will imagine that you will talk about them in the same manner as you will talk about your current supervisor.

You should definitely look to change supervisors, but you may need to consider the politics of doing so. Academia is a small world and it's possible that you'll run into your old supervisor again some day, or that they will talk to others who you work with, so it's generally better to be tactful.
My department had a Postgraduate Coordinator who was there to assist all the PhD/MSc students. Mine was very helpful when I needed to drop one of my co-supervisors because our working relationship had broken down. If your university has such a role, I'd strongly encourage talking to them about it; they may be able to help you smooth the waters with your old supervisor.


text:
GRE Math Subject Test Overkill for Statistics MS?
I got a degree in Applied Mathematics, but while I aced my Statistics courses, my performance in my math courses was weak. I have retaken some of the courses but will not be able to retake them all. Is the Math Subject GRE, though difficult, worth the effort of preparing and doing, hopefully, well on it?

Why don't you check the admissions page of the program you are applying to? I'm sure they will say something like "GRE math subject test required/recommended/not required/not considered" etc

Some mention that it is "strongly encouraged", but only in general for a program: they do not specify if it is even important for MS programs. Others don't mention it at all on the MS applicant pages. The main point of my question, is it even worth it to take the test for just MS?

If the Math GRE is "strongly encouraged" and you're concerned that your performance in mathematics courses will negatively affect your application, then yes, you should take it. It doesn't matter so much that it's only for a Master's degree, because the GRE is only useful as a predictor for courses, which is Master's-level work.


text:
"scholarly activities" vs. "research activities" in Australia for the purpose of applying to a lecturer position
For the purpose of applying for a lecturer position in Australia in computer science (CS), what are "research activities" and "scholarly activies", and how do they differ? The applicant is asked to provide "scholarly and research activities" according to the selection criteria stated in a particular job description on the website of the CS department to which I am applying to.  However, both terms seem to me way too vague or broad from a purely linguistic viewpoint.  The discussion in What does "research activities" mean? touches only the "research activity" term, but even this discussion is incomplete and contradictory.

Really you should ask them.  My uninformed opinion (from the US).  Research activities is: doing research.  Presumably that is what you want if you apply in computer science.  Scholarly activities is: writing books and poems, performing music and drama and dance.  Other departments may emphasize that, rather than research.

@GEdgar I find it hard to believe that a CS department is really interested in how well I can dance. I can, but it's off-topic.

I just assume that classification "scholarly and research activities" is included for all applicants in all departments, so that one of the two possibilities applies to each applicant.

@GEdgar Thx. Right. "Doing research" is ok, but it is very, very wide: I could write 10 lines or 10 pages on that. What I actually wish to find out is what aspects of research do people reading the response to selection criteria care about. Asking the department could be counterproductive: if it is well-known in Australia, my question would come ridiculous and could be regarded negatively.

Why don't you look at what the faculty there put on their CVs? That is probably an indication of what is valued.

@Dawn Not a bad idea, but the person having the most weight does not have it. Though, a CV (they call it résumé) and a statement addressing the selection criteria are supposed to be two different documents for the purpose of the application.

@Abra: I would be very surprised if asking the department was received negatively at all.  People are well aware that this sort of academic-bureaucratic language varies widely from place to place, and so even if it’s well-understood in Australia, someone from elsewhere may reasonably not know the distinction.  (I also wouldn’t be surprised if it’s not a widely-used distinction even in Australia, but just a particular technical distinction made by some administrative committee.)

I am currently out of academia, but have worked at Lecturer level in Australia (US equivalent of Assistant Prof).  To my understanding, asking about your "research activities" is a cue for you to talk about your published (and in-progress) papers, and your field of research, and "scholarly activities" is a bit broader, allowing you to talk about other activities that do not result in publications to you (e.g., refereeing papers, editing a journal, holding an administrative position in a professional body, etc.).  That is how I would interpret it, but if in doubt, be proactive and contact them; there is zero chance of your enquiry being taken negatively.


text:
How to not get "filtered out" during graduate admissions in top programs?
There are a lot of questions about admissions on this forum, including many which discuss the importance of the GRE. However, my question is a little more specific than most of them.
In short, what does it take to not get "filtered out" of graduate schools admissions, particularly in competitive engineering/STEM programs?
I have read some answers on this forum that mention that candidate profiles are divided into MAYBE/PROBABLY NOT/NOT groups, where applicants who belong on PROBABLY NOT/NOT groups may not have their applications read by faculty--which makes sense, given the hundreds of qualified candidates they can choose from. (See this and this). This practice is consistent with what I've heard from other professors. However, what does it take to not automatically fall into those categories?
JeffE, for instance, mentions that, in his school, candidates are/were filtered by GRE and GPA. How does this process work? Are GRE/GPA scores the only filters or are other qualifications taken into consideration during the initial triage (i.e., publications)?
For instance, I received unimpressive GRE scores (~90% Q / ~70% V / ~10% AWA, ran off-topic). Moreover, while I ranked first in my graduating class, I am an international applicant from a (top) Latin American school and the committee may not be able to interpret my GPA. While I could take the GRE again and score better, that would consume time, energy and money (getting to the nearest test center requires 10+ hours of travel as well as sleeping over), all of which could be better spent in other parts of my application. Nonetheless, I believe I have an otherwise very strong application, having various first author publications in top journals and conferences, very strong LORs, 5+ years of research experience, and regularly serving as a reviewer for a top journal in my field.
However, my concern is to be rejected in the initial triage, given that I have no idea about what would get me past it.

Apply to universities that don't require the GRE?

@astronat I'm applying mostly to the US for family reasons. Most, if not all, top programs in the US require the GRE.

... but many STEM departments don't pay attention to anything but the quantitative for foreign students.

The easiest way is to get buy-in beforehand. Find a specific PI you'd like to work with and contact them, best if by phone, preceded by email. Express your interest and how groundbreaking you find their research, and how you can uniquely contribute to their research program. Usually this gets you off the pile and onto someone's desk. The school may have cutoffs for standardized test scores, but even that can be mitigated if you capture a specific persons' interest. The point is, make a personal appeal to an individual.


text:
Applying for PhD in mathematics as Third-Year Undergraduate Student
I am currently a sophomore majoring in mathematics. I plan to pursue PhD right after my graduation. According to my current schedule, I will be able to graduate within 3 years if I only take classes to satisfy minimum graduation requirement. Alternatively, I can choose to graduate in traditional 4 years and take graduate-level classes in my senior year.
I personally want to graduate early so that I can save my family cost. However, I am not sure if graduating in 3 years will put me under some disadvantages in compare to other applicants who graduate in 4 years.
I am thinking, is it possible (and recommended) for me to try applying for PhD during my third year and see if I get accepted to schools I want to go?
If I am not accepted, I will stay in college for the fourth year and improve my portfolio by taking graduate-level classes and engaging in more mathematics-related activities. Will there be any disadvantage of reapplying to the same PhD program?
My course schedule in the third year:
Fall: Algebra I, Topology, Combinatorics (as an elective)
Winter: Algebra II, another Combinatorics (as an elective)

I believe you will find the answers to the question helpful: Does rigor/thoroughness of undergraduate program matter (for graduate/PhD applications)? Of course, the specifics of your situation are not exactly the same, but I think you will find that many parts of those answers also apply to you.

@ff524 Thank you so much! That is very helpful.


text:
Being Ostracized in Research Group
I currently am a sophomore in a US college. I have been accepted into a semester-long undergraduate research group. Officially, we have a faculty advisor as well as graduate student mentors. In practice, we mostly only meet with our graduate student mentors.
The problem is that, from the first day, one of my teammates deliberately ignores me in every group meeting. I do not know why, but they talked to all other teammates except me. Every time I tried to interact with or discuss with them, they skipped me and pretended to that they did not hear what I said.
(I said 'deliberately ignores' because there were occasions when only I and the person in question were present, and the person still refused to communicate with me. However, the person engagingly talk to everyone else. )
My other teammates are not talkative at all. In a meeting, they are the only person who casually led the conversation and left me out of the conversation. I feel ostracized and more and more mentally bullied.
The situation makes me feel extremely unhappy right now. I am quite certain I did not do anything inappropriate to them because the issue arose from the first time we met. For now, I feel out of place and think that I might not belong to this place.
What can I do for now, besides quitting?
One option I am thinking is to approach graduate student mentors. However, I am holding back from doing so because it seems that I am the only person who has this problem. Also, since our mentors are also present during the meeting, I have a feeling that they already knew the problem exists.
For clarification, I had an issue with only one teammate and not the others, and the issue is with that person refusing to communicate with me, even when only two of us were present.

How much longer is the research commitment? If it's not for very long then just stick it out and then not return to the lab again when you want to undertake research again. Are you a high school or undergrad student? Perhaps they don't want or need input from an inexperienced researcher (not saying that that's the right thing to do, just saying why they might be behaving that way).

When (s)he does it again, just say "I'd like to have a talk with you personally after the meeting.", and after the meeting you say "I have the impression that you are ignoring me, and it makes me feel uncomfortable. Are you aware you are doing this and how will we handle this situation?". You'll easily derive from his/her answer if there is any bad intention or not. Good luck.

@AlbertXu Not an answer, but I've been in a similar situation where I was a junior in a grad research program. I think my mentor resented me because she thought I'd waste her time. Some teammates resented me because (I think) they thought an undergrad shouldn't be on the team. Basically, they thought I didn't belong. If you think your coworker thinks that, the best advice I've got is to show them you do. Keep producing your best work and people will notice. Worst case, you end up more involved in the project and your teammate has to interact with you anyway.

Are there any gender/race/age/religion/cast issues at play?

Have you tried asking your teammate directly?

Or language issues. Sometimes people are just embarrassed about not understanding others' accents and/or feel pointing it out would be rude so they just skip over it.

Based on the updates, there are a few things I can offer in terms of advice. The first is that given it's a short amount of time remaining on your term, stick it out. Especially if this is going to impact your college credits/marks/etc. Sure, it's a crappy situation but try to make the best out of it as not to impact your marks or the progress of your degree.
Once completed, don't return to the research group. Take the opportunity now to find research groups within your institution that are nicer and more willing to host a student because it sounds like the current group sees students as a hindrance rather than as a collaborator or colleague.
There are avenues you can take to make complaints about bullying in the workplace, such as speaking to professors (not unless they're the one involved in bullying) or going to a human resources division. However, this may not be in your best interests to do anything 'formal' at this stage of your career given you aren't committed to this lab group on a fixed term contract as an official job. I would be talking to the student mentor you mentioned in the comment about your experience.

Being ignored is not the usual type of bullying and will be hard to prove and to act upon (you cannot force people to talk with others - and that's a good thing, BTW). I concur with the idea to let it go, since it is a limited period and a limited impact visit.

I think it depends on the institute you're at. Ignoring in work situations such as meetings has been characterised as active bullying in a place I used to work at. I agree that it's hard to prove and is on the 'fuzzier' side of workplace bullying.

I think it is very unwise to force people to talk with others. I had cases where minimising contact with the person in question was the only way to liberate oneself from an abusive interaction at work, especially when one does not wish to involve managers or they do not take this seriously. (I am, of course, not insinuating that this is the case here).

Keep your nerve.
This will likely not be the last time in your life people will treat you badly, so learning to cope with it will come in handy for the future. Concentrate on your work, listen, absorb and, apart from that, imagine you have been stranded on a lonely island. 2 months is not short, but it's not too long either.
Important: Keep your friendships and social connections outside of the group alive.

AKA do nothing, accept that all the bastards can do whatever they want and bow down. That is ridiculous !!!

@SteffX this is called "pick your battles". Frankly, it is unwise (to avoid the disparaging adjective "ridiculous") to try and start a fight because of "bad vibes". No one really knows what is going on here - starting to confront members of a group early when you join it is the surest way to encourage confirmation bias in the group. You have to know when to fight and when to wait and observe.

I could agree with you in some cases but not on this one (if it is the whole story, of course!). I think you always benefit from fighting if you are right.

@SteffX There are fights worth picking. I am not sure whether trying to curry favour with a group (or, in this case, with a single person) that does not appreciate you is one of these. And what "being right" has to do with this is not clear to me; especially as we do not know why the person in question decides to not interact. I second dan1111's comments below.

@SteffX I'm not sure about in Academia but, in the working world, that belief will not be your friend.  There have been many times where I'm certain that I'm right but if the big people upstairs disagree, even after I've made my case, continuing to debate/fight is just going to get me into trouble. There's no sense wasting energy on a battle you can't win or a battle over something that, in the grand scheme, is trivial. It also runs the risk of making you look confrontational.  Pick your battles.  Some hills just aren't worth dying on but it's up to you to determine which ones are.

Go to your graduate mentor who is present during your meetings. Tell them that you feel like this person specifically ignores you, but that you aren't sure if your impression is accurate. Ask them if they have also observed that, or possibly ask if they can pay attention to the interaction between the two of you during the next group meeting and see if they observe the same thing that you have. Then ask them what to do--either if they say they do not observe the same thing, you can talk to them about how you came to your impression and figure out where you went wrong, or if they do observe the same thing then they can tell you what to do about it.

best advice so far, I think

Be careful in ascribing ill intent to others.
You sound quite confident that this other group member is intentionally excluding you: "deliberately ignores me", "mentally bullied", etc.  I don't want to diminish how you feel, in this difficult situation.  However, be careful in assuming that the person is intentionally excluding you.
Interacting with other people is not easy for many.  I know this personally--my shyness was often considered rudeness by others, though I didn't intend that.
This student may be insecure, lack self-confidence, or feel awkward in starting conversations.  This can be particularly hard across different cultural backgrounds, with different expectations for communication.
I'm not trying to excuse the student's behavior, which is clearly not good, and has an impact on you.  I would, however, try to view the situation as generously as you possibly can.  It's a good rule to assume that everyone around you is acting in good faith, and act on this basis as far as is possible.
In this case, I would keep trying to make a contribution to the conversation.
Do seek advice from a mentor or faculty member.
I would raise the issue that you are finding it challenging to participate in the group, because this one member seems to be ignoring you.
The mentor or advisor may be able to make changes to help let everyone participate (for example, change the format to give everyone a turn to speak).  They also might be able to give you advice about how to approach the issue.  At the very least, hopefully they can give you some encouragement.

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

Are you different in race/gender/nationality/stature from other participants?  Any disabilities?  This sounds like your teammate has no concept how he can sensibly deal with you being part of the course, like if someone enrolled a house cat.  It doesn't help if the cat does its parts of the experiments diligently.
This is a problem of the person dealing with the reality of you participating in that course, consciously or subconsciously.  It's their impediment.  Don't make it yours.  Don't feel forced into behaving in patterns matching their preconceptions.  "They did not fit in here and chose to leave": that's not the verdict you want others to arrive at for you.
Whatever the reason for this kind of behavior, stressing out over it would make you fit its purpose.
Keep your cool.  Keep the door open for the other party reverting to normal behavior but don't depend on it.

Have you considered confronting the person? Perhaps with, "Have I done something to upset you, X?"
If they ignore that, then you know for sure they're actually ignoring you.
If they say something like "No, not really," you have the opportunity to point out that they don't communicate with you. "Oh, you just don't talk to me much compared to everyone else, so I was concerned."
If they say "yes," then you may be able to address the root cause of the issue.

This can be done in a group setting too.

I understand it is one of your team mates and not the Mentor/Professor that is upsetting you. My first question is why it is important for you that this particular person should pay attention to you? In many cultures, direct eye-contact or engaging another may not be perceived in the same way you take for granted. I recommend approaching the personin your most friendly way with NO preconceived ideas as to why he/she is not engaging you. You may be surprised to find that they are wondering the same thing about you! In any case reaching out in with your best self is the way forward.

Talk to your grad students. It's part of their job to help resolve personnel problems, especially when said problems could potentially sabotage their research. That possibility alone should be enough of a motivation for them to take your concerns seriously. Asking the PI to get involved is more of a last-resort situation (excepting emergencies or anything relating to funding); it sends the message that group members, undergrads and grads included, aren't doing their jobs. You don't want that.

Do you work well with other members of the group? How do you get along with the instructors? This seems like a pretty cool experience for you, other than this guy.
As time progresses and you act normal but he is a jerk, you will definitely look like the good guy. Just make sure that you do not look like the non-communicative one by always saying what is professionally relevant in class (then he looks like a jerk) and always using email to communicate about doing group work.
If he does not reply, complain to the instructors that he does not participate in group work.

I've experienced something similar, yet I am American and faced being ignored by a majority international student research group; they seem to self-segregate themselves in our group.
Knowing that my opportunity to learn the ropes in research through a great group leader / professor, I ignored the fact that I was being ignored, I stopped asking them for input.  I focused solely on learning from the professor and I gave input when needed to the rest of the group.  I earned another research position with the professor the next semester and then no longer had to deal with the people that ignored me.
So, go after the research and be aggressive and proactive.  If your graduate mentors are helpful, seek them out for more guidance.  And yeah, the professor and grad mentors probably are already aware of the situation and group dynamics that are perhaps not fair for you, so don't worry too much.
Lastly, I disagree with the tone and the message in CaptainEmac's answer.  He or she suggests tolerating any sort of bullying and just coping by keeping one's friends around.  What a ridiculous piece of advice.  It's like if a woman gets raped, tell her to cope with it by keeping her friends around.  Sounds absurd, doesn't it?

@user81988 I gave you a +1 for the first group of comments, before noticing your second part of the answer. I will not take the mark away post hoc. It is ok to disagree with my opinion. However, your comparison of people not wanting to communicate with - legally prosecutable - rape is totally inappropriate and a completely different level of aggression. Keep in mind that there are people who are so aggressive towards other members of the group that keeping distance is the only way to handle them. To be sure: I am certainly not claiming that OP is one of them. Cont'd.

I also did not say anywhere that you should "tolerate any sort of bullying". This is an argument you introduced, so, respectfully, I ask you to not put it into my mouth. I responded to the particular type of situation OP is in. It is not clear at all whether keeping silence is intended as a form of bullying, is a natural in-group behaviour or comes from some other dynamics.

-1 Wow, tolerating not very nice treatment from a colleague is not at all like tolerating rape.  The seriousness of the offense makes all the difference in what sort of response is required.  What a terrible analogy.