label
stringclasses 2
values | request
stringlengths 110
2.68k
|
|---|---|
B | POST: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair.
RESPONSE A: And when your teacher doesn't listen or pay attention to your presentation even you do not go over time limit? I did experienced that a week ago with my group and I still feel frustrated. We were the only group that he didn't pay attention at all. We put so much effort in that presentation! I felt very useless and depressed when I noticed that he didn't have the effort to listen us.
RESPONSE B: I'm pretty strict on time, to the point where I'll cut off the presentation if it goes over the alloted time (typically, I'll also give them a warning when they're halfway through their time and another when a minute is left). Getting your point accross concisely is a valuable skill and important to master in a business environment. In a similar vein, I put a max word/page count on assignments instead of a minimum. Students often seem surprised at that.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair.
RESPONSE A: I did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. I presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. The « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. It sucked because I could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too...
RESPONSE B: I feel really lucky that I didn't experience this in my program. It was geared towards practitioners so the time limit on presentations was a hard limit. If a policy maker wouldn't sit through it because it was too long the faculty member would cut it off.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair.
RESPONSE A: Absolutely, meeting a time limit is a skill that need to be practiced. I am in math and my supervisor is fond of quoting (well, paraphrasing) Pascal saying "I have made this letter longer than usual because I have not had time to make it shorter".
RESPONSE B: I did a poster presentation where the time limer was 5 mins, including questions. I presented within the time limits, but no one else in my group did. The « winner » was a student that went 5 minutes over time. It sucked because I could have done a lot better with that 5 extra minutes too...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair.
RESPONSE A: I don't. If you get 15 minutes, your presentation has to be between 14 and 16 minutes. If you run short, engage the audience with questions. If you're running long, which you shouldn't (you practiced, right?), wind it up. I penalize if you go over 16 minutes, and I'll cut you off at 20 (maybe sooner, depending on how tight we are for time for the day). I would never reward students for going three times the allotted time. They'd never come close to finishing their presentation by the time I stopped them.
RESPONSE B: I feel really lucky that I didn't experience this in my program. It was geared towards practitioners so the time limit on presentations was a hard limit. If a policy maker wouldn't sit through it because it was too long the faculty member would cut it off.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: If any professor is reading this: please do not praise students keeping their presentations much longer than you said it should be because it covers more. It is unfair and an obvious sign of obliviousness. It is nonsense. Please. If you tell your students to keep their presentations at a certain length, do not praise the ones who go above the set time limit by half an hour and praise their work for its depth. This has happened to me second time now. My professor asks me to cover one of the most controversial and comprehensive subjects in social sciences in 10 minutes and rolls their eyes for it not having elaborated enough in certain aspects while praising the 40-minute-though-supposed-to-be-10-minute presentation of my classmate for covering more on the same subject. If there are any professors reading this; please don't do this. Some students put a lot of work into making the damn presentation as concise as possible and literally rehearse a few times so that they do not go over the time limit. Covering more by going waaaay above the limit you yourself set is not something to be encouraged. Nor is it fair.
RESPONSE A: I feel really lucky that I didn't experience this in my program. It was geared towards practitioners so the time limit on presentations was a hard limit. If a policy maker wouldn't sit through it because it was too long the faculty member would cut it off.
RESPONSE B: Yes. Part of what we are teaching at the college level is professionalism. You will not be praised in industry, nonprofits, or government if you regularly use up more than your allotted time slot for presentations. Not that this doesn’t happen everywhere quite a bit, especially in academia. But it’s just as irritating in a business setting as it is in a college setting.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936
RESPONSE A: Those acknowledgements though😂😂😂
RESPONSE B: Using WTF as a keyword surelly sets an impact factor over 9000
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936
RESPONSE A: Using WTF as a keyword surelly sets an impact factor over 9000
RESPONSE B: Lmao I am dead
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936
RESPONSE A: Don’t these journals ask for a hefty fee? Did the professor actually pay money to get this published?
RESPONSE B: “More research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936
RESPONSE A: Lmao I am dead
RESPONSE B: “More research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: After receiving an email from a sketchy journal soliciting submissions, a professor sent in a joke paper titled "What's the Deal With Birds?", which got published. Here's a small excerpt from the paper: > *Abstract:* Many people wonder: what’s the deal with birds? This is a common query. Birds are pretty weird. I mean, they have feathers. WTF? Most other animals don’t have feathers. To investigate this issue, I looked at some birds. I looked at a woodpecker, a parrot, and a penguin. They were all pretty weird! In conclusion, we may never know the deal with birds, but further study is warranted. > *Keywords*: birds, ornithology, behavior, phenotype, WTF, genomics, climate change You can read the PDf version of the original article here: https://irispublishers.com/sjrr/pdf/SJRR.MS.ID.000540.pdf Alternatively, there's a press summary of the situation here: https://gizmodo.com/sketchy-science-journal-publishes-article-titled-whats-1842924936
RESPONSE A: “More research is warranted” has always been the biggest cop out.
RESPONSE B: This is great, love it! Thank you for sharing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How about we stop working for free? Just this month I was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. I understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during COVID times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? Honestly, I feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ Field of research: Neuroscience/Biophysics Title: Ph.D. Country: USA
RESPONSE A: I have three tenure reviews due soon. While I consider it part of my service, especially as I have a fairly rare specialty, it adds up.
RESPONSE B: I'm getting pretty sick of writing papers for free. For my PhD and postdoc I've worked on other people's big projects. Every time they strategically keep me in the lab for the entire duration of the fellowship with no time to write, knowing full well that I have to write papers to get a job, and that I'll do it for free when the fellowship is over just to try to keep up.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How about we stop working for free? Just this month I was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. I understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during COVID times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? Honestly, I feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ Field of research: Neuroscience/Biophysics Title: Ph.D. Country: USA
RESPONSE A: I'm getting pretty sick of writing papers for free. For my PhD and postdoc I've worked on other people's big projects. Every time they strategically keep me in the lab for the entire duration of the fellowship with no time to write, knowing full well that I have to write papers to get a job, and that I'll do it for free when the fellowship is over just to try to keep up.
RESPONSE B: I could probably write more if not reviewing 3+ papers per each published. I had no idea it was that many until I looked up my reviewer stats.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: How about we stop working for free? Just this month I was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. I understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during COVID times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? Honestly, I feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ Field of research: Neuroscience/Biophysics Title: Ph.D. Country: USA
RESPONSE A: One way I'd think about it is if you're not planning to submit your own papers to journals in the future, then you don't need to review for them. If you do, and aren't expecting to pay others to review your paper for you, then you're kind of being a hypocrite.
RESPONSE B: I'm getting pretty sick of writing papers for free. For my PhD and postdoc I've worked on other people's big projects. Every time they strategically keep me in the lab for the entire duration of the fellowship with no time to write, knowing full well that I have to write papers to get a job, and that I'll do it for free when the fellowship is over just to try to keep up.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during COVID times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? Honestly, I feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ Field of research: Neuroscience/Biophysics Title: Ph.D. Country: USA
RESPONSE A: This “publication-review-journals” is one of the most fucked up systems there is. We work like crazy to have publications ready (lab/field/writting) for ZERO money, plus many times we loose even our rights to our own papers. It is absolutely insane and abusive. People assuming OP is being malicious for pointing that out is insane. This kind of thinking will keep feeding this machine. Us pals should be more united and have each others backs like in other fields. On top of that, salaries received for universities/industry employment should not be factored in. You are producing new information and using that for handing out tenures and such is borderline blackmail, seeing that not everyone will be able to pay fees for publishing in high-impact journals, have time to review and still pay the bills. We should be paid for our services, especially if it’s in this weird cycle. Sadly, it does not look like we will find a solution soon enough. We are kind of trapped in this toxic situation having to overwork for free and having to do it with a smile on our faces. Edit: i do not mean to point fingers, just trying to speak my mind. This topic is such a huge cancer in academia it makes me mad.
RESPONSE B: I think it's fine to say no sometimes. But if you say no all the time, you better not be submitting any work to peer reviewed journals or else you're just a dick. Also, if we do ask for compensation you know they're just going to up the publication fees. And we don't want the quality of the reviews to decline because people are trying to make a buck. I think we have a shitty system but I'm not sure how to improve it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: How about we stop working for free? Just this month I was invited to review five new submissions from three different journals. I understand that we have an important role in improving the quality of science being published (specially during COVID times), but isn’t it unfair that we do all the work and these companies get all the money? Honestly, I feel like it’s passed time we start refusing to review articles without minimum compensation from these for-profit journals. ​ Field of research: Neuroscience/Biophysics Title: Ph.D. Country: USA
RESPONSE A: This “publication-review-journals” is one of the most fucked up systems there is. We work like crazy to have publications ready (lab/field/writting) for ZERO money, plus many times we loose even our rights to our own papers. It is absolutely insane and abusive. People assuming OP is being malicious for pointing that out is insane. This kind of thinking will keep feeding this machine. Us pals should be more united and have each others backs like in other fields. On top of that, salaries received for universities/industry employment should not be factored in. You are producing new information and using that for handing out tenures and such is borderline blackmail, seeing that not everyone will be able to pay fees for publishing in high-impact journals, have time to review and still pay the bills. We should be paid for our services, especially if it’s in this weird cycle. Sadly, it does not look like we will find a solution soon enough. We are kind of trapped in this toxic situation having to overwork for free and having to do it with a smile on our faces. Edit: i do not mean to point fingers, just trying to speak my mind. This topic is such a huge cancer in academia it makes me mad.
RESPONSE B: One way I'd think about it is if you're not planning to submit your own papers to journals in the future, then you don't need to review for them. If you do, and aren't expecting to pay others to review your paper for you, then you're kind of being a hypocrite.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I flunked someone for plagiarism. I just discovered they hired a PI to investigate me. Does anyone have experience with this? I’m in a tenure track position in the social sciences at a school in the Midwest. Last semester, I flunked a student for plagiarizing part of a paper (it was a clear case of copy and paste from an obscure source). The student did not take it well. Things are winding their way through the administrative process. It has come to my attention that this disgruntled student has apparently hired a private investigator to follow me and look into my life. I feel extremely violated. However, it has unfortunately also come to my attention that this PI has learned that I am in an open relationship. I suspect this would not be well received by my department and would likely jeopardize my ability to get tenure. It has been strongly implied that details of my personal relationship will be leaked to the department unless I stop pursuing internal discipline against the student. However, it’s not clear to me that I could stop the proceedings even if I wanted to. What exactly am I supposed to do in this situation?
RESPONSE A: Go to the police. Jesus.
RESPONSE B: This will sound harsh and unpopular, but grow some backbone and stand for your way of life. If this is frowned upon by a place you spend over 8 hours each weekday, you're in the wrong spot and you're supporting a system that undermines something you value a lot. It's difficult to do this, given you might have to provide for a family and run the risk of losing job security, but if the alternative is to live a lie for a third of your life, the choice seems easy to me.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: discovered they hired a PI to investigate me. Does anyone have experience with this? I’m in a tenure track position in the social sciences at a school in the Midwest. Last semester, I flunked a student for plagiarizing part of a paper (it was a clear case of copy and paste from an obscure source). The student did not take it well. Things are winding their way through the administrative process. It has come to my attention that this disgruntled student has apparently hired a private investigator to follow me and look into my life. I feel extremely violated. However, it has unfortunately also come to my attention that this PI has learned that I am in an open relationship. I suspect this would not be well received by my department and would likely jeopardize my ability to get tenure. It has been strongly implied that details of my personal relationship will be leaked to the department unless I stop pursuing internal discipline against the student. However, it’s not clear to me that I could stop the proceedings even if I wanted to. What exactly am I supposed to do in this situation?
RESPONSE A: Is being in an open relationship against the terms of your contract? Regardless of whether it's right or wrong...if it's in your contract, it's in your contract. All-else considered, the school should protect you from this. You were literally doing your job. However, it sounds like this student comes from a fairly wealthy family...and money talks to universities as we've seen in the media recently. Just in case the school does not take your side...I'd lawyer-up immediately. Also might be time to throw your resume around to some colleagues at other institutions.
RESPONSE B: This will sound harsh and unpopular, but grow some backbone and stand for your way of life. If this is frowned upon by a place you spend over 8 hours each weekday, you're in the wrong spot and you're supporting a system that undermines something you value a lot. It's difficult to do this, given you might have to provide for a family and run the risk of losing job security, but if the alternative is to live a lie for a third of your life, the choice seems easy to me.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: my life. I feel extremely violated. However, it has unfortunately also come to my attention that this PI has learned that I am in an open relationship. I suspect this would not be well received by my department and would likely jeopardize my ability to get tenure. It has been strongly implied that details of my personal relationship will be leaked to the department unless I stop pursuing internal discipline against the student. However, it’s not clear to me that I could stop the proceedings even if I wanted to. What exactly am I supposed to do in this situation?
RESPONSE A: I would go to a lawyer first. I'd ask the lawyer if I could file both criminal and civil charges and sue the student into next week. They'll probably say no which is disappointing because I'd want to nail that little shit to the wall. One thing you may find the lawyer actually doing for you is filing a restraining order against the student. I'd also be sure to ask the lawyer when to include the dean and the senior leadership at the school. Adding a threat and attempted blackmail to the disciplinary process might just get the kid expelled. Now I know there are some states where the LGBT status is a non-protected status which is what I'm assuming you're talking about, my brother's boyfriend was fired for being Gay at a school in New Hampshire. So yes there is a risk. If the student is willing to go to all of this trouble there is a real risk of violence, either by them or by someone they paid when things don't go their way. This is not something to take lightly. You need help.
RESPONSE B: Is being in an open relationship against the terms of your contract? Regardless of whether it's right or wrong...if it's in your contract, it's in your contract. All-else considered, the school should protect you from this. You were literally doing your job. However, it sounds like this student comes from a fairly wealthy family...and money talks to universities as we've seen in the media recently. Just in case the school does not take your side...I'd lawyer-up immediately. Also might be time to throw your resume around to some colleagues at other institutions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: this? I’m in a tenure track position in the social sciences at a school in the Midwest. Last semester, I flunked a student for plagiarizing part of a paper (it was a clear case of copy and paste from an obscure source). The student did not take it well. Things are winding their way through the administrative process. It has come to my attention that this disgruntled student has apparently hired a private investigator to follow me and look into my life. I feel extremely violated. However, it has unfortunately also come to my attention that this PI has learned that I am in an open relationship. I suspect this would not be well received by my department and would likely jeopardize my ability to get tenure. It has been strongly implied that details of my personal relationship will be leaked to the department unless I stop pursuing internal discipline against the student. However, it’s not clear to me that I could stop the proceedings even if I wanted to. What exactly am I supposed to do in this situation?
RESPONSE A: No advice beyond that given, but just want to express solidarity. Who are these supposed academics who don't understand that your university doesn't need to fire you - they just need to quietly deny you tenure for a plausible reason, which at your university may be the code of conduct. I don't think there's anything wrong with you for wanting to keep your job, even at the (incredible personal) cost of placating one shithead student who would probably have been acquitted by the system anyway even if he raped or killed someone. I hope you figure this out.
RESPONSE B: Is being in an open relationship against the terms of your contract? Regardless of whether it's right or wrong...if it's in your contract, it's in your contract. All-else considered, the school should protect you from this. You were literally doing your job. However, it sounds like this student comes from a fairly wealthy family...and money talks to universities as we've seen in the media recently. Just in case the school does not take your side...I'd lawyer-up immediately. Also might be time to throw your resume around to some colleagues at other institutions.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? I was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. Like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. Or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. Or learning one more additional language. And all of that on top of the workload you already have. Sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things I am interested in and curious about but the more I study the things the longer the list of things I want to learn more about gets. Idk if you can relate but I just wanted to share this and I would be really interested to see what you think about this!
RESPONSE A: I have nothing other to say than: Yes, I know that feeling.
RESPONSE B: I never thought about it but now that you mentioned it... Yess!!! Its kind of like when you read a review paper and they cite many other original research papers, and you wanna get through all of them but you dont have the time to do so. When you do attempt to get through them, you find yourself going down a rabbit hole. One paper leads to 10 other papers and each of the 10 papers lead you to another 10 papers... IT NEVER ENDS!! Then the timer goes off, you gotta run back to the lab to change whatever solution you've got your tissue incubating in. And those papers that you've found will be left as tabs on your browser, never looked at again (but never closed too). Until one day, your computer freezes up and you gotta force shutdown your computer.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? I was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. Like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. Or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. Or learning one more additional language. And all of that on top of the workload you already have. Sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things I am interested in and curious about but the more I study the things the longer the list of things I want to learn more about gets. Idk if you can relate but I just wanted to share this and I would be really interested to see what you think about this!
RESPONSE A: I'm more sad that I can't have chips every day without getting spherical.
RESPONSE B: I had this feeling when I was in grad school. Now, it's more that I'll never have time in this life to create all the things I want to: books, games, etc., that will never see the light of day. OTOH, that means I'll never be bored. I'll never run out of things to learn, do, and try. I try to keep my focus on that side.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? I was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. Like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. Or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. Or learning one more additional language. And all of that on top of the workload you already have. Sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things I am interested in and curious about but the more I study the things the longer the list of things I want to learn more about gets. Idk if you can relate but I just wanted to share this and I would be really interested to see what you think about this!
RESPONSE A: I used to feel that way until corona hit and I had to scrub my research project. Three months into quarantine and I’m still sitting here trying to work up the will power to get better at coding.
RESPONSE B: I had this feeling when I was in grad school. Now, it's more that I'll never have time in this life to create all the things I want to: books, games, etc., that will never see the light of day. OTOH, that means I'll never be bored. I'll never run out of things to learn, do, and try. I try to keep my focus on that side.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? I was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. Like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. Or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. Or learning one more additional language. And all of that on top of the workload you already have. Sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things I am interested in and curious about but the more I study the things the longer the list of things I want to learn more about gets. Idk if you can relate but I just wanted to share this and I would be really interested to see what you think about this!
RESPONSE A: I'm more sad that I can't have chips every day without getting spherical.
RESPONSE B: Chaucer had the same feeling: “The lyf so short the craft so longe to lerne.“ one of the quotes I most strongly identify with
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Do you also happen to get sad because you simply will never have enough time to get the knowledge you want to? I was wondering if other people also get kind of sad because it is simply impossible to have enough time to learn everything you actually wanted to learn by a certain age/stage in life. Like idk, completing that list of books with important authors in your field which gets longer and longer while keeping up with the recent findings in your field. Or learning that additional programming language or further practicing the one your familiar with. Or learning one more additional language. And all of that on top of the workload you already have. Sometimes that makes me really sad because there are just so many things I am interested in and curious about but the more I study the things the longer the list of things I want to learn more about gets. Idk if you can relate but I just wanted to share this and I would be really interested to see what you think about this!
RESPONSE A: Chaucer had the same feeling: “The lyf so short the craft so longe to lerne.“ one of the quotes I most strongly identify with
RESPONSE B: I used to feel that way until corona hit and I had to scrub my research project. Three months into quarantine and I’m still sitting here trying to work up the will power to get better at coding.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: 5 years. I’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. Yet it’s all been for nothing. I can’t get a job for the life of me. I’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year R1 schools, SLACs, and community colleges all have rejected me. I’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. There’s too few jobs and I just don’t cut. I’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. And I’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. No upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. It sucks. I would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. I’ve learned the hard way that the PhD pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. Why did I do this to myself? Any one else feel this way?
RESPONSE A: Sorry to hear this. As someone who nope-d out of academia pretty much after defending, I have mixed feelings about this, but they're mostly positive. There's a part of me that wishes that academia was what I dreamt it was, and a part of me that wishes I had succeeded, despite it being not what I had hoped. But I don't regret anything. I went to grad school because I loved science - not for the money (lol), or the prestige, but because I loved it as a way of acquiring knowledge and learning about the world. That's still true today, and it will probably be true my whole life. For me, that realization helped me overcome what I think a lot of people fear when they think about leaving academia: "Will I ever be able to love something as much as this?" And just like the ending of a bad relationship, despite my feelings to the contrary at the time, the answer is yes. But more importantly, it doesn't matter even if the answer is "no", because from what you describe, it doesn't matter how much you love academia, academia does not love you back.
RESPONSE B: What is it in? Can you go into industry?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. And I’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. No upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. It sucks. I would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. I’ve learned the hard way that the PhD pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. Why did I do this to myself? Any one else feel this way?
RESPONSE A: Sorry to hear this. As someone who nope-d out of academia pretty much after defending, I have mixed feelings about this, but they're mostly positive. There's a part of me that wishes that academia was what I dreamt it was, and a part of me that wishes I had succeeded, despite it being not what I had hoped. But I don't regret anything. I went to grad school because I loved science - not for the money (lol), or the prestige, but because I loved it as a way of acquiring knowledge and learning about the world. That's still true today, and it will probably be true my whole life. For me, that realization helped me overcome what I think a lot of people fear when they think about leaving academia: "Will I ever be able to love something as much as this?" And just like the ending of a bad relationship, despite my feelings to the contrary at the time, the answer is yes. But more importantly, it doesn't matter even if the answer is "no", because from what you describe, it doesn't matter how much you love academia, academia does not love you back.
RESPONSE B: I do. I did have some good things happen but I am quite disappointed. It's not you, it's the system. You have to be at the right place on the right time. If you feel like staying in academia, take the admin route. Working in admin is more secure, gets you on track and later on you can move to the research side. Thee is no point in trying to get a goodjob in academia, the generations before us have occupied those positions and won't let go their good salary and pension.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: my PhD from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. I’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. Yet it’s all been for nothing. I can’t get a job for the life of me. I’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year R1 schools, SLACs, and community colleges all have rejected me. I’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. There’s too few jobs and I just don’t cut. I’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. And I’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. No upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. It sucks. I would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. I’ve learned the hard way that the PhD pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. Why did I do this to myself? Any one else feel this way?
RESPONSE A: I can relate. I found a decent position, but I've always kept my eye an the market and applied to the more "dream" schools since I've graduated. I only had one finalist interview at a "fancy" school. As usual, someone better connected than me with more pubs got the position. It's really rough out there. I can really relate to what your saying. My PhD experience was traumatic, and my advisor committed suicide when I was writing. I was almost booted from my program because the other major professor didn't like my topic. I was able to graduate super fast, but I think maybe only recently can I honestly say that it was worth getting the degree. Once of the things that I've had to do is branch out a bit into other areas of interest, and be flexible with the work that I do. Don't box yourself in to the tenure track only dream that gets sold to us. It's just not possible for most of us. Focus instead on what you can do creatively, and how you can make a living at the same time.
RESPONSE B: What is it in? Can you go into industry?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Why did I pursue a PhD if it has not led to any opportunities? I’m feeling pretty down at the moment. I’ve been applying to TT jobs for a few years and have gotten no luck. I received my PhD from an average state school in 2015 and have had two relatively fruitful postdocs the last 5 years. I’ve published 10 papers in mid-tier journals. Yet it’s all been for nothing. I can’t get a job for the life of me. I’ve applied to probably almost 100 professor jobs with no success whatsoever. 4 year R1 schools, SLACs, and community colleges all have rejected me. I’m willing to relocate anywhere in the country. There’s too few jobs and I just don’t cut. I’m almost 35 now with a salary that an undergrad straight out of college wouldn’t be thrilled with. And I’ve busting my ass for more than a decade for pretty much nothing. No upside, no new or exciting opportunities, nothing. It sucks. I would have been better off teaching high school instead of trying in to break into higher ed. I’ve learned the hard way that the PhD pays in prestige, but you can’t eat prestige. Why did I do this to myself? Any one else feel this way?
RESPONSE A: This question is for OP and anybody who has completed a PhD program. What did/does your program do in regards to helping with job placement, making connections, etc.? I'm asking because several of the programs I'm looking at boast about high job placement, particularly in academia, post-PhD program. ... If it matters I have my MBA, and I'm looking at PhD in Business programs.
RESPONSE B: 1. Go apply for industry jobs 2. Get an entry level job 3. Be happy when you see your first pay check that's double the money for less work
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: My prediction for the Fall semester 2020. Might play out like this: https://imgur.com/IVt9EiJ
RESPONSE A: I currently teach high school... We plan to be open face to face, once a kid gets COVID we're out for a week and anyone who was in class with that kid is out an additional week for quarantine... In a school with almost 2k students. Yeah, ok...
RESPONSE B: My uni is gonna be all remote at least
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: My prediction for the Fall semester 2020. Might play out like this: https://imgur.com/IVt9EiJ
RESPONSE A: This is the correct take.
RESPONSE B: I currently teach high school... We plan to be open face to face, once a kid gets COVID we're out for a week and anyone who was in class with that kid is out an additional week for quarantine... In a school with almost 2k students. Yeah, ok...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: My prediction for the Fall semester 2020. Might play out like this: https://imgur.com/IVt9EiJ
RESPONSE A: My uni is gonna be all remote at least
RESPONSE B: In all honesty; it's not going to happen. They *intend* to open, and they'd vastly prefer to open from a revenue perspective, but at the same time they're all quietly planning for the possibility (or, rather, probability) of online-only instruction. Eventually, they'll start acknowledging it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: My prediction for the Fall semester 2020. Might play out like this: https://imgur.com/IVt9EiJ
RESPONSE A: This is the correct take.
RESPONSE B: In all honesty; it's not going to happen. They *intend* to open, and they'd vastly prefer to open from a revenue perspective, but at the same time they're all quietly planning for the possibility (or, rather, probability) of online-only instruction. Eventually, they'll start acknowledging it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: interview and it came up that she said in the letter that I would not be a suitable candidate for the program. Her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". She never gave any inclination that this was the case, so I am stunned that she is saying these things. What can I do about this? She lied to me, and could impact my future. What course of action do I take? I'm at a loss of words here.
RESPONSE A: I expect a lot of people to disagree with this but: really give her a piece of your mind. That is an unbelievably shitty thing to do to someone, and especially lie through your teeth about it. If she thought those things, she should have told you to your face or at the very least declined to write the letter. What she has done here is wildly disrespectful and vindictive. Beyond unprofessional, its downright mean. At this point, status aside, you are two adults with no bridges really left to burn. So if you feel like it, you might as well make sure this person knows well how unreasonably shitty this was to do. Its not about getting revenge, its making sure other humans understand the consequences of their actions and what it means to be a PoS. Good luck OP, sorry to hear about this.
RESPONSE B: I serve on an admissions committee. I can tell you that whenever we see a negative letter in an application, the first judgement is on the advisor. As others have said, any competent letter writer in the US academic system understands that a letter should be positive, or not written at all. That's why it's called a letter of recommendation. Do not use this person as a reference in the future. Do let other people know that this person wrote you a bad letter rather than declining. This likely will not harm your application as much as you think. If anything, it will hurt the writer's career when their peers see the kind of letter they write for people they should be supporting. It's of course a shitty thing to happen, and I'm sorry you're dealing with this, but it's not as serious as it probably feels right now.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". She submitted it, I had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that I would not be a suitable candidate for the program. Her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". She never gave any inclination that this was the case, so I am stunned that she is saying these things. What can I do about this? She lied to me, and could impact my future. What course of action do I take? I'm at a loss of words here.
RESPONSE A: I serve on an admissions committee. I can tell you that whenever we see a negative letter in an application, the first judgement is on the advisor. As others have said, any competent letter writer in the US academic system understands that a letter should be positive, or not written at all. That's why it's called a letter of recommendation. Do not use this person as a reference in the future. Do let other people know that this person wrote you a bad letter rather than declining. This likely will not harm your application as much as you think. If anything, it will hurt the writer's career when their peers see the kind of letter they write for people they should be supporting. It's of course a shitty thing to happen, and I'm sorry you're dealing with this, but it's not as serious as it probably feels right now.
RESPONSE B: Don't use that letter. But honestly I'd burn all sorts of bridges out of spite over something like that. I'd go to her school and tell them this, ideally with a copy of the letter, and ask them why their professor is doing this to students who ask her for recommendations in good faith. It's universally accepted that if you can't give a good reference, you don't. And if you're in a position where it's expected to recommend someone, you at _least_ hit a neutral to positive note. Actively attacking you in the letter without warning you that she didn't feel she could write you a good letter is unforgivable.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: What to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? I am in the US, and applying to graduate school. I was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. I did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program I am going into. I asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". She submitted it, I had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that I would not be a suitable candidate for the program. Her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". She never gave any inclination that this was the case, so I am stunned that she is saying these things. What can I do about this? She lied to me, and could impact my future. What course of action do I take? I'm at a loss of words here.
RESPONSE A: You can try to talk to her to see what the problem was. And stop putting her name for recommendations.
RESPONSE B: I serve on an admissions committee. I can tell you that whenever we see a negative letter in an application, the first judgement is on the advisor. As others have said, any competent letter writer in the US academic system understands that a letter should be positive, or not written at all. That's why it's called a letter of recommendation. Do not use this person as a reference in the future. Do let other people know that this person wrote you a bad letter rather than declining. This likely will not harm your application as much as you think. If anything, it will hurt the writer's career when their peers see the kind of letter they write for people they should be supporting. It's of course a shitty thing to happen, and I'm sorry you're dealing with this, but it's not as serious as it probably feels right now.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? I am in the US, and applying to graduate school. I was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. I did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program I am going into. I asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". She submitted it, I had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that I would not be a suitable candidate for the program. Her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". She never gave any inclination that this was the case, so I am stunned that she is saying these things. What can I do about this? She lied to me, and could impact my future. What course of action do I take? I'm at a loss of words here.
RESPONSE A: I serve on an admissions committee. I can tell you that whenever we see a negative letter in an application, the first judgement is on the advisor. As others have said, any competent letter writer in the US academic system understands that a letter should be positive, or not written at all. That's why it's called a letter of recommendation. Do not use this person as a reference in the future. Do let other people know that this person wrote you a bad letter rather than declining. This likely will not harm your application as much as you think. If anything, it will hurt the writer's career when their peers see the kind of letter they write for people they should be supporting. It's of course a shitty thing to happen, and I'm sorry you're dealing with this, but it's not as serious as it probably feels right now.
RESPONSE B: What others say and warn future students about her. Also, I don't know if it was a "send directly from the advisor" thing, but I always make sure to check their rec letters before submission.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: What to do about a situation where my professor wrote a negative letter of rec for grad school? I am in the US, and applying to graduate school. I was a research assistant for this particular professor and ran a club that she was the advisor to. I did not struggle in her class or other class revolving the program I am going into. I asked her well beforehand to write me a letter and she claimed "it would be an honor". She submitted it, I had my interview and it came up that she said in the letter that I would not be a suitable candidate for the program. Her points in the letter claimed "that the club struggled under my leadership" and my research "was not adequate and not helpful". She never gave any inclination that this was the case, so I am stunned that she is saying these things. What can I do about this? She lied to me, and could impact my future. What course of action do I take? I'm at a loss of words here.
RESPONSE A: I expect a lot of people to disagree with this but: really give her a piece of your mind. That is an unbelievably shitty thing to do to someone, and especially lie through your teeth about it. If she thought those things, she should have told you to your face or at the very least declined to write the letter. What she has done here is wildly disrespectful and vindictive. Beyond unprofessional, its downright mean. At this point, status aside, you are two adults with no bridges really left to burn. So if you feel like it, you might as well make sure this person knows well how unreasonably shitty this was to do. Its not about getting revenge, its making sure other humans understand the consequences of their actions and what it means to be a PoS. Good luck OP, sorry to hear about this.
RESPONSE B: You can try to talk to her to see what the problem was. And stop putting her name for recommendations.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Your name was mentioned in a paper recently found by Academia! Dear Academia.edu, no one is mentioning my name in any papers. Please stop.
RESPONSE A: Supposedly there are over 3,000 mentions of my name in papers. My name is quite uncommon.
RESPONSE B: In contrast, when Research Gate says you have a citation, it's true. It's even better than Google Scholar. Citations for my unpublished PhD dissertation appear on Research Gate but not on Google Scholar.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: MY FIRST PAPER WAS ACCEPTED!! The good news keep on coming! My sole-author paper was accepted. I will be published as an undergrad!
RESPONSE A: Published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? That's pretty nuts congrats!
RESPONSE B: Congratulations! This will be a huge help for you moving forward in your life no matter what path you choose to take.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: MY FIRST PAPER WAS ACCEPTED!! The good news keep on coming! My sole-author paper was accepted. I will be published as an undergrad!
RESPONSE A: Congratulations! That's wonderful!
RESPONSE B: Published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? That's pretty nuts congrats!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: MY FIRST PAPER WAS ACCEPTED!! The good news keep on coming! My sole-author paper was accepted. I will be published as an undergrad!
RESPONSE A: Gratz!!!
RESPONSE B: Published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? That's pretty nuts congrats!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: MY FIRST PAPER WAS ACCEPTED!! The good news keep on coming! My sole-author paper was accepted. I will be published as an undergrad!
RESPONSE A: Published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? That's pretty nuts congrats!
RESPONSE B: Congratulations!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: MY FIRST PAPER WAS ACCEPTED!! The good news keep on coming! My sole-author paper was accepted. I will be published as an undergrad!
RESPONSE A: That's huge! Especially as an undergrad! gg, my friend
RESPONSE B: Published as an undergrad in a non-undergrad publication? That's pretty nuts congrats!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: When you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. I see this particularly in STEM researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. I'm a spouse working in the private sector. We, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. And I cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call PIs, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. Sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. So, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! Cheers.
RESPONSE A: Ewwwww you kiss your spouse?
RESPONSE B: My spouse and I are both academics teaching fully online. What does "come home" even mean?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: When you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. I see this particularly in STEM researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. I'm a spouse working in the private sector. We, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. And I cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call PIs, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. Sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. So, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! Cheers.
RESPONSE A: The struggle is real.
RESPONSE B: My spouse and I are both academics teaching fully online. What does "come home" even mean?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: When you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. I see this particularly in STEM researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. I'm a spouse working in the private sector. We, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. And I cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call PIs, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. Sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. So, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! Cheers.
RESPONSE A: The struggle is real.
RESPONSE B: Ewwwww you kiss your spouse?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: When you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. I see this particularly in STEM researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. I'm a spouse working in the private sector. We, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. And I cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call PIs, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. Sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. So, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! Cheers.
RESPONSE A: The struggle is real.
RESPONSE B: I do not understand how the hell I put up with it. You wanna hire a hard working nanotechnologist? I would like to see my family a little, and afford a better house than this tiny apartment... \*sigh\*
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: When you get home today, don't forget to kiss your spouse and say thank you. I see this particularly in STEM researchers; it's a thing for you apparently. I'm a spouse working in the private sector. We, along with your children, get a bit tired of not seeing you much. And I cannot understand how the hell you put up with the very long hours, horrible pay, medieval managers which you call PIs, incredible amount of stress every few years looking for funding, and one of the most ferocious competitive contexts that exist. Sorry about the rant, but it's dinner time, and my spouse is running some cells through some machine or whatnot in the lab. So, closing the circle repeating myself, kiss them fondly and thank them profusely! Cheers.
RESPONSE A: Architecture school too! Once the architecture school term starts, I’m like a widow :/
RESPONSE B: I do not understand how the hell I put up with it. You wanna hire a hard working nanotechnologist? I would like to see my family a little, and afford a better house than this tiny apartment... \*sigh\*
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? I am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. Becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. However, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. Further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. I think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. I feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. Does anybody have thoughts on this?
RESPONSE A: YES!! It’s now at the point in my field that if you don’t have a science or nature paper AND a prestigious post doc, you’re basically SOL for any faculty positions. I have worked on meta analyses and publication bias favouring positive outcomes is completely skewing our ability to synthesis and understand actual patterns in ecological data. Which in turn is limiting our ability to apply this information accurately to evidence based policy. The business side of academia is ruining the actual utility of science.
RESPONSE B: I've added failed experiments/negative data into papers. You unfortunately generally need some positive/interesting result as the basis for the paper, but if things failed along the way and are relevant to the main topic of the paper, you can briefly mention the negative results and add it as a supplemental figure. I believe there are journals exclusively for negative results now, too, but I'm not sure how widely indexed they are.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? I am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. Becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. However, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. Further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. I think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. I feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. Does anybody have thoughts on this?
RESPONSE A: Agree 100% on publishing failed experiments!
RESPONSE B: YES!! It’s now at the point in my field that if you don’t have a science or nature paper AND a prestigious post doc, you’re basically SOL for any faculty positions. I have worked on meta analyses and publication bias favouring positive outcomes is completely skewing our ability to synthesis and understand actual patterns in ecological data. Which in turn is limiting our ability to apply this information accurately to evidence based policy. The business side of academia is ruining the actual utility of science.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? I am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. Becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. However, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. Further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. I think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. I feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. Does anybody have thoughts on this?
RESPONSE A: Agreed! It’s partly why I left academia: the “game” of publishing/grants. And I was good at the game! So many papers add epsilon to delta...very little meat. And the redundancy is ridiculous. Soooo many papers that don’t properly cite & document what has come before, despite it being easier than ever to check (Google). I am much happier in industry, after 20 years in academia.
RESPONSE B: It’s one of the things ruining academia. It stems from administrators wanting a way to quantify and rank researchers’ productivity. This may not even be possible, but assuming it is “number of papers” is a terrible metric. It doesn’t measure what administrators think it does and it creates perverse incentives that actually harm research output. Citations per paper is a metric I pulled out of my butt just now but it’s still a much better metric than paper count. What I don’t understand is why the publish-or-perish model still exists when everybody should know it’s not working. Who’s keeping it going? Why? Is Big Paper behind it? Is there some law?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? I am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. Becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. However, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. Further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. I think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. I feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. Does anybody have thoughts on this?
RESPONSE A: It’s one of the things ruining academia. It stems from administrators wanting a way to quantify and rank researchers’ productivity. This may not even be possible, but assuming it is “number of papers” is a terrible metric. It doesn’t measure what administrators think it does and it creates perverse incentives that actually harm research output. Citations per paper is a metric I pulled out of my butt just now but it’s still a much better metric than paper count. What I don’t understand is why the publish-or-perish model still exists when everybody should know it’s not working. Who’s keeping it going? Why? Is Big Paper behind it? Is there some law?
RESPONSE B: Agree 100% on publishing failed experiments!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does anybody feel like academic publication pressure is becoming unsustainable? I am becoming very frustrated with the publication culture in my field. Becoming an expert takes a long time and so is making a valuable contribution to the literature. However, publication pressure is turning many contributions into spin-offs that are slightly different from the publication before, and they are often redundant. Further, a failed experiment would never get published but it would actually provide insight to peers as to what route not to explore. I think that publication pressure is overwhelming for academics and in detriment of scientific literature. I feel like we seriously need to rethink the publication reward system. Does anybody have thoughts on this?
RESPONSE A: Agree 100% on publishing failed experiments!
RESPONSE B: I've added failed experiments/negative data into papers. You unfortunately generally need some positive/interesting result as the basis for the paper, but if things failed along the way and are relevant to the main topic of the paper, you can briefly mention the negative results and add it as a supplemental figure. I believe there are journals exclusively for negative results now, too, but I'm not sure how widely indexed they are.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: re in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. However, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) Thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the Flailing University family. That’s why I know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. A 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. We all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) All senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. I want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. We have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. You see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for FU. I wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! We are all in this together! Sincerely, Senior Administrator
RESPONSE A: Thankfully we're only getting everything above hard truths at my institution. But we've formed committees to look at all the options
RESPONSE B: >As for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (I bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their \[paid\] hours will be reduced to a minimum. LOL. Sincerely, A staff member whose mandatory \[unpaid\] furlough days will result in $3,000 less this year
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. You can thank us later. (2) As for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (I bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. However, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) Thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the Flailing University family. That’s why I know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. A 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. We all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) All senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. I want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. We have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. You see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for FU. I wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! We are all in this together! Sincerely, Senior Administrator
RESPONSE A: I was surprised to get a newsletter announcing some pay increases for staff https://www.ukrant.nl/a-bonus-and-a-3-percent-pay-increase/?lang=en
RESPONSE B: Don’t forget to forget mentioning athletics! No need to cut them!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: you will all qualify now for a special Coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. You can thank us later. (2) As for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (I bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. However, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) Thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the Flailing University family. That’s why I know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. A 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. We all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) All senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. I want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. We have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. You see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for FU. I wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! We are all in this together! Sincerely, Senior Administrator
RESPONSE A: Thankfully we're only getting everything above hard truths at my institution. But we've formed committees to look at all the options
RESPONSE B: Don’t forget to forget mentioning athletics! No need to cut them!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Terminate all contract workers, non-tenure track faculty, and 65% of lower-level administrative staff. Fortunately, you will all qualify now for a special Coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. You can thank us later. (2) As for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (I bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. However, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) Thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the Flailing University family. That’s why I know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. A 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. We all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) All senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. I want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. We have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. You see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for FU. I wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! We are all in this together! Sincerely, Senior Administrator
RESPONSE A: uncanny
RESPONSE B: Don’t forget to forget mentioning athletics! No need to cut them!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: qualify now for a special Coronavirus inspired extra unemployment bonus that, surely, will make this feel more like a glorious paid vacation if not winning the lottery. You can thank us later. (2) As for fortunate few staff allowed to remain (I bet you'd like to know if you're in this category, but let's keep the mystery), their [paid] hours will be reduced to a minimum. However, we all know their actually working hours will remain the same, maybe increase because now that they are working at home every waking hour is a potential working hour - and someone has to do the work of the 65% we’re letting go. (3) Thanks to all the tenure track faculty who are part of the Flailing University family. That’s why I know they will be more than glad to take on all the extra teaching needed (since we have purged all the teaching faculty, adjuncts, university-funded postdocs, researchers, assistants, and technicians) all while revising their curriculums to be entirely online, including lab sciences. A 25% pay cut will no doubt serve as a terrific incentive to work harder and maybe be able to get back to the barely living wage we were paying before. We all know it really doesn’t work like that, but you’ll try, won’t you! (4) All senior administration will be taking a 4.387% pay-cut. I want to close here but talking about how incredibly stressful, painful, even traumatizing it was for us - the senior administration - to make these decisions. We have screamed, we have cried, we rent our garments, we have gone up to as much as three times a week with our $300/hour shrinks. You see us being on a high perch here, but we're the ones suffering the most - always ready to take one on the chin for FU. I wish you all the best in this difficult time for everybody! We are all in this together! Sincerely, Senior Administrator
RESPONSE A: Ours are taking a 10% paycut and one extremely noble individual is going up to 20%.
RESPONSE B: Thankfully we're only getting everything above hard truths at my institution. But we've formed committees to look at all the options
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: . However, whenever I visit the r/AskAcademia subreddit, I find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. Now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. Now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? If yes, do you know about the details of this effort? If no, why don't academics do more to really promote science?
RESPONSE A: >Now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? If yes, do you know about the details of this effort? If no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? Yeah we complain about this all the time. The funding agencies (primarily NSF, NIH, but also DOE, DOD, etc) are basically the ones that determine it, and that's based on how much money they're given by the federal government... But the academic job market can't grow indefinitely and faculty turnover is greatly outpaced by the rate at which students graduate. If there is one graduate student per professor, they won't find jobs unless professors retire after six years. And they don't. But science wouldn't get done without graduate students, so we're stuck under the current model. Thankfully there are plenty of non-academic science jobs as u/drsomewhatevil points out and that's the saving grace for the academic job market.
RESPONSE B: I think you will find that a lot of industry is really resting on a academic foundation. The erosion of that academic foundation is a huge problem. Every paper and technique we used in the drug company and in many biotech companies were academic. Maybe you took those 100 papers and that federally funded training and those first pilots and paper and ran with it and started your own company, but you weren’t going to get that in the company. All the drug companies, including the ones that made the vaccines , are relying on years of federally funded basic and clinical research. So as more people flee the system and funding to basic science is eroded you will lose that also.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: So much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? I am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. However, whenever I visit the r/AskAcademia subreddit, I find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. Now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. Now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? If yes, do you know about the details of this effort? If no, why don't academics do more to really promote science?
RESPONSE A: I don't think that pushing people to become scientists is the same as pushing people to become professors. That said, I do think the way that we promote science to our society is problematic. From a careers perspective, there's this myth that getting a STEM degree means that you're guaranteed a good job, when most S and M jobs are really competitive and actually don't pay very well, at least until you get a higher degree. This really fucks over, say, vanilla biology undergrads.
RESPONSE B: Can people please stop spreading the idea that academia is the only path for scientists? It's utterly ridiculous and also why education is one of the slowest when it comes to innovating as we're stucl in an almost century old method of cultivating scientists.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? I am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. However, whenever I visit the r/AskAcademia subreddit, I find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. Now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. Now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? If yes, do you know about the details of this effort? If no, why don't academics do more to really promote science?
RESPONSE A: >Now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? If yes, do you know about the details of this effort? If no, why don't academics do more to really promote science? Yeah we complain about this all the time. The funding agencies (primarily NSF, NIH, but also DOE, DOD, etc) are basically the ones that determine it, and that's based on how much money they're given by the federal government... But the academic job market can't grow indefinitely and faculty turnover is greatly outpaced by the rate at which students graduate. If there is one graduate student per professor, they won't find jobs unless professors retire after six years. And they don't. But science wouldn't get done without graduate students, so we're stuck under the current model. Thankfully there are plenty of non-academic science jobs as u/drsomewhatevil points out and that's the saving grace for the academic job market.
RESPONSE B: I don't think that pushing people to become scientists is the same as pushing people to become professors. That said, I do think the way that we promote science to our society is problematic. From a careers perspective, there's this myth that getting a STEM degree means that you're guaranteed a good job, when most S and M jobs are really competitive and actually don't pay very well, at least until you get a higher degree. This really fucks over, say, vanilla biology undergrads.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: So much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? I am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. However, whenever I visit the r/AskAcademia subreddit, I find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. Now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. Now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? If yes, do you know about the details of this effort? If no, why don't academics do more to really promote science?
RESPONSE A: We have to be careful as this is a slippery slope. Industry R&D positions are also saturated similar to academia, and this is beginning to spill into other career paths. Soon even biotech sales or PM positions will also require PhD at the entry level. But agreed, academia should do more to retain and employ students. Postdocs can become staff scientists or something.
RESPONSE B: All I can say is that I studied biology instead of English in college because of the « study stem! You’ll have a job! » push, and when I graduated it was nearly impossible to get a job as a biologist. People that have a BA in STEM and don’t want to be a computer scientist can get a job as a teacher pretty easily. But who wants to be a science teacher? In addition to trying to do all of the things most teachers have to do (that could easily be multiple people’s jobs), they have to set up labs, get materials, organize materials, clean up labs... All of this to say I wish I had studied English, so I had at least struggled to get a job in a field I loved most...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: So much effort about encouraging young people to do science, what about creating more jobs in academia? I am watching this increasing trend of scientists encouraging youngsters to become scientists for the last couple of years. However, whenever I visit the r/AskAcademia subreddit, I find some posts about the poor condition of the academic job market. Now, what's the point of telling young people to become scientists, when there's not much scope to really do so. Now, my question do academics reach out to the authorities to fund/ create more academic jobs or not? If yes, do you know about the details of this effort? If no, why don't academics do more to really promote science?
RESPONSE A: The US government notice a deficit in supply of STEM graduates that will work in industry, not a deficit in supply of STEM PhDs
RESPONSE B: All I can say is that I studied biology instead of English in college because of the « study stem! You’ll have a job! » push, and when I graduated it was nearly impossible to get a job as a biologist. People that have a BA in STEM and don’t want to be a computer scientist can get a job as a teacher pretty easily. But who wants to be a science teacher? In addition to trying to do all of the things most teachers have to do (that could easily be multiple people’s jobs), they have to set up labs, get materials, organize materials, clean up labs... All of this to say I wish I had studied English, so I had at least struggled to get a job in a field I loved most...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I do not know whether the author chose to disparage PhDs only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. However, I think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. The reason is that both WSJ and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a PhD should not call themselves a doctor. This is just the thought that occurred to me. I would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: Beyond the misogyny and everything else commented here, the op-ed belittles her dissertation, "Student Retention at the Community College Level: Meeting Students' Needs", calling it "unpromising" based on its title. (1) Fuck you. Community college is an incredibly important dimension of US Higher Education, serving over 40% of all college students, and studying retention at CC is very valuable. (2) Being given a platform to judge a dissertation by its title, as opposed to its content, is the epitome of "sound\[ing\] and feel\[ing\] fraudulent, not to say a touch comic".
RESPONSE B: > I do not know whether the author chose to disparage PhDs only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. I mean, why not both? Real people are complicated and this guy is a piece of work. The reason it is condemned for misogyny is because people only feel clever asking this kind of question when it's a woman who has the doctorate. That's the misogyny — along with the "kiddo" and other sorts of things that imply that he thinks he is superior to her despite his being a total piece of shit. The fact that it is also deeply ignorant and anti-intellectual is part of that, too.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I was also offended by the denigration of PhDs in general. I have listened to people talk about'real doctors' and it gets annoying. As a PhD in computer science, I do not go about touting my title in a hospital. In fact, I rarely use my title, unless required on a form. However, I feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. If a PhD goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. I do not know whether the author chose to disparage PhDs only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. However, I think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. The reason is that both WSJ and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a PhD should not call themselves a doctor. This is just the thought that occurred to me. I would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: I think the thesis here is that the WSJ is a trash publication that exists for risky clicks. I don't get why it's "fraudulent" for a person who has a PhD to call themselves Dr, so I feel like his whole argument is moot.
RESPONSE B: Beyond the misogyny and everything else commented here, the op-ed belittles her dissertation, "Student Retention at the Community College Level: Meeting Students' Needs", calling it "unpromising" based on its title. (1) Fuck you. Community college is an incredibly important dimension of US Higher Education, serving over 40% of all college students, and studying retention at CC is very valuable. (2) Being given a platform to judge a dissertation by its title, as opposed to its content, is the epitome of "sound\[ing\] and feel\[ing\] fraudulent, not to say a touch comic".
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: . However, I was also offended by the denigration of PhDs in general. I have listened to people talk about'real doctors' and it gets annoying. As a PhD in computer science, I do not go about touting my title in a hospital. In fact, I rarely use my title, unless required on a form. However, I feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. If a PhD goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. I do not know whether the author chose to disparage PhDs only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. However, I think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. The reason is that both WSJ and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a PhD should not call themselves a doctor. This is just the thought that occurred to me. I would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: I am always hesitant and sometimes feel odd about using “Dr” because of the confusion. I don’t work in academia ( but it is a setting with a good deal of MD’s) and everyone uses first names except in the most formal of meetings with those outside our organization.
RESPONSE B: Beyond the misogyny and everything else commented here, the op-ed belittles her dissertation, "Student Retention at the Community College Level: Meeting Students' Needs", calling it "unpromising" based on its title. (1) Fuck you. Community college is an incredibly important dimension of US Higher Education, serving over 40% of all college students, and studying retention at CC is very valuable. (2) Being given a platform to judge a dissertation by its title, as opposed to its content, is the epitome of "sound\[ing\] and feel\[ing\] fraudulent, not to say a touch comic".
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: only problem with the WSJ op-ed on asking Jill Biden to not use 'Dr.'? Edit: I do not often post. And looking at the options for flairs, I have a feeling this might not be the right subreddit for this. I apologize if that's the case. So recently there has been a furore over the op-ed by Joseph Epstein asking Jill Biden to not use the title of 'Dr.' and even calling it fraudulent. The article is absolutely misogynistic and should be condemned. However, I was also offended by the denigration of PhDs in general. I have listened to people talk about'real doctors' and it gets annoying. As a PhD in computer science, I do not go about touting my title in a hospital. In fact, I rarely use my title, unless required on a form. However, I feel that people who choose to do so are completely in the right. If a PhD goes about using the title with their name, the only flaw that can even be alleged is vanity, not fraudulence. I do not know whether the author chose to disparage PhDs only to help his misogynistic agenda with regards to the next first lady, or that he felt envious of people with higher degrees while he worked in academia. However, I think that the article can be condemned from an angle other than misogyny. The reason is that both WSJ and the author will double down on saying that they are not misogynistic, but in my opinion find it harder to objectively defend why a PhD should not call themselves a doctor. This is just the thought that occurred to me. I would love to hear what other people's approach is towards this and learn from that. Thanks.
RESPONSE A: I think the thesis here is that the WSJ is a trash publication that exists for risky clicks. I don't get why it's "fraudulent" for a person who has a PhD to call themselves Dr, so I feel like his whole argument is moot.
RESPONSE B: I stopped reading the article after “kiddo”
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but I don't know what I should do. My parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. They want me to finish my undergrad on time (by May 1st) and start grad school on time (June 1st), but I'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. My end goal is to become a professor at a PUI. Would deferment be looked at negatively? Does anyone know how I can transition back into my life/school? Is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? I'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. Does anyone have any advice? I'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. Thank you for any advice.
RESPONSE A: Take your time and grieve your loss. You've done the right thing and reached out to your undergrad and grad programs and gotten extensions and deferment. This is why these options are there, when the unexpected happens. Don't listen to your parents and take your time to get to a point you are okay. Mental health is already tough in grad school and going in when you are already vulnerable is not a wise decision. Having a gap year shouldn't be a problem. Plus, grant, fellowship and job applications all have a personal statement where you can explain gaps like this. And you have a very good reason if questioned. But also having a gap year at this stage isn't usually an issue. This won't ruin your chance to be a professor. Focus on grieving and dealing with your loss. And think about would she want you to put your life on hold. Taking the deferment to grieve is okay. But also moving on to grad school (be it this one or applying again this fall for another school) is okay as well.
RESPONSE B: I'm so sorry to hear about your loss. There's no shame at all in taking time off to process your emotions. Trying to push on may only hurt you in the end if you don't take the time to deal with this.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: there. I want to still get my PhD but now I'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. I contacted the school and they said I can defer up to a year and keep my RA-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but I don't know what I should do. My parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. They want me to finish my undergrad on time (by May 1st) and start grad school on time (June 1st), but I'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. My end goal is to become a professor at a PUI. Would deferment be looked at negatively? Does anyone know how I can transition back into my life/school? Is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? I'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. Does anyone have any advice? I'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. Thank you for any advice.
RESPONSE A: I'm so sorry to hear about your loss. There's no shame at all in taking time off to process your emotions. Trying to push on may only hurt you in the end if you don't take the time to deal with this.
RESPONSE B: Sorry for your loss OP. This is unimaginable. I would absolutely defer if you have any means of supporting yourself over the next year. Fall 2020 is going to be a real mess on campuses everywhere, and I can't imagine starting a Ph.D. program in the midst of that. You'd be better off almost anywhere else IMO, for both personal and professional reasons. Give yourself a break and do what you need to in order to reset...grieving during a pandemic is hard as hell (as I and many others now know). Being a grad student ain't no picnic either. If you can take some time to focus on yourself and to heal you'd probably be in a better place in fall 2021, and it's all but certain that's true for higher ed in general as well.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: grad school on time (June 1st), but I'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. My end goal is to become a professor at a PUI. Would deferment be looked at negatively? Does anyone know how I can transition back into my life/school? Is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? I'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. Does anyone have any advice? I'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. Thank you for any advice.
RESPONSE A: Sorry for your loss OP. This is unimaginable. I would absolutely defer if you have any means of supporting yourself over the next year. Fall 2020 is going to be a real mess on campuses everywhere, and I can't imagine starting a Ph.D. program in the midst of that. You'd be better off almost anywhere else IMO, for both personal and professional reasons. Give yourself a break and do what you need to in order to reset...grieving during a pandemic is hard as hell (as I and many others now know). Being a grad student ain't no picnic either. If you can take some time to focus on yourself and to heal you'd probably be in a better place in fall 2021, and it's all but certain that's true for higher ed in general as well.
RESPONSE B: I am so, so sorry. Grief is a heavy thing and it can’t be gotten over. You will learn to live with it, but you need support. I think you should defer, take some time, and care for your own health first. I am so, so sorry. I can’t even imagine. I do know that when you’re experiencing grief you should avoid making huge decisions for several months. If funding and admission is the same, don’t jump in just yet. You may feel like you’re in a fog during the first year of grieving, and I’m not sure doctoral work will help. Also think about your studies as an investment in yourself. Are you ready to invest all that’s required right now, or would you be better suited for the work after taking some time?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: area/things to do there. I want to still get my PhD but now I'm feeling lost and scared about moving forward. I contacted the school and they said I can defer up to a year and keep my RA-ship offer and everything and my current university is offering me incompletes to finish over the summer, but I don't know what I should do. My parents have taken me back to my childhood home and they are trying to "get me over" the death of the love of my life. They want me to finish my undergrad on time (by May 1st) and start grad school on time (June 1st), but I'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. My end goal is to become a professor at a PUI. Would deferment be looked at negatively? Does anyone know how I can transition back into my life/school? Is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? I'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. Does anyone have any advice? I'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. Thank you for any advice.
RESPONSE A: I’m sorry for your loss. I know it’s not the same, but my roommate took his life while we were living together. My biggest regret wasn’t taking time away from to school to process the event.
RESPONSE B: Sorry for your loss OP. This is unimaginable. I would absolutely defer if you have any means of supporting yourself over the next year. Fall 2020 is going to be a real mess on campuses everywhere, and I can't imagine starting a Ph.D. program in the midst of that. You'd be better off almost anywhere else IMO, for both personal and professional reasons. Give yourself a break and do what you need to in order to reset...grieving during a pandemic is hard as hell (as I and many others now know). Being a grad student ain't no picnic either. If you can take some time to focus on yourself and to heal you'd probably be in a better place in fall 2021, and it's all but certain that's true for higher ed in general as well.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: une 1st), but I'm having trouble just typing this let alone thinking about math. My end goal is to become a professor at a PUI. Would deferment be looked at negatively? Does anyone know how I can transition back into my life/school? Is it okay to not be able to do any work right now? I'm also feeling guilty to move on with my life without her. Does anyone have any advice? I'm only 22 and my lover has already passed away. Thank you for any advice.
RESPONSE A: I'm so sorry to hear about your loss. There's no shame at all in taking time off to process your emotions. Trying to push on may only hurt you in the end if you don't take the time to deal with this.
RESPONSE B: OK - first, my wife died over a decade ago. I understand your pain. It is immense. It's not going away soon. In some ways you will actually do things that others will see as "crazy." There will be times that you cannot function. That's all normal. It took me about 6 months to feel at all consistently functional. But there will also be times when you can do all right and be wanting to move forward. Like when you wrote this message to all of us. Take whatever time off you have been given. This is not giving up or giving in. Your entire psyche has been shocked badly and you cannot function at your best. You need the time to recover, even if all you want to do is bury yourself in work to distract you from the pain of it all. It sounds like both institutions are doing you a solid and giving you the time. Take it. You need it. I was trying to finish my dissertation when my wife died. My first draft was completely finished. It actually took me another 2 years until I got to my defense. OK, that's what it took. I simply could not have gone any faster. Try to remember that your parents are trying to help even when they're not. You can also say, "no, I don't want that." They might actually hear you after 45 tries. No one you want to work with will look badly at deferment for this reason. When you're ready, you'll know.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Successfully defended PhD yesterday. COVID-positive today. So much to do to submit this paper, but I feel like death. Any advice?
RESPONSE A: PhD's cause Covid, n=1
RESPONSE B: Take a few days. Other than a graduation filing deadline there are few true emergencies in academia. However, be entirely prepared for the graduate school to tell you to pound sand if you are up against one.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Successfully defended PhD yesterday. COVID-positive today. So much to do to submit this paper, but I feel like death. Any advice?
RESPONSE A: PhD's cause Covid, n=1
RESPONSE B: Congratulations! Hope for a speedy recovery Dr !
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Successfully defended PhD yesterday. COVID-positive today. So much to do to submit this paper, but I feel like death. Any advice?
RESPONSE A: PhD's cause Covid, n=1
RESPONSE B: First, congrats! Second, I was incredibly ill when I defended. I forced myself to look over ten pages a day after that (I had almost five weeks and only 300 pages to look over). Most days were easy with few revisions. Some days required a little more effort. Pareling out the work made it easier to get through. I hope you get better soon!!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Successfully defended PhD yesterday. COVID-positive today. So much to do to submit this paper, but I feel like death. Any advice?
RESPONSE A: Congrats it’s big thing to celebrate!! Drink a lot of water and rest up. Find some good books or movies to relax as you recover. It’s a lot (really a lot) of physical pain so I’d totally say find some distraction would be nicer. Defended Feb 13, 2017 but got super ill soon after Christmas. Major symptoms relieved within a week but never was a day without coughing before I hand in revised thesis. Stress makes immune system not working well is so true.
RESPONSE B: PhD's cause Covid, n=1
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Successfully defended PhD yesterday. COVID-positive today. So much to do to submit this paper, but I feel like death. Any advice?
RESPONSE A: Inform your adviser? That's the first thing I'd personally do. So they'd know I won't be able to submit any revisions or further requirements as quickly as I can under normal circumstances. Anyway, congrats op! I hope your case is mild and it goes away fast. Take your vitamins and other over the counter medicine for symptom control.
RESPONSE B: Congratulations! Hope for a speedy recovery Dr !
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Successful defense! Today I defended my PhD dissertation, and it was accepted by committee with revisions. I'm so relieved I could cry. I'm so glad this stage is over. To be honest, I had been worried the pandemic was going to affect my defense process negatively, and I'm so relieved it's done with.
RESPONSE A: Congrats, Dr! I guess no one is showing you the secret handshake, what with social distancing and all.
RESPONSE B: Congrats! Stay healthy
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Successful defense! Today I defended my PhD dissertation, and it was accepted by committee with revisions. I'm so relieved I could cry. I'm so glad this stage is over. To be honest, I had been worried the pandemic was going to affect my defense process negatively, and I'm so relieved it's done with.
RESPONSE A: Congrats, Dr! I guess no one is showing you the secret handshake, what with social distancing and all.
RESPONSE B: Congratulations! Mine is two weeks from today (via video)!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Successful defense! Today I defended my PhD dissertation, and it was accepted by committee with revisions. I'm so relieved I could cry. I'm so glad this stage is over. To be honest, I had been worried the pandemic was going to affect my defense process negatively, and I'm so relieved it's done with.
RESPONSE A: Congrats, Dr! I guess no one is showing you the secret handshake, what with social distancing and all.
RESPONSE B: Congratulations! Savor it.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Successful defense! Today I defended my PhD dissertation, and it was accepted by committee with revisions. I'm so relieved I could cry. I'm so glad this stage is over. To be honest, I had been worried the pandemic was going to affect my defense process negatively, and I'm so relieved it's done with.
RESPONSE A: Congrats, Dr! I guess no one is showing you the secret handshake, what with social distancing and all.
RESPONSE B: Congratulations!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Successful defense! Today I defended my PhD dissertation, and it was accepted by committee with revisions. I'm so relieved I could cry. I'm so glad this stage is over. To be honest, I had been worried the pandemic was going to affect my defense process negatively, and I'm so relieved it's done with.
RESPONSE A: Congrats!!!
RESPONSE B: Congrats, Dr! I guess no one is showing you the secret handshake, what with social distancing and all.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I just passed my Qualifying Exam. I’m officially a Ph.D Candidate!! As many of us, I’ve had imposter syndrome since I started grad school. Until my exam, I honestly thought I would fail my QE as I really didn’t belong and didn’t think I knew enough. I thought they would hate my proposal and rip it apart in front of me. However, after today’s exam, I finally feel more confident in myself. Having a discussion about your proposed project with other researchers really does help bring things into perspective, and can be thought provoking. Having your thoughts and ideas supported by other well established researchers is something that I never thought would happen. To everyone going through comprehensive/qualifying exams: you can do it!!! We are our own worst enemies, but believe me when I tell you that you know a lot more than you think you do! You’re going to kill it!
RESPONSE A: Yay, congrats! I'm taking my exam next week!
RESPONSE B: Congratulations! This marks (in theory) the point where your committee is on your side: supportive rather than antagonistic. Excellent work! I wrote up my experience while it was still fresh in my mind; maybe you'll consider doing the same to dispel some of the common fears that new grad students face regarding the qualifying exam?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: I just passed my Qualifying Exam. I’m officially a Ph.D Candidate!! As many of us, I’ve had imposter syndrome since I started grad school. Until my exam, I honestly thought I would fail my QE as I really didn’t belong and didn’t think I knew enough. I thought they would hate my proposal and rip it apart in front of me. However, after today’s exam, I finally feel more confident in myself. Having a discussion about your proposed project with other researchers really does help bring things into perspective, and can be thought provoking. Having your thoughts and ideas supported by other well established researchers is something that I never thought would happen. To everyone going through comprehensive/qualifying exams: you can do it!!! We are our own worst enemies, but believe me when I tell you that you know a lot more than you think you do! You’re going to kill it!
RESPONSE A: Congratulations that is awesome!!! The qual is a terrifying nightmare, till you pass and the it’s such a sense of accomplishment. Keep up all the ass kicking, and crush your proposal!! Great job!
RESPONSE B: Congratulations! This marks (in theory) the point where your committee is on your side: supportive rather than antagonistic. Excellent work! I wrote up my experience while it was still fresh in my mind; maybe you'll consider doing the same to dispel some of the common fears that new grad students face regarding the qualifying exam?
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I just passed my Qualifying Exam. I’m officially a Ph.D Candidate!! As many of us, I’ve had imposter syndrome since I started grad school. Until my exam, I honestly thought I would fail my QE as I really didn’t belong and didn’t think I knew enough. I thought they would hate my proposal and rip it apart in front of me. However, after today’s exam, I finally feel more confident in myself. Having a discussion about your proposed project with other researchers really does help bring things into perspective, and can be thought provoking. Having your thoughts and ideas supported by other well established researchers is something that I never thought would happen. To everyone going through comprehensive/qualifying exams: you can do it!!! We are our own worst enemies, but believe me when I tell you that you know a lot more than you think you do! You’re going to kill it!
RESPONSE A: Congratulations! This marks (in theory) the point where your committee is on your side: supportive rather than antagonistic. Excellent work! I wrote up my experience while it was still fresh in my mind; maybe you'll consider doing the same to dispel some of the common fears that new grad students face regarding the qualifying exam?
RESPONSE B: Congratulations!!! That’s a wonderful achievement!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I just passed my Qualifying Exam. I’m officially a Ph.D Candidate!! As many of us, I’ve had imposter syndrome since I started grad school. Until my exam, I honestly thought I would fail my QE as I really didn’t belong and didn’t think I knew enough. I thought they would hate my proposal and rip it apart in front of me. However, after today’s exam, I finally feel more confident in myself. Having a discussion about your proposed project with other researchers really does help bring things into perspective, and can be thought provoking. Having your thoughts and ideas supported by other well established researchers is something that I never thought would happen. To everyone going through comprehensive/qualifying exams: you can do it!!! We are our own worst enemies, but believe me when I tell you that you know a lot more than you think you do! You’re going to kill it!
RESPONSE A: Congratulations! This marks (in theory) the point where your committee is on your side: supportive rather than antagonistic. Excellent work! I wrote up my experience while it was still fresh in my mind; maybe you'll consider doing the same to dispel some of the common fears that new grad students face regarding the qualifying exam?
RESPONSE B: I really really needed to read this. I have my preliminary exam the first week of May and my imposter syndrome is really getting the best of me even though my advisor is the most encouraging person ever and says that he wouldn’t send me into this without knowing that I’m ready. I have a group meeting practice next week and I think I’ll feel better once that happens...
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: I just passed my Qualifying Exam. I’m officially a Ph.D Candidate!! As many of us, I’ve had imposter syndrome since I started grad school. Until my exam, I honestly thought I would fail my QE as I really didn’t belong and didn’t think I knew enough. I thought they would hate my proposal and rip it apart in front of me. However, after today’s exam, I finally feel more confident in myself. Having a discussion about your proposed project with other researchers really does help bring things into perspective, and can be thought provoking. Having your thoughts and ideas supported by other well established researchers is something that I never thought would happen. To everyone going through comprehensive/qualifying exams: you can do it!!! We are our own worst enemies, but believe me when I tell you that you know a lot more than you think you do! You’re going to kill it!
RESPONSE A: Congratulations! This marks (in theory) the point where your committee is on your side: supportive rather than antagonistic. Excellent work! I wrote up my experience while it was still fresh in my mind; maybe you'll consider doing the same to dispel some of the common fears that new grad students face regarding the qualifying exam?
RESPONSE B: For me, the qualifying exam was great because I felt like my committee was on my team. I wasn’t defending myself to them as much as it was a conversation among colleagues. Congrats!
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Just wanted to say thank you. I'd read several times on here that the best way to gain access to most papers is to ask the author directly. I tried it yesterday and it worked. Not only was the author happy to send me her paper, she also sent me another related paper of hers and offered to send me more of her research if I wanted it. The papers are fascinating, it's exactly what I needed for my current research project (writing a high-school textbook), and on top of that, the author is a lovely person. So thank you, AskAcademia, for helping me dare to do something I would never have done otherwise.
RESPONSE A: I've asked numerous authors for pdfs of their papers, and have been asked for copies of mine. It seems like a professional courtesy -- plus hey, someone else is interested! I've never been turned down and certainly would never turn down such a request. I'm glad you had a similar experience.
RESPONSE B: Can't speak for everyone but I know for me as an author publishing feels like throwing things into the void sometimes. So getting an email from someone who's actually interested in what I'm writing about is such a great and validating feeling. I'm sure that the feeling is the same for most other academics. Plus... not like we get a cut of what publishers are making.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Just wanted to say thank you. I'd read several times on here that the best way to gain access to most papers is to ask the author directly. I tried it yesterday and it worked. Not only was the author happy to send me her paper, she also sent me another related paper of hers and offered to send me more of her research if I wanted it. The papers are fascinating, it's exactly what I needed for my current research project (writing a high-school textbook), and on top of that, the author is a lovely person. So thank you, AskAcademia, for helping me dare to do something I would never have done otherwise.
RESPONSE A: It's great that authors share their papers and it is the very least they should be doing. It is not a sustainable model for dissemination of publicly funded scientific work though. It should all be open access.
RESPONSE B: Can't speak for everyone but I know for me as an author publishing feels like throwing things into the void sometimes. So getting an email from someone who's actually interested in what I'm writing about is such a great and validating feeling. I'm sure that the feeling is the same for most other academics. Plus... not like we get a cut of what publishers are making.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does anyone else get really sleepy about 20 minutes into any Zoom call? I find it's impossible for me to stay alert during colloquiums or presentations, and sometimes even for more dynamic conversations where I'm actually participating, for more than about 20 minutes into a video call. I feel like my brain gets exhausted very quickly by the low-quality, compressed audio/video. I'll have a coffee during these events and that still doesn't help. Has anyone else suffered from this, and do you have any tricks for remaining alert?
RESPONSE A: You can make it for 20 whole minutes!?!
RESPONSE B: Yes.I’m the professor so it’s a problem.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: Does anyone else get really sleepy about 20 minutes into any Zoom call? I find it's impossible for me to stay alert during colloquiums or presentations, and sometimes even for more dynamic conversations where I'm actually participating, for more than about 20 minutes into a video call. I feel like my brain gets exhausted very quickly by the low-quality, compressed audio/video. I'll have a coffee during these events and that still doesn't help. Has anyone else suffered from this, and do you have any tricks for remaining alert?
RESPONSE A: All the time. Writing notes during the call definitely helps me stay focused.
RESPONSE B: Yes.I’m the professor so it’s a problem.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: Does anyone else get really sleepy about 20 minutes into any Zoom call? I find it's impossible for me to stay alert during colloquiums or presentations, and sometimes even for more dynamic conversations where I'm actually participating, for more than about 20 minutes into a video call. I feel like my brain gets exhausted very quickly by the low-quality, compressed audio/video. I'll have a coffee during these events and that still doesn't help. Has anyone else suffered from this, and do you have any tricks for remaining alert?
RESPONSE A: Yes.I’m the professor so it’s a problem.
RESPONSE B: yeah :/ it’s rly hard for me to go to talks and symposiums now, especially when they’re webinar format and i cant even discuss things or see others’ responses
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: it's impossible for me to stay alert during colloquiums or presentations, and sometimes even for more dynamic conversations where I'm actually participating, for more than about 20 minutes into a video call. I feel like my brain gets exhausted very quickly by the low-quality, compressed audio/video. I'll have a coffee during these events and that still doesn't help. Has anyone else suffered from this, and do you have any tricks for remaining alert?
RESPONSE A: For me, Vitamin D deficiency was the culprit.
RESPONSE B: Absolutely... and the NY Times had a great article on this about 6 months ago as to why. It turns out that, when we engage with people in real life, our brains are absorbing a *massive* amount of almost-imperceptible information (small gestures, posture, foot-shuffling, smells, pheromones, etc.), most of it subliminally. (Because our lizard-brains need to know: is this person about to attack me? is this person a potential mate? is this person a member of my in-group? And our civilized-brains are constantly-evaluating on every level, from the utilitarian to the social to the abstract.) But even on a high-quality, non-lagging Zoom call, practically NONE of this information is being captured by the software or otherwise conveyed. You can't see their posture; you can't smell their pheromones, etc. So, your brain starts revving up to try to pick up the signals... and this is exhausting. (It's sort of like how your cell phone battery drains faster when you're in an area of poor coverage, as it tries to grasp onto a useable signal.) It goes the other way, too: when I was Zoom-lecturing, I quickly learned to "over-emote"... to exaggerate the facial expressions emotions I was trying to get across, because the students seemed to respond much better when I did. But this itself was exhausting... a 50 minute Zoom "lecture" felt as exhausting as giving a 2-hour in-person lecture.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: gets exhausted very quickly by the low-quality, compressed audio/video. I'll have a coffee during these events and that still doesn't help. Has anyone else suffered from this, and do you have any tricks for remaining alert?
RESPONSE A: Yes - I started shortening my own lectures into smaller chunks when I realized that listening to anyone on Zoom for more than 20 minutes straight is mentally exhausting. I don’t have a short attention span, either, so I don’t know why I find it so draining.
RESPONSE B: Absolutely... and the NY Times had a great article on this about 6 months ago as to why. It turns out that, when we engage with people in real life, our brains are absorbing a *massive* amount of almost-imperceptible information (small gestures, posture, foot-shuffling, smells, pheromones, etc.), most of it subliminally. (Because our lizard-brains need to know: is this person about to attack me? is this person a potential mate? is this person a member of my in-group? And our civilized-brains are constantly-evaluating on every level, from the utilitarian to the social to the abstract.) But even on a high-quality, non-lagging Zoom call, practically NONE of this information is being captured by the software or otherwise conveyed. You can't see their posture; you can't smell their pheromones, etc. So, your brain starts revving up to try to pick up the signals... and this is exhausting. (It's sort of like how your cell phone battery drains faster when you're in an area of poor coverage, as it tries to grasp onto a useable signal.) It goes the other way, too: when I was Zoom-lecturing, I quickly learned to "over-emote"... to exaggerate the facial expressions emotions I was trying to get across, because the students seemed to respond much better when I did. But this itself was exhausting... a 50 minute Zoom "lecture" felt as exhausting as giving a 2-hour in-person lecture.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: People who write scientific research papers quickly, what’s your secret? For academic research papers, what are your best tips and tricks for being both efficient and doing high quality work? What order do you write the paper in, and how do you keep from going off on too many tangents? How do you deal efficiently with co-authors?
RESPONSE A: Start writing whatever you have. No matter how insignificant your contributions are up to that point. If you don’t have any idea what you are proposing, download a journal template and write down your name and probable tittle. Start writing what you want to do? Chapter headings References You will have some new idea each time you open that document. That will work like a charm. Let me give you an example from my work: I work in developing algorithms, analyzing them and applying them to solve optimization problem. Whenever I have an idea, I just do the following: 1. Download a probable journal latex template 2. Write down the probable title 3. Author names 4. Paper headings 5. Add random Algorithm templates 6. Start writing the abstract After all of that I have a preliminary document to work on. It drives me to write more. In my mind I know I already wrote down the structure. That gives me motivation.
RESPONSE B: Confidence
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: People who write scientific research papers quickly, what’s your secret? For academic research papers, what are your best tips and tricks for being both efficient and doing high quality work? What order do you write the paper in, and how do you keep from going off on too many tangents? How do you deal efficiently with co-authors?
RESPONSE A: Confidence
RESPONSE B: I write while I do the research. Even if things change, there is still a draft of the Related Work, Methods and Results that I can go to immediately when finished and continue writing. I write all over the place on the paper because of this strategy.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: People who write scientific research papers quickly, what’s your secret? For academic research papers, what are your best tips and tricks for being both efficient and doing high quality work? What order do you write the paper in, and how do you keep from going off on too many tangents? How do you deal efficiently with co-authors?
RESPONSE A: I write while I do the research. Even if things change, there is still a draft of the Related Work, Methods and Results that I can go to immediately when finished and continue writing. I write all over the place on the paper because of this strategy.
RESPONSE B: I try to write really good notes as I work on the project. Why we decided to do it (incl relevant papers it's building on), what our goal/question is, all the details about the method & analysis, etc. The first draft is just making that into full sentences and then you're just editing.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: People who write scientific research papers quickly, what’s your secret? For academic research papers, what are your best tips and tricks for being both efficient and doing high quality work? What order do you write the paper in, and how do you keep from going off on too many tangents? How do you deal efficiently with co-authors?
RESPONSE A: I write while I do the research. Even if things change, there is still a draft of the Related Work, Methods and Results that I can go to immediately when finished and continue writing. I write all over the place on the paper because of this strategy.
RESPONSE B: A solid formula for the structure
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
A | POST: People who write scientific research papers quickly, what’s your secret? For academic research papers, what are your best tips and tricks for being both efficient and doing high quality work? What order do you write the paper in, and how do you keep from going off on too many tangents? How do you deal efficiently with co-authors?
RESPONSE A: This may not work for everyone, but I have a big love for presenting. So I’ll make my figures and get them all nailed down, write my methods like normal, and basically set up a presentation outline. Then, I’ll stream-of-consciousness word vomit on to the page as if I were talking to an audience. I take a day or more away, come back, and read it out loud to myself to identify any gaps in information or illogical jumps, to edit grammar and spelling, and just generally clean up. It makes for really speedy writing and gets you to practice “presenting” as well.
RESPONSE B: I start with the research questions/hypothesis then literature review to show the gaps that highlight my research questions. Then I move to the methodology and results, making sure the research questions are addressed well in those sections. From my experience writing and reviewing papers, these are what will drive the decision to accept/revise/reject the paper, so I work on them first to make sure rest fo the sections align with these sections. Intro/motivation is next and then I work on discussions and limitations. Conclusions and abstract are the last things I write because these are probably what reviewers will read first and you want these to highlight everything on your paper . I feel that this sequence helps me focus more on the contributions of my work and keeps that chain of thought throughout the paper.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |
B | POST: If I have 6 hours of Zoom meetings everyday, can I really be expected to get anything else done? Postdoc in STEM completely overburdened with meetings at the moment. I'm (co-)supervising 15 student projects, spanning the bachelor to PhD level with students in 4 different countries, on top of which I have all of my normal collaborations that I should make progress on. On top of that, there's seminars and journal clubs everyday. It's just impossible to get anything done at the moment! /rant
RESPONSE A: I only read the title. ABSOLUTELY NO is the answer... Meetings are a plague on productivity... edit: typo
RESPONSE B: Cut the meeting times in half, move others to email or slide updates and meeting every other week, have a conversation with your PI about overburdening, and start blocking time on your calendar for your priorities.
Which response is better? RESPONSE |