Datasets:

Dahoas

/

filtered-SHP

like 2

o2tc11

askacademia_train

Human: PIs, what do you find most impressive about exceptional grad students? I know it's not about knowing the answers to everything (as I was once led to believe), but a part of grad school and growing is asking dumb questions, lots of them. This is especially so if one worked in an interdisciplinary field. What then, separates mediocre, good, and exceptional students? When is the last time a student genuinely impressed you? What did he/she do? I'm less curious about the specific outcomes (publications, high grades, engagement, etc.), but more about the characteristics and habits great students have. Could it be creativity? Productivity? The ability to ask relevant research questions and design experiments? The ability to conduct experiments independently and discuss the results meaningfully? Put another way, aside from tangible results, what (soft) skills should I aim to gain in grad school to become a better academic? What makes you say, *wow, I am really impressed by this student*? Hope the question is clear. Thanks for your input! Assistant:

h28xuby

h289ksk

The best grad students seem to have their own agenda that is interdependent with their mentor's research. They use their mentor for advice, but don't need hand holding for everything. They are driven by their own goals and find a mentor that facilities progress in that direction.

“…a part of grad school and growing is asking dumb questions, lots of them.” No, it’s really not. There are two really big misunderstandings on this. First, “there’s no such thing as a stupid question” is absolutely false. Second, “it doesn’t hurt to ask” is also not true. Hopefully for you, you aren’t using the term “dumb question” correctly. A dumb question is one where the answer should be obvious to you (not just obvious to the person your asking), or you’ve been told before, or one you can look up yourself as quickly as it takes you to ask. A dumb question is one that annoys the person you ask because they shouldn’t have to answer it for you. And this is where “it doesn’t hurt to ask” is dead wrong. Everyone asks dumb questions on occasion, but someone who does it “a lot” is someone I can’t trust to work on complicated projects, or without more supervision than I give other students, and that means it’s someone I can’t write a good letter of recommendation for. Students at all levels need to figure out how to tell if a question is a stupid question or not. If you’re not sure, ask. A few times doesn’t hurt. But from someone who hopes to be an independent researcher one day, you really need to figure it out quick.

o2tc11

askacademia_train

Human: PIs, what do you find most impressive about exceptional grad students? I know it's not about knowing the answers to everything (as I was once led to believe), but a part of grad school and growing is asking dumb questions, lots of them. This is especially so if one worked in an interdisciplinary field. What then, separates mediocre, good, and exceptional students? When is the last time a student genuinely impressed you? What did he/she do? I'm less curious about the specific outcomes (publications, high grades, engagement, etc.), but more about the characteristics and habits great students have. Could it be creativity? Productivity? The ability to ask relevant research questions and design experiments? The ability to conduct experiments independently and discuss the results meaningfully? Put another way, aside from tangible results, what (soft) skills should I aim to gain in grad school to become a better academic? What makes you say, *wow, I am really impressed by this student*? Hope the question is clear. Thanks for your input! Assistant:

h28shbp

h28xuby

Time management skills. I just graduated with my MA and there were two other students in my cohort that I was constantly impressed by because of their insane time management skills. One of them is a mother to twin girls who works a part time job outside of her GTA responsibilities and she was constantly submitting grant applications, writing multiple manuscripts, and consistently working on her research in the lab. The other also worked a job outside of her GTA responsibilities and lab work on top of planning a massive wedding complete with meticulously crafted 3D representations of the venue and decor. I have absolutely no idea how they managed to do all of the stuff that they did with only 24 hours in a day. I am exceptionally jealous of and massively impressed with their time management skills.

The best grad students seem to have their own agenda that is interdependent with their mentor's research. They use their mentor for advice, but don't need hand holding for everything. They are driven by their own goals and find a mentor that facilities progress in that direction.

o2tc11

askacademia_train

Human: PIs, what do you find most impressive about exceptional grad students? I know it's not about knowing the answers to everything (as I was once led to believe), but a part of grad school and growing is asking dumb questions, lots of them. This is especially so if one worked in an interdisciplinary field. What then, separates mediocre, good, and exceptional students? When is the last time a student genuinely impressed you? What did he/she do? I'm less curious about the specific outcomes (publications, high grades, engagement, etc.), but more about the characteristics and habits great students have. Could it be creativity? Productivity? The ability to ask relevant research questions and design experiments? The ability to conduct experiments independently and discuss the results meaningfully? Put another way, aside from tangible results, what (soft) skills should I aim to gain in grad school to become a better academic? What makes you say, *wow, I am really impressed by this student*? Hope the question is clear. Thanks for your input! Assistant:

h28fpn1

h289ksk

Being someone I can trust to do good work without needing to manage you much is really what it boils down to. Like if I give a deadline, I expect it to be met. If it can't be, that's ok as long as there's an extenuating circumstance and I know about it ahead of time. Regularly meeting deadlines, being concientious (but not anxious - I have enough of my own anxiety, I don't need yours), responding well to constructive feedback, being dependable, and actually being interested in the work. Being respectful obviously too, and having good boundaries

“…a part of grad school and growing is asking dumb questions, lots of them.” No, it’s really not. There are two really big misunderstandings on this. First, “there’s no such thing as a stupid question” is absolutely false. Second, “it doesn’t hurt to ask” is also not true. Hopefully for you, you aren’t using the term “dumb question” correctly. A dumb question is one where the answer should be obvious to you (not just obvious to the person your asking), or you’ve been told before, or one you can look up yourself as quickly as it takes you to ask. A dumb question is one that annoys the person you ask because they shouldn’t have to answer it for you. And this is where “it doesn’t hurt to ask” is dead wrong. Everyone asks dumb questions on occasion, but someone who does it “a lot” is someone I can’t trust to work on complicated projects, or without more supervision than I give other students, and that means it’s someone I can’t write a good letter of recommendation for. Students at all levels need to figure out how to tell if a question is a stupid question or not. If you’re not sure, ask. A few times doesn’t hurt. But from someone who hopes to be an independent researcher one day, you really need to figure it out quick.

o2tc11

askacademia_train

Human: PIs, what do you find most impressive about exceptional grad students? I know it's not about knowing the answers to everything (as I was once led to believe), but a part of grad school and growing is asking dumb questions, lots of them. This is especially so if one worked in an interdisciplinary field. What then, separates mediocre, good, and exceptional students? When is the last time a student genuinely impressed you? What did he/she do? I'm less curious about the specific outcomes (publications, high grades, engagement, etc.), but more about the characteristics and habits great students have. Could it be creativity? Productivity? The ability to ask relevant research questions and design experiments? The ability to conduct experiments independently and discuss the results meaningfully? Put another way, aside from tangible results, what (soft) skills should I aim to gain in grad school to become a better academic? What makes you say, *wow, I am really impressed by this student*? Hope the question is clear. Thanks for your input! Assistant:

h2aexcm

h29o3qz

I've seen a lot of people go on to get really competitive academic and industry jobs and the number one skill they have had (along with genuine intellectual curiosity), bar none, is time management. These were mostly people who did *not* work crazy long hours or most (if any) weekends, often because of family commitments. Some had to make it 9 to 5, if thats not possible it never really extends much beyond that because 1) they couldn't and 2) I really think its counterproductive. They were people who could stay focused and organized to produce a steady stream of small steps forward and deliverables day in and day out with an eye on a goal (usually a big paper or a fellowship etc). From a mangers perspective, someone like this is the best, especially if they can communicate what is working and what isn't.

I think a lot of it boils down to finding a right mentor. A lot of success in grad school depends on luck and whether your project is successful or not. That is of course the essence of research. In my opinion, I have seen everyone of my cohorts work hard but the results vary because of varying factors. For example, a good student with a PI who doesn’t the mentor the student would go through a hard time.

b5com1

askacademia_train

Human: What type of cranks does your discipline attract? I'm in religious studies and just got an email from someone letting me know his bizarre theories about the Bible. Assistant:

ejcnodt

ejckfgu

I’m in German Studies.... so Nazis.... lots and lots of fucking Nazis.

I do geochronology and a lot of my group works on Early Earth. We get weird postcards a couple times a year, and weird emails several times a year. My supervisor also has been "cited" by Answers in Genesis multiple times... ​ Edit: I realized I didn't specify what type of weird it was. Mostly creationists insisting the Earth isn't that old, or that radiogenic elements' decay constants are actually much higher, etc.

b5com1

askacademia_train

Human: What type of cranks does your discipline attract? I'm in religious studies and just got an email from someone letting me know his bizarre theories about the Bible. Assistant:

ejcnodt

ejclz9z

I’m in German Studies.... so Nazis.... lots and lots of fucking Nazis.

Celtic studies/medieval Irish history attracts a lot of people who identify with pop-history representations of Irish culture/society who are absolutely furious to discover that much of what's out there (especially with regards to the religion[s] practised in Ireland prior to Christianisation) is not an accurate representation of the historical record.

b5com1

askacademia_train

Human: What type of cranks does your discipline attract? I'm in religious studies and just got an email from someone letting me know his bizarre theories about the Bible. Assistant:

ejcnk3f

ejcnodt

Assyriology, Sumerology, and Biblical Studies. Anything from Ancient Aliens folks to biblical fundamentalists to Atheist fundamentalists. Absolute insanity.

I’m in German Studies.... so Nazis.... lots and lots of fucking Nazis.

b5com1

askacademia_train

Human: What type of cranks does your discipline attract? I'm in religious studies and just got an email from someone letting me know his bizarre theories about the Bible. Assistant:

ejcnodt

ejcmrmy

I’m in German Studies.... so Nazis.... lots and lots of fucking Nazis.

Libertarians. CS PhD. It's.... upsetting

b5com1

askacademia_train

Human: What type of cranks does your discipline attract? I'm in religious studies and just got an email from someone letting me know his bizarre theories about the Bible. Assistant:

ejcms3f

ejcnodt

Anthropology/human evolution/fossils. I get angry Creationists and the “is this totally normal rock I found in my back yard a precious fossil?” types. The latter is usually accompanied by a blurry, low resolution photo of said rock.

I’m in German Studies.... so Nazis.... lots and lots of fucking Nazis.

iht6gb

askacademia_train

Human: So so tired. How to rediscover my lost passion and drive 😥 Perhaps this feeling has been cliche by now, with everything going on in the world. But does anyone else out there just feel totally *done*? I'm going into my 3rd year of my PhD (out of 4 total), my "analysis year". (Previous two were mostly lots and lots of fieldwork, collecting data, presentations, some general analyses and papers but not focused on detailed analyses.) I used to love my research. I still do, but feel totally separate from it. Just can't motivate myself to work on anything for my dissertation the past few weeks. I'm tired all of the time and don't know how to refuel my drive... I'm guessing others must feel the same way. Suggestions on how to get out of this slump? How to feel refreshed, recharged, and passionate again? There's just so many shitty chaotic things occurring, speaking from the US perspective but globally as well. How does anyone focus on research, or anything for that matter, anymore? I'm just so tired... Assistant:

g32n6bl

g32mmao

My perspective is a little different. I don't need to be passionate about my work. I treat my research and teaching as a job, and that helps me stay motivated and productive. Maybe try to find things other than passion that motivate you to complete your PhD. Edited to add: Of course, there is a mental health aspect of your post that I haven't addressed. I second the suggestion to take a few days off to mentally recharge.

Ughh I feel this. I feel exhausted ALL the time and its making it impossible for me to get anything done. But then the longer I go without getting things done, the more stressed and tired I get.

iht6gb

askacademia_train

Human: So so tired. How to rediscover my lost passion and drive 😥 Perhaps this feeling has been cliche by now, with everything going on in the world. But does anyone else out there just feel totally *done*? I'm going into my 3rd year of my PhD (out of 4 total), my "analysis year". (Previous two were mostly lots and lots of fieldwork, collecting data, presentations, some general analyses and papers but not focused on detailed analyses.) I used to love my research. I still do, but feel totally separate from it. Just can't motivate myself to work on anything for my dissertation the past few weeks. I'm tired all of the time and don't know how to refuel my drive... I'm guessing others must feel the same way. Suggestions on how to get out of this slump? How to feel refreshed, recharged, and passionate again? There's just so many shitty chaotic things occurring, speaking from the US perspective but globally as well. How does anyone focus on research, or anything for that matter, anymore? I'm just so tired... Assistant:

g32mih9

g32n6bl

I'm not sure where you're at, but I know for many quarantine is really draining. Even if you're just staying inside all the time, that itself is very draining. Stay strong!

My perspective is a little different. I don't need to be passionate about my work. I treat my research and teaching as a job, and that helps me stay motivated and productive. Maybe try to find things other than passion that motivate you to complete your PhD. Edited to add: Of course, there is a mental health aspect of your post that I haven't addressed. I second the suggestion to take a few days off to mentally recharge.

iht6gb

askacademia_train

Human: So so tired. How to rediscover my lost passion and drive 😥 Perhaps this feeling has been cliche by now, with everything going on in the world. But does anyone else out there just feel totally *done*? I'm going into my 3rd year of my PhD (out of 4 total), my "analysis year". (Previous two were mostly lots and lots of fieldwork, collecting data, presentations, some general analyses and papers but not focused on detailed analyses.) I used to love my research. I still do, but feel totally separate from it. Just can't motivate myself to work on anything for my dissertation the past few weeks. I'm tired all of the time and don't know how to refuel my drive... I'm guessing others must feel the same way. Suggestions on how to get out of this slump? How to feel refreshed, recharged, and passionate again? There's just so many shitty chaotic things occurring, speaking from the US perspective but globally as well. How does anyone focus on research, or anything for that matter, anymore? I'm just so tired... Assistant:

g32mih9

g32qup7

I'm not sure where you're at, but I know for many quarantine is really draining. Even if you're just staying inside all the time, that itself is very draining. Stay strong!

2 suggestions:Work out every single day, seriously. Start small and progressively increase. Physical health can help you feel more energized. I know this is a very common suggestion, but this is how I keep myself focused. I run a mile everyday which really isn't much, but in the long run I've would've ran 365 miles after year. I like short simple workouts because it doesn't conflict with your schedule and if you're consistent you'll see results both mentally and physically. And I'm in STEM too, I have to tell you this is very common, especially when you've been spending time on all of the low level stuff (coding, collecting data, math, etc). My second suggestion is to watch movies on your subject, play video games on your subject, travel (maybe just road trip due to covid for safety), etc. I just notice that seeing your subject in a high/abstract level can get you excited again.

iht6gb

askacademia_train

Human: So so tired. How to rediscover my lost passion and drive 😥 Perhaps this feeling has been cliche by now, with everything going on in the world. But does anyone else out there just feel totally *done*? I'm going into my 3rd year of my PhD (out of 4 total), my "analysis year". (Previous two were mostly lots and lots of fieldwork, collecting data, presentations, some general analyses and papers but not focused on detailed analyses.) I used to love my research. I still do, but feel totally separate from it. Just can't motivate myself to work on anything for my dissertation the past few weeks. I'm tired all of the time and don't know how to refuel my drive... I'm guessing others must feel the same way. Suggestions on how to get out of this slump? How to feel refreshed, recharged, and passionate again? There's just so many shitty chaotic things occurring, speaking from the US perspective but globally as well. How does anyone focus on research, or anything for that matter, anymore? I'm just so tired... Assistant:

g3468z6

g33tjju

One thing I've found PhD candidates absolutely *terrible* at without encouragement is taking actual leave. Go on leave for a minimum of a week. 10 days is better. DO not check your emails. Do not do anything work related. Do whatever you can to make it feel like holiday - visit friends or family, travel (if that's possible in current circumstances), etc. It is an unhealthy and unsustainable approach to just keep ploughing on without giving yourself a break from things.

Repost this message in r/PhD ! There's a lot of open discussions about this kind of topics :) Cheers

hkevuw

askacademia_train

Human: What’s life like Post-PhD? Does one feels less dumb? Only interested in unpopular opinions. Assistant:

fwsjul4

fws9pbk

No it’s great. On days when I’m lounging around being a useless lump, I catch myself and I’m like “damn I’m a doctor!” And then I feel fancy and validated as I uselessly lump around.

Nope. Just check out imposter syndrome...

hkevuw

askacademia_train

Human: What’s life like Post-PhD? Does one feels less dumb? Only interested in unpopular opinions. Assistant:

fwsc12x

fwsjul4

For his epitaph, Paul Erdős suggested "I've finally stopped getting dumber." (Hungarian: "Végre nem butulok tovább").

No it’s great. On days when I’m lounging around being a useless lump, I catch myself and I’m like “damn I’m a doctor!” And then I feel fancy and validated as I uselessly lump around.

hkevuw

askacademia_train

Human: What’s life like Post-PhD? Does one feels less dumb? Only interested in unpopular opinions. Assistant:

fwsjul4

fwsjtv1

No it’s great. On days when I’m lounging around being a useless lump, I catch myself and I’m like “damn I’m a doctor!” And then I feel fancy and validated as I uselessly lump around.

No, but there's a lot more Pre-PhD nostalgia, though.

hkevuw

askacademia_train

Human: What’s life like Post-PhD? Does one feels less dumb? Only interested in unpopular opinions. Assistant:

fwsjul4

fwsey37

No it’s great. On days when I’m lounging around being a useless lump, I catch myself and I’m like “damn I’m a doctor!” And then I feel fancy and validated as I uselessly lump around.

Nope. Embrace it

hkevuw

askacademia_train

Human: What’s life like Post-PhD? Does one feels less dumb? Only interested in unpopular opinions. Assistant:

fwsjtv1

fwsk6qe

No, but there's a lot more Pre-PhD nostalgia, though.

I’ve been relentlessly asking myself this too since I just defended two weeks ago. I remember when I first got accepted I imagined myself in the future, graduating. My head would be massive, not from my ego but from the bulk of knowledge I had stored, memorized, formatted, eternally remembered, able to recall in the fraction of a second. Now that I’ve finished (besides revisions), I feel dumber than when I started. I know nothing.

vt7lfw

askacademia_train

Human: Why are scientists always portrayed as bad guys/cowardly villains/arrogant/etc in movies/media? ​ God damnit, I'm tired of screenwriters/entertainment industry's weird vilification of us. Every time there's a guy with a lab coat in a movie, you know he/she is going to die in a horrible way or they're going to be complete weird dickheads.\* Have they even ever talked to or befriended your real average scientist? *Most* nobody acts like that in real life. (at least here in Canada) \*unless they're some rugged ex-soldier outsider main character who don't get along with the rest /rant Assistant:

if66sex

if63ziu

Because America doesn’t respect science as much as you think. Especially when rational and scientific behavior would solve most problems removing any excitement from the film.

Gordon Freeman though

vt7lfw

askacademia_train

Human: Why are scientists always portrayed as bad guys/cowardly villains/arrogant/etc in movies/media? ​ God damnit, I'm tired of screenwriters/entertainment industry's weird vilification of us. Every time there's a guy with a lab coat in a movie, you know he/she is going to die in a horrible way or they're going to be complete weird dickheads.\* Have they even ever talked to or befriended your real average scientist? *Most* nobody acts like that in real life. (at least here in Canada) \*unless they're some rugged ex-soldier outsider main character who don't get along with the rest /rant Assistant:

if6ow7d

if71nxr

It's the old blasphemy trope. The non god-fearing scientists have no morals kind of things.

Anti-intellectualism, glorification of ignorance, and a desire of discrediting knowledge for the sake of dogma. What you are referring to is a modern continuation of witch burnings of the old. This is a looong discussion. But I will attempt to summarize. Simple people want simple answers in life. But the truth is often different from what you see and understand through intuition. Throw a healthy dose of religiosity on top and you will put together a sample group of people representative of our society. These people will pick and absorb information based on subjective bias. The bias may be due to what they can understand with intuition or religious beliefs. These people are your target market for media. Furthermore, these people are the ones producing the media. This causes scientists to be not only be in odds with society but also look detached from it. You have to understand that average person has no clue what we do. Some of them think we don't do anything and just tinker around. They are that detached from us. There is a us-them separation almost. It is like, there is this group of people doing their own thing. Masses enjoy their products without needing to think about what goes into make these marvels of science and tech possible. All the while praising lack of education and brute force approach to solve problems.

vt7lfw

askacademia_train

Human: Why are scientists always portrayed as bad guys/cowardly villains/arrogant/etc in movies/media? ​ God damnit, I'm tired of screenwriters/entertainment industry's weird vilification of us. Every time there's a guy with a lab coat in a movie, you know he/she is going to die in a horrible way or they're going to be complete weird dickheads.\* Have they even ever talked to or befriended your real average scientist? *Most* nobody acts like that in real life. (at least here in Canada) \*unless they're some rugged ex-soldier outsider main character who don't get along with the rest /rant Assistant:

if6d5q9

if71nxr

This trope is so common in media it even crosses into video games. Scientists are either the evil villains/totally complicit with it & have fancy all white, bright & snazzy labs or they’re the one that no one listens to and everything could have been better if they had 😐

Anti-intellectualism, glorification of ignorance, and a desire of discrediting knowledge for the sake of dogma. What you are referring to is a modern continuation of witch burnings of the old. This is a looong discussion. But I will attempt to summarize. Simple people want simple answers in life. But the truth is often different from what you see and understand through intuition. Throw a healthy dose of religiosity on top and you will put together a sample group of people representative of our society. These people will pick and absorb information based on subjective bias. The bias may be due to what they can understand with intuition or religious beliefs. These people are your target market for media. Furthermore, these people are the ones producing the media. This causes scientists to be not only be in odds with society but also look detached from it. You have to understand that average person has no clue what we do. Some of them think we don't do anything and just tinker around. They are that detached from us. There is a us-them separation almost. It is like, there is this group of people doing their own thing. Masses enjoy their products without needing to think about what goes into make these marvels of science and tech possible. All the while praising lack of education and brute force approach to solve problems.

vt7lfw

askacademia_train

Human: Why are scientists always portrayed as bad guys/cowardly villains/arrogant/etc in movies/media? ​ God damnit, I'm tired of screenwriters/entertainment industry's weird vilification of us. Every time there's a guy with a lab coat in a movie, you know he/she is going to die in a horrible way or they're going to be complete weird dickheads.\* Have they even ever talked to or befriended your real average scientist? *Most* nobody acts like that in real life. (at least here in Canada) \*unless they're some rugged ex-soldier outsider main character who don't get along with the rest /rant Assistant:

if71nxr

if6u3zv

Anti-intellectualism, glorification of ignorance, and a desire of discrediting knowledge for the sake of dogma. What you are referring to is a modern continuation of witch burnings of the old. This is a looong discussion. But I will attempt to summarize. Simple people want simple answers in life. But the truth is often different from what you see and understand through intuition. Throw a healthy dose of religiosity on top and you will put together a sample group of people representative of our society. These people will pick and absorb information based on subjective bias. The bias may be due to what they can understand with intuition or religious beliefs. These people are your target market for media. Furthermore, these people are the ones producing the media. This causes scientists to be not only be in odds with society but also look detached from it. You have to understand that average person has no clue what we do. Some of them think we don't do anything and just tinker around. They are that detached from us. There is a us-them separation almost. It is like, there is this group of people doing their own thing. Masses enjoy their products without needing to think about what goes into make these marvels of science and tech possible. All the while praising lack of education and brute force approach to solve problems.

Because STEM is scary shit for moviegoers.

vt7lfw

askacademia_train

Human: Why are scientists always portrayed as bad guys/cowardly villains/arrogant/etc in movies/media? ​ God damnit, I'm tired of screenwriters/entertainment industry's weird vilification of us. Every time there's a guy with a lab coat in a movie, you know he/she is going to die in a horrible way or they're going to be complete weird dickheads.\* Have they even ever talked to or befriended your real average scientist? *Most* nobody acts like that in real life. (at least here in Canada) \*unless they're some rugged ex-soldier outsider main character who don't get along with the rest /rant Assistant:

if6k5oz

if71nxr

Because that is what 98% of society thinks about smart and very smart people.

Anti-intellectualism, glorification of ignorance, and a desire of discrediting knowledge for the sake of dogma. What you are referring to is a modern continuation of witch burnings of the old. This is a looong discussion. But I will attempt to summarize. Simple people want simple answers in life. But the truth is often different from what you see and understand through intuition. Throw a healthy dose of religiosity on top and you will put together a sample group of people representative of our society. These people will pick and absorb information based on subjective bias. The bias may be due to what they can understand with intuition or religious beliefs. These people are your target market for media. Furthermore, these people are the ones producing the media. This causes scientists to be not only be in odds with society but also look detached from it. You have to understand that average person has no clue what we do. Some of them think we don't do anything and just tinker around. They are that detached from us. There is a us-them separation almost. It is like, there is this group of people doing their own thing. Masses enjoy their products without needing to think about what goes into make these marvels of science and tech possible. All the while praising lack of education and brute force approach to solve problems.

hnndkn

askacademia_train

Human: I love working for my PIs because... So this isn’t a question but I just wanted to take the time to make a shout-out to all the awesome PIs who are nice to their students, and I’m posting this here instead of r/Academia because 10 times the audience haha Context first, I am a student researcher. I’ve been making a lot of mistakes with my work recently despite having a couple years of lab experience, for a multitude of reasons including Covid. Instead of getting mad at me or engaging in any of the negative behaviour we hear often on this sub, my PIs (I’ve got 3 advisors) have been wonderfully understanding about my poor performance. They’ve repeatedly reassured me that I am not a dumbass, that I am adding value to the lab and projects, and that it is ok to screw up sometimes. At this point, they probably believe in me more than I believe in myself. Also, my PIs seem to make it a point to thank me whenever I’ve done extra work or taken initiative, and are lavish with praise for anything they think I’ve done well. They make me feel like I am valued in the lab and their actions assure me that they will be here to support me no matter what. I feel like I would do anything for this lab. It may not mean much to them, but for a young student like myself, being praised and supported by my PIs means the world to me. It motivates me to keep at it, and it pushes me to want to grow and work harder and be a better version of myself. TLDR: be nice to the students and the students probably might sell their soul to your lab willingly Assistant:

fxcr3xk

fxcqqta

So much this. I ride the offhanded "good job"s for days. First time doing research (undergrad) and my advisor is SO nice. I was actually worried because Reddit (whether it be this sub or other academic subs) makes it seem like 99% of advisors are toxic micromanagers, but I've seen nothing of the sort irl.

Glad to hear! My advisor is the same way. Very generous with the praise, pushes me to do my best but in a kind and supportive way, always takes interest and helps greatly with my work, available to meet whenever I need it. Also encourages me to have a life! Having a supportive Supervisor is the best.

hnndkn

askacademia_train

Human: I love working for my PIs because... So this isn’t a question but I just wanted to take the time to make a shout-out to all the awesome PIs who are nice to their students, and I’m posting this here instead of r/Academia because 10 times the audience haha Context first, I am a student researcher. I’ve been making a lot of mistakes with my work recently despite having a couple years of lab experience, for a multitude of reasons including Covid. Instead of getting mad at me or engaging in any of the negative behaviour we hear often on this sub, my PIs (I’ve got 3 advisors) have been wonderfully understanding about my poor performance. They’ve repeatedly reassured me that I am not a dumbass, that I am adding value to the lab and projects, and that it is ok to screw up sometimes. At this point, they probably believe in me more than I believe in myself. Also, my PIs seem to make it a point to thank me whenever I’ve done extra work or taken initiative, and are lavish with praise for anything they think I’ve done well. They make me feel like I am valued in the lab and their actions assure me that they will be here to support me no matter what. I feel like I would do anything for this lab. It may not mean much to them, but for a young student like myself, being praised and supported by my PIs means the world to me. It motivates me to keep at it, and it pushes me to want to grow and work harder and be a better version of myself. TLDR: be nice to the students and the students probably might sell their soul to your lab willingly Assistant:

fxews50

fxf07e2

> I ~~love~~ like my supervisor because As a person she is amazing, she brought food to me during quarantine. (I was not sick, but had 1.order contact). She is generally awesomely nice... ... too nice. I think I took too much advantage of her. Regardless, I think she will be disappointed to know I am leaving the field because I just cannot bear the job insecurity any longer.

I found my PI by asking what groups had the happiest grad students. My PI makes everyone feel respected, pushes you because he wants you to achieve your best, and manages to mentor women without ever coming off as creepy. He's just a really good guy. And he's ridiculously brilliant. My master's PI was also awesome. She asked questions like you were an equal, even when you were an undergrad, made the group feel like a team even if we were working on separate projects, and kept a sense of humor when things went sideways. And she rooted for me to reach higher for my PhD, even though I could have stayed there.

brb756

askacademia_train

Human: "How to work in academia and look after yourself" A talk I gave last week about well-being and work-life balance in academia Last week I gave a talk called "How to work in higher education and look after yourself" which was also called "How to be a future research leader and look after yourself".... The talk was recorded and you can watch it here It's the second time I've given it, lots of people have told me it was useful for them. It's super hard for me to give the talk (it brings up a lot of personal issues with anxiety) so this time I recorded it so I won't have to give it again! It's got some practical time management, work-life balance stuff but focuses on thinking about the relationship you have with your work. I'm in the UK so it's obviously focused on that context. Assistant:

eodhzjm

eocmy7w

As a PhD students I think one of the biggest things as academics is we need to be kind and not be dicks. We had an issue with blackboard a few weeks ago where coursework would randomly not upload and I remember seeing a first year crying in the corridor outside a lecture officer as blackboard failed and she was going to fail the module and year (100% coursework). She emailed him within 5 minutes of the deadline with the file. Still rejected. Further that, I was talking to some student volunteer a few weeks back and one professor came up to them, asked them an obscure question and lost it with the SV for not knowing. We need to try to be kind more and challenge poor behaviour more often. We affect our students lives more often than we realise. Edit - fixed some grammar

As someone who has just finished their PhD and is a relatively fresh Postdoc, thank you for this, friend.

brb756

askacademia_train

Human: "How to work in academia and look after yourself" A talk I gave last week about well-being and work-life balance in academia Last week I gave a talk called "How to work in higher education and look after yourself" which was also called "How to be a future research leader and look after yourself".... The talk was recorded and you can watch it here It's the second time I've given it, lots of people have told me it was useful for them. It's super hard for me to give the talk (it brings up a lot of personal issues with anxiety) so this time I recorded it so I won't have to give it again! It's got some practical time management, work-life balance stuff but focuses on thinking about the relationship you have with your work. I'm in the UK so it's obviously focused on that context. Assistant:

eodhzjm

eocc92c

As a PhD students I think one of the biggest things as academics is we need to be kind and not be dicks. We had an issue with blackboard a few weeks ago where coursework would randomly not upload and I remember seeing a first year crying in the corridor outside a lecture officer as blackboard failed and she was going to fail the module and year (100% coursework). She emailed him within 5 minutes of the deadline with the file. Still rejected. Further that, I was talking to some student volunteer a few weeks back and one professor came up to them, asked them an obscure question and lost it with the SV for not knowing. We need to try to be kind more and challenge poor behaviour more often. We affect our students lives more often than we realise. Edit - fixed some grammar

Thanks

brb756

askacademia_train

Human: "How to work in academia and look after yourself" A talk I gave last week about well-being and work-life balance in academia Last week I gave a talk called "How to work in higher education and look after yourself" which was also called "How to be a future research leader and look after yourself".... The talk was recorded and you can watch it here It's the second time I've given it, lots of people have told me it was useful for them. It's super hard for me to give the talk (it brings up a lot of personal issues with anxiety) so this time I recorded it so I won't have to give it again! It's got some practical time management, work-life balance stuff but focuses on thinking about the relationship you have with your work. I'm in the UK so it's obviously focused on that context. Assistant:

eodhzjm

eocgvwv

As a PhD students I think one of the biggest things as academics is we need to be kind and not be dicks. We had an issue with blackboard a few weeks ago where coursework would randomly not upload and I remember seeing a first year crying in the corridor outside a lecture officer as blackboard failed and she was going to fail the module and year (100% coursework). She emailed him within 5 minutes of the deadline with the file. Still rejected. Further that, I was talking to some student volunteer a few weeks back and one professor came up to them, asked them an obscure question and lost it with the SV for not knowing. We need to try to be kind more and challenge poor behaviour more often. We affect our students lives more often than we realise. Edit - fixed some grammar

Thank you!

brb756

askacademia_train

Human: "How to work in academia and look after yourself" A talk I gave last week about well-being and work-life balance in academia Last week I gave a talk called "How to work in higher education and look after yourself" which was also called "How to be a future research leader and look after yourself".... The talk was recorded and you can watch it here It's the second time I've given it, lots of people have told me it was useful for them. It's super hard for me to give the talk (it brings up a lot of personal issues with anxiety) so this time I recorded it so I won't have to give it again! It's got some practical time management, work-life balance stuff but focuses on thinking about the relationship you have with your work. I'm in the UK so it's obviously focused on that context. Assistant:

eodhzjm

eocudiy

As a PhD students I think one of the biggest things as academics is we need to be kind and not be dicks. We had an issue with blackboard a few weeks ago where coursework would randomly not upload and I remember seeing a first year crying in the corridor outside a lecture officer as blackboard failed and she was going to fail the module and year (100% coursework). She emailed him within 5 minutes of the deadline with the file. Still rejected. Further that, I was talking to some student volunteer a few weeks back and one professor came up to them, asked them an obscure question and lost it with the SV for not knowing. We need to try to be kind more and challenge poor behaviour more often. We affect our students lives more often than we realise. Edit - fixed some grammar

Great talk. Thank you so much for sharing - I really needed to hear this right now.

brb756

askacademia_train

Human: "How to work in academia and look after yourself" A talk I gave last week about well-being and work-life balance in academia Last week I gave a talk called "How to work in higher education and look after yourself" which was also called "How to be a future research leader and look after yourself".... The talk was recorded and you can watch it here It's the second time I've given it, lots of people have told me it was useful for them. It's super hard for me to give the talk (it brings up a lot of personal issues with anxiety) so this time I recorded it so I won't have to give it again! It's got some practical time management, work-life balance stuff but focuses on thinking about the relationship you have with your work. I'm in the UK so it's obviously focused on that context. Assistant:

eocmy7w

eocc92c

As someone who has just finished their PhD and is a relatively fresh Postdoc, thank you for this, friend.

Thanks

pilxnh

askacademia_train

Human: As a student, should we challenge our textbooks when they contain bullshit and where is the onus for the bullshit? I'm a student who keeps finding bullshit in my assigned textbooks: >"For example, most Americans do not leave home without their mobile phone. And, if they do forget and leave their home or office without them, they're covered. While out and about, they buy a disposal *(sic)* mobile phone with airtime for a few dollars. However, disposable phones typically lack most of the features of conventional mobile phones." From *Communicating in Business* by Robert G Insley 2nd edition, Kendall Hunt Publishing 2017. There's no citation for this claim because no one does this. Here's another one: >"As a result, many adverse physical, mental, and emotional conditions associated with chronic stress can be reduced or eliminated with regular practice of PMR. It helps decrease insomnia and posttraumatic stress disorder". "The Effects of Music Relaxation and Muscle Relaxation Techniques on Sleep Quality and Emotional Measures among Individuals with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder," by M. Blanaru, B. Bloch, L. Vadas, et al., Mental Illness, 4(2) (2012): e13 From *Stress Management for Life: A Research-Based Experiential Approach 5th Edition* by Olpin and Hesson Cengage Publishing 2021 I looked into that and the study of 13 people with PTSD tests them with music relaxation and muscle relaxation. The study finds that there are positive effects with music relaxation. But the description in the book claims that the PMR is the effective part. Here's a third one. >Instead, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator" (MBTI.,) instrument is a personality assessment tool developed in the 1940s by Isabel Briggs Myers and Katharine Cook Briggs. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® assessment is an inventory test that identifies sixteen personality types. From *Essential Study Skills* 5th Edition by Wong Cengage Publishing 2013 Except no. Who should be responsible for these things? Should it be the student, who should not accept what is being taught at face value? Should the professor, who should have reviewed the textbook to make sure that what is being taught is accurate? Should it be the publisher, who is selling these as learning instruments without fact-checking? Should it be the author, who is not doing their due diligence prior to releasing these turds? Should we as students challenge these things? Assistant:

hbqi4i5

hbqpo79

I absolutely think this should be challenged and talked about. Especially with how expensive textbooks can be. I would think it would have good information in it if I was made to pay 60 bucks for one textbook.

Who is responsible? All of the above. I explicitly tell my students to question what they are taught, and challenge when they think something doesn’t add up. I point out when I disagree with something in a textbook. You should have been taught to critically think in high school, and you should absolutely be doing that in college. The publisher should be fact checking their authors before they publish. As faculty, I try to read all of any book I require or recommend, but I skim some and could miss something even when I read thoroughly.

i99nw6

askacademia_train

Human: Those who discovered they had ADHD during their PhD, what is your story? Hi! I started listening to the "How to ADHD" podcast on youtube ( https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvq9Tp5JZ8oDV3SIpSJX25Twp9FHKqi\_l ) and honestly, it has brought me to tears... I'm not sure if I'm just exhausted or realize that I've been struggling with this for such a long time. I'm now a PhD student and have been having great grades in school most of my life, even if I didn't study a lot (excepts for math... where I have to study a lot and have meh grades...) Anyways, I'm interested in how you discovered that you had it, what caused you to get diagnosed and what you are doing now with it. Assistant:

g1e07j6

g1e01ej

I'm in a similar situation and there's good news. Now that you know, you can harness your adhd to your benefit. Usually for me there are a couple/a few hours a day when my brain chemistry is balanced, I have the optimum caffeine and food energy levels without jitters. I use that time to do my "A" tasks, like writing. Then when the full adhd kicks in, it's time for emails, ie. "C" tasks. By the end of the day, when I'm tired enough that the adhd isn't overwhelming, I settle in a little bit for reading, "B" tasks. This is what works for me, ymmv

I got diagnosed with adhd after my masters, prior to my PhD. I had suspected for a long time (I’m a psychologist) but the impetus for me was the way I nearly fell apart at the end of my degree. I was always able to keep on top of things at uni even though I had terrible study habits, would do everything last minute, and was super disorganised. It all came to a head when I had to spend extra weeks at the clinic because I got so behind on notes. It was a huge relief to get diagnosed, it’s made a huge difference. Happy to answer any questions you might have!

i99nw6

askacademia_train

Human: Those who discovered they had ADHD during their PhD, what is your story? Hi! I started listening to the "How to ADHD" podcast on youtube ( https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvq9Tp5JZ8oDV3SIpSJX25Twp9FHKqi\_l ) and honestly, it has brought me to tears... I'm not sure if I'm just exhausted or realize that I've been struggling with this for such a long time. I'm now a PhD student and have been having great grades in school most of my life, even if I didn't study a lot (excepts for math... where I have to study a lot and have meh grades...) Anyways, I'm interested in how you discovered that you had it, what caused you to get diagnosed and what you are doing now with it. Assistant:

g1e07j6

g1dw29k

I'm in a similar situation and there's good news. Now that you know, you can harness your adhd to your benefit. Usually for me there are a couple/a few hours a day when my brain chemistry is balanced, I have the optimum caffeine and food energy levels without jitters. I use that time to do my "A" tasks, like writing. Then when the full adhd kicks in, it's time for emails, ie. "C" tasks. By the end of the day, when I'm tired enough that the adhd isn't overwhelming, I settle in a little bit for reading, "B" tasks. This is what works for me, ymmv

I was diagnosed right after my ph.d. (Psychiatrist). I started really struggling in multiple areas—reason I sought out help. It’s been helpful in the sense that it explains a lot of my life. Ironically, I work in special education. I know a lot of strategies for ADHD, but difficult to put them into play myself. I found that cognitive behavior therapy was really helpful. I still use a therapist to provide external motivation, accountability, and problem solving.

i99nw6

askacademia_train

Human: Those who discovered they had ADHD during their PhD, what is your story? Hi! I started listening to the "How to ADHD" podcast on youtube ( https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvq9Tp5JZ8oDV3SIpSJX25Twp9FHKqi\_l ) and honestly, it has brought me to tears... I'm not sure if I'm just exhausted or realize that I've been struggling with this for such a long time. I'm now a PhD student and have been having great grades in school most of my life, even if I didn't study a lot (excepts for math... where I have to study a lot and have meh grades...) Anyways, I'm interested in how you discovered that you had it, what caused you to get diagnosed and what you are doing now with it. Assistant:

g1ds3lp

g1e07j6

Uhh...... I’m now typing like super angry and sad at the same time after watching this video 🤣 that could explain so much haha

I'm in a similar situation and there's good news. Now that you know, you can harness your adhd to your benefit. Usually for me there are a couple/a few hours a day when my brain chemistry is balanced, I have the optimum caffeine and food energy levels without jitters. I use that time to do my "A" tasks, like writing. Then when the full adhd kicks in, it's time for emails, ie. "C" tasks. By the end of the day, when I'm tired enough that the adhd isn't overwhelming, I settle in a little bit for reading, "B" tasks. This is what works for me, ymmv

i99nw6

askacademia_train

Human: Those who discovered they had ADHD during their PhD, what is your story? Hi! I started listening to the "How to ADHD" podcast on youtube ( https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvq9Tp5JZ8oDV3SIpSJX25Twp9FHKqi\_l ) and honestly, it has brought me to tears... I'm not sure if I'm just exhausted or realize that I've been struggling with this for such a long time. I'm now a PhD student and have been having great grades in school most of my life, even if I didn't study a lot (excepts for math... where I have to study a lot and have meh grades...) Anyways, I'm interested in how you discovered that you had it, what caused you to get diagnosed and what you are doing now with it. Assistant:

g1ds3lp

g1e01ej

Uhh...... I’m now typing like super angry and sad at the same time after watching this video 🤣 that could explain so much haha

I got diagnosed with adhd after my masters, prior to my PhD. I had suspected for a long time (I’m a psychologist) but the impetus for me was the way I nearly fell apart at the end of my degree. I was always able to keep on top of things at uni even though I had terrible study habits, would do everything last minute, and was super disorganised. It all came to a head when I had to spend extra weeks at the clinic because I got so behind on notes. It was a huge relief to get diagnosed, it’s made a huge difference. Happy to answer any questions you might have!

i99nw6

askacademia_train

Human: Those who discovered they had ADHD during their PhD, what is your story? Hi! I started listening to the "How to ADHD" podcast on youtube ( https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvq9Tp5JZ8oDV3SIpSJX25Twp9FHKqi\_l ) and honestly, it has brought me to tears... I'm not sure if I'm just exhausted or realize that I've been struggling with this for such a long time. I'm now a PhD student and have been having great grades in school most of my life, even if I didn't study a lot (excepts for math... where I have to study a lot and have meh grades...) Anyways, I'm interested in how you discovered that you had it, what caused you to get diagnosed and what you are doing now with it. Assistant:

g1ds3lp

g1dw29k

Uhh...... I’m now typing like super angry and sad at the same time after watching this video 🤣 that could explain so much haha

I was diagnosed right after my ph.d. (Psychiatrist). I started really struggling in multiple areas—reason I sought out help. It’s been helpful in the sense that it explains a lot of my life. Ironically, I work in special education. I know a lot of strategies for ADHD, but difficult to put them into play myself. I found that cognitive behavior therapy was really helpful. I still use a therapist to provide external motivation, accountability, and problem solving.

l20at8

askacademia_train

Human: Is it wrong that I feel resentful towards my PI making me work on a weekends/university holiday (MLK day) and that he was unappreciative of it? It was for revisions to my first first author manuscript and we still have 11 days left to the deadline to resubmit and he told me “I was taking too long” when I asked him if I could read through it one more time for grammar before submitting it. I just feel really hurt because I worked for 40 hours on this paper Saturday to Tuesday of this week on top of all of my other normal life and student responsibilities. Being told I was taking too long when I put in so much effort to get it done way in advance of the deadline just makes me feel so bad right now. Assistant:

gk2lldi

gk2jil0

Not at all. No idea why 60-hour weeks are the minimum and in many cases they expect you to work on holidays and weekends in academia. I think that's just poor project management, not from you but from your PI. Sometimes, when you have experiments running, it can be understandable. It also means that you should be able to take time off once the experiment is done. I just think the whole "we do it because we love it" often gets confused with "I don't have to pay you and you don't have any rights". My advice, work a schedule with your PI as soon as possible and discuss what are his expectations. In any case, take action. Feeling resentful will only make you feel worse and a PhD is tough enough without all the extra drama happening. Good luck!

I absolutely do not think it is wrong to feel that way. However, based on my personal experience, you may feel a lot better about life in general and continuing with what you are doing if you are able to let that resentment go and not hang on to it. It's hard and I was not always able to get past that type of thing. Right or wrong, feeling that way only made finishing my degree harder.

l20at8

askacademia_train

Human: Is it wrong that I feel resentful towards my PI making me work on a weekends/university holiday (MLK day) and that he was unappreciative of it? It was for revisions to my first first author manuscript and we still have 11 days left to the deadline to resubmit and he told me “I was taking too long” when I asked him if I could read through it one more time for grammar before submitting it. I just feel really hurt because I worked for 40 hours on this paper Saturday to Tuesday of this week on top of all of my other normal life and student responsibilities. Being told I was taking too long when I put in so much effort to get it done way in advance of the deadline just makes me feel so bad right now. Assistant:

gk2m7cs

gk2oz2e

It’s not wrong at all. But at the same time, your first first author manuscript is a big deal. The sooner you finish it, the better. You never want to wait till the last minute for these things because the things that can go wrong will go wrong and then you end up losing more time.

One of the perks of science/academia is having some flexibility in your schedule. The downside of that is that you'll occasionally have very busy weeks where you work much more than the standard work week, and there will be times that an experiment or looming deadline will dictate that you have to work on a holiday. I recently had to come in over the winter holidays to keep some lab critters alive, and I took a few other days off to make up for it. I'm a huge advocate for work/life balance and not working ridiculous hours as a scientist, but I sort of feel like you need a little reality check here. Your PI didn't "make" you work over a holiday; you had an external deadline (from the journal) that needed to be met, and that happened to coincide with a holiday weekend. He's your mentor, and if he said you were taking too long, I would probably interpret that as him suggesting it doesn't need another read-through; thus, you're spending too much time on this particular task. I think you're creating a story around a simple piece of feedback (ie: telling yourself that your PI doesn't appreciate you and thinks your time isn't valuable, when in reality, he probably just meant that it's ready to go so there's no need to read over it again. In fairness to your PI, that might mean that he IS recognizing how valuable your time is, and doesn't want you to spend more than necessary on a given task). Done is better than perfect, and there's no such thing as perfect anyway! I suggest you take a few days off in the next week or so in lieu of the long weekend that you missed, and just let your PI know when and why.

l20at8

askacademia_train

Human: Is it wrong that I feel resentful towards my PI making me work on a weekends/university holiday (MLK day) and that he was unappreciative of it? It was for revisions to my first first author manuscript and we still have 11 days left to the deadline to resubmit and he told me “I was taking too long” when I asked him if I could read through it one more time for grammar before submitting it. I just feel really hurt because I worked for 40 hours on this paper Saturday to Tuesday of this week on top of all of my other normal life and student responsibilities. Being told I was taking too long when I put in so much effort to get it done way in advance of the deadline just makes me feel so bad right now. Assistant:

gk2jil0

gk2oz2e

I absolutely do not think it is wrong to feel that way. However, based on my personal experience, you may feel a lot better about life in general and continuing with what you are doing if you are able to let that resentment go and not hang on to it. It's hard and I was not always able to get past that type of thing. Right or wrong, feeling that way only made finishing my degree harder.

One of the perks of science/academia is having some flexibility in your schedule. The downside of that is that you'll occasionally have very busy weeks where you work much more than the standard work week, and there will be times that an experiment or looming deadline will dictate that you have to work on a holiday. I recently had to come in over the winter holidays to keep some lab critters alive, and I took a few other days off to make up for it. I'm a huge advocate for work/life balance and not working ridiculous hours as a scientist, but I sort of feel like you need a little reality check here. Your PI didn't "make" you work over a holiday; you had an external deadline (from the journal) that needed to be met, and that happened to coincide with a holiday weekend. He's your mentor, and if he said you were taking too long, I would probably interpret that as him suggesting it doesn't need another read-through; thus, you're spending too much time on this particular task. I think you're creating a story around a simple piece of feedback (ie: telling yourself that your PI doesn't appreciate you and thinks your time isn't valuable, when in reality, he probably just meant that it's ready to go so there's no need to read over it again. In fairness to your PI, that might mean that he IS recognizing how valuable your time is, and doesn't want you to spend more than necessary on a given task). Done is better than perfect, and there's no such thing as perfect anyway! I suggest you take a few days off in the next week or so in lieu of the long weekend that you missed, and just let your PI know when and why.

l20at8

askacademia_train

Human: Is it wrong that I feel resentful towards my PI making me work on a weekends/university holiday (MLK day) and that he was unappreciative of it? It was for revisions to my first first author manuscript and we still have 11 days left to the deadline to resubmit and he told me “I was taking too long” when I asked him if I could read through it one more time for grammar before submitting it. I just feel really hurt because I worked for 40 hours on this paper Saturday to Tuesday of this week on top of all of my other normal life and student responsibilities. Being told I was taking too long when I put in so much effort to get it done way in advance of the deadline just makes me feel so bad right now. Assistant:

gk2oz2e

gk2ms8j

One of the perks of science/academia is having some flexibility in your schedule. The downside of that is that you'll occasionally have very busy weeks where you work much more than the standard work week, and there will be times that an experiment or looming deadline will dictate that you have to work on a holiday. I recently had to come in over the winter holidays to keep some lab critters alive, and I took a few other days off to make up for it. I'm a huge advocate for work/life balance and not working ridiculous hours as a scientist, but I sort of feel like you need a little reality check here. Your PI didn't "make" you work over a holiday; you had an external deadline (from the journal) that needed to be met, and that happened to coincide with a holiday weekend. He's your mentor, and if he said you were taking too long, I would probably interpret that as him suggesting it doesn't need another read-through; thus, you're spending too much time on this particular task. I think you're creating a story around a simple piece of feedback (ie: telling yourself that your PI doesn't appreciate you and thinks your time isn't valuable, when in reality, he probably just meant that it's ready to go so there's no need to read over it again. In fairness to your PI, that might mean that he IS recognizing how valuable your time is, and doesn't want you to spend more than necessary on a given task). Done is better than perfect, and there's no such thing as perfect anyway! I suggest you take a few days off in the next week or so in lieu of the long weekend that you missed, and just let your PI know when and why.

nothing wrong at all, but try to just to let it float by you and get over it. But there may be a good lesson here. First, never leave things until the deadline, never finish things at the last moment. So 11 days left is a good time to be your effective deadline. The other thing here is that perhaps the PI wants your revisions as the "first draft" and wants to go over them in detail. He'd want to make sure you adequately address the reviewer's concerns, and that your changes are in fact correct and appropriate. He might think more measurements/analysis or more data is required. He may think there is still another week's worth of work to do beyond your revisions, and that is why he says you are taking too long.

l20at8

askacademia_train

Human: Is it wrong that I feel resentful towards my PI making me work on a weekends/university holiday (MLK day) and that he was unappreciative of it? It was for revisions to my first first author manuscript and we still have 11 days left to the deadline to resubmit and he told me “I was taking too long” when I asked him if I could read through it one more time for grammar before submitting it. I just feel really hurt because I worked for 40 hours on this paper Saturday to Tuesday of this week on top of all of my other normal life and student responsibilities. Being told I was taking too long when I put in so much effort to get it done way in advance of the deadline just makes me feel so bad right now. Assistant:

gk2ndfl

gk2oz2e

Not wrong to feel that way at all. I was in the same situation last year and got to the point I hated my paper (don’t we all? Lol). This is the time to set boundaries and if it were me I would’ve said something along the lines of that’s fine, but I will be taking Friday off instead or something so you still have some you time. Your first first author is super cool and a big deal so do it for YOU bc this is YOUR awesome accomplishment. Nothing else matters ❤️

One of the perks of science/academia is having some flexibility in your schedule. The downside of that is that you'll occasionally have very busy weeks where you work much more than the standard work week, and there will be times that an experiment or looming deadline will dictate that you have to work on a holiday. I recently had to come in over the winter holidays to keep some lab critters alive, and I took a few other days off to make up for it. I'm a huge advocate for work/life balance and not working ridiculous hours as a scientist, but I sort of feel like you need a little reality check here. Your PI didn't "make" you work over a holiday; you had an external deadline (from the journal) that needed to be met, and that happened to coincide with a holiday weekend. He's your mentor, and if he said you were taking too long, I would probably interpret that as him suggesting it doesn't need another read-through; thus, you're spending too much time on this particular task. I think you're creating a story around a simple piece of feedback (ie: telling yourself that your PI doesn't appreciate you and thinks your time isn't valuable, when in reality, he probably just meant that it's ready to go so there's no need to read over it again. In fairness to your PI, that might mean that he IS recognizing how valuable your time is, and doesn't want you to spend more than necessary on a given task). Done is better than perfect, and there's no such thing as perfect anyway! I suggest you take a few days off in the next week or so in lieu of the long weekend that you missed, and just let your PI know when and why.

y3ohs2

askacademia_train

Human: Struggling with Disrespectful Masters Students Hello, I'm (30f) a north american doctoral researcher at a French university. This semester I'm teaching two classes: an undergraduate class and a masters class. My undergraduate students are wonderful, excited, and truly a joy to teach. I'm week 7/12 with them and I'm delighted each time I get to have them in my classroom. They're highly active, very engaged, and seem so passionate about the coursework. My masters students....are not. I'm on week 4/10 with them, and it's like pulling teeth. The purpose of the class is for them to practice speaking English in a scientific manner. That's the point. For the first half of the class, I designed it so we discuss readings that were given out as homework the week before. The second half, we break into group work so they can practice speaking in English to their colleagues. During week two, 33% of the class didn't do the readings. I'm flexible, so when I came to a student who didn't read, I changed questions. "What do you feel about the title of the paper?" -- "I don't know." "What do you think it means?" "I don't know." "What do you think about this topic in general?" "I don't know." Eventually, I moved on. During week three, they were meant to hand in an assignment -- the title of an article they'll be doing a five minute oral presentations on at the end of the semester, and the title of the book they'll do a book review on (also due at the end of the semester) Six students didn't show up. It's a class of 20. 10 in general didn't even turn in the assignment. Students have come up to me and said, they don't feel like doing the book review can they just do the oral presentation? No. A book is too long to read (over the course of 7 weeks), can they just do chapters instead? No. The most recent, tonight, was an email response to a reminder that I hadn't received this student's work. He told me he didn't know how to find a journal article, JSTOR and Research Gate has a paywall, can I just give it to him? I explained he could get institution access through the school library to find a journal article, that JSTOR has 100 free articles even without institution access, and Research Gate does as well. The parameters for choosing a book/journal article were: in he student's field of study and in english. That's it. I don't know what to do or how to respond to what seems just persistent disrespect for me and the class itself. Half the class seems to be doing okay, they're engaged and they do the work and they talk. I have one student, a professor on sabbatical taking a second masters, who seems to really enjoy the class. She tells me I'm doing great and that she wants to use my methodology with the group work to help keep classes engaged. But it feels like whiplash when she says that, because I feel like I'm fighting non-stop to keep the rest of the group engaged. I don't know the best way to reach out to these students, and also...how to respond to the blatant lack of care for the course. Apparently this is a weighted class system, so even if they fail my class it will barely affect their overall average. But that doesn't mean they should just be so outright *rude.* They don't even *try* to lie. They just tell me that they're not going to do their work. What do I do with that? I could really use some advice. Assistant:

is9ujph

is9p680

I can speak from a students perspective here. The problem with classes like "English for Scientists" is, that they are often the first thing you stop caring about when other classes get too stressful. They feel like they are not directly related to your degree, they often take up a lot of time and it's just more work you have to do. I'm very sorry that i can't offer a solution here and it's sad that you spend all that time and energy and students can't appreciate that.

Whenever an individual behaves outside the norm, it can be something on his/her part. If a larger population misbehaves, more likely than not there is a systemic problem. I might address this with the students. "Hi. You seem to have been mislead somehow. To pass this course you need to be more engaged."

y3ohs2

askacademia_train

Human: persistent disrespect for me and the class itself. Half the class seems to be doing okay, they're engaged and they do the work and they talk. I have one student, a professor on sabbatical taking a second masters, who seems to really enjoy the class. She tells me I'm doing great and that she wants to use my methodology with the group work to help keep classes engaged. But it feels like whiplash when she says that, because I feel like I'm fighting non-stop to keep the rest of the group engaged. I don't know the best way to reach out to these students, and also...how to respond to the blatant lack of care for the course. Apparently this is a weighted class system, so even if they fail my class it will barely affect their overall average. But that doesn't mean they should just be so outright *rude.* They don't even *try* to lie. They just tell me that they're not going to do their work. What do I do with that? I could really use some advice. Assistant:

is9ujph

is9s2l3

I can speak from a students perspective here. The problem with classes like "English for Scientists" is, that they are often the first thing you stop caring about when other classes get too stressful. They feel like they are not directly related to your degree, they often take up a lot of time and it's just more work you have to do. I'm very sorry that i can't offer a solution here and it's sad that you spend all that time and energy and students can't appreciate that.

Ok, so a few things that come to mind. First, for clarification: are you at a French university (in France), or a university in a French speaking region (e.g., Québec)? This might matter because French universities use ECTS points that specify the workload of a course (1 ECTS points is about 25-30h work, including course time). Then, in general, I have made the experience that students become disengaged and uncooperative when they feel they are not treated fairly (whether that is justified or not). From what you wrote, my guesses are that: * The students think the workload is too high. That is why they are asking for only doing a book chapter instead of the whole book. You could check whether that is justified by comparing your course to others from the same institute/group and check whether yours has a much higher workload. * The students are not motivated to work because some of the course elements lack accountability. It seems like they can get by without doing the readings so many of them will probably stop doing them. Also, as a student, it will feel pointless to do the reading if you adapt the course to those that did not do the readings. This will detoriate the first discussion part in your course. * The students have very little experience with scientific articles (that is probably why they are taking your course). Therefore it is to be expected that none of them have a "favorite" article to present, and they will feel lost with the assignment to pick one that is appropriate for them to read and present. Same for the book. * The students might be afraid of embarassing themselves when speaking up. English is surprisingly hard to learn for French speaking people and your students might be afraid of sounding silly or saying something wrong. * The students might have noticed that you think they are lacking and rude, which makes it hard for them to engage positively with the course. * The students do not even lie about not doing the work because (a) they are honest, (b) they feel they are giving you some form of feedback on your course - e.g., the workload is not justified. These are all just guesses though and of course I cannot judge whether any of those or justified or not. Still, if I were you, I would: * Check if the the workload is justified. Personally, the part of reading and presenting a whole book seems a bit much at least from my European perspective. * Give them 3-4 specific questions (open answer) on the homework reading. They should then bring their written answer to class and you can ask them to answer these questions first. This should improve the engagement with the readings, and make it easier for them speak up because they had time to prepare their answers. * Probably not possible anymore because the course already started, but for the future: Grade participation in class so that you can hold students accountable for not doing the readings and for not coming to class. * Ask easy questions at the start of each lesson. For example, "How difficult was the paper to read?". This also gives you a quick impression of how difficult it will be for the students to engage during the rest of the class. * Use 5-10 minutes in the next class to explain how to use google scholar and the library website to access articles and books, and give them a few pointers on how to select a good article to present. Finally, even if you are the best teacher, there will always be some students that do not care. Nothing to be done about it except holding them accountable. Personally, them being honest with you seems like a good sign for them respecting you. If they would make up excuses every week I would be more worried. Hope any of this was helpful!

y3ohs2

askacademia_train

Human: Struggling with Disrespectful Masters Students Hello, I'm (30f) a north american doctoral researcher at a French university. This semester I'm teaching two classes: an undergraduate class and a masters class. My undergraduate students are wonderful, excited, and truly a joy to teach. I'm week 7/12 with them and I'm delighted each time I get to have them in my classroom. They're highly active, very engaged, and seem so passionate about the coursework. My masters students....are not. I'm on week 4/10 with them, and it's like pulling teeth. The purpose of the class is for them to practice speaking English in a scientific manner. That's the point. For the first half of the class, I designed it so we discuss readings that were given out as homework the week before. The second half, we break into group work so they can practice speaking in English to their colleagues. During week two, 33% of the class didn't do the readings. I'm flexible, so when I came to a student who didn't read, I changed questions. "What do you feel about the title of the paper?" -- "I don't know." "What do you think it means?" "I don't know." "What do you think about this topic in general?" "I don't know." Eventually, I moved on. During week three, they were meant to hand in an assignment -- the title of an article they'll be doing a five minute oral presentations on at the end of the semester, and the title of the book they'll do a book review on (also due at the end of the semester) Six students didn't show up. It's a class of 20. 10 in general didn't even turn in the assignment. Students have come up to me and said, they don't feel like doing the book review can they just do the oral presentation? No. A book is too long to read (over the course of 7 weeks), can they just do chapters instead? No. The most recent, tonight, was an email response to a reminder that I hadn't received this student's work. He told me he didn't know how to find a journal article, JSTOR and Research Gate has a paywall, can I just give it to him? I explained he could get institution access through the school library to find a journal article, that JSTOR has 100 free articles even without institution access, and Research Gate does as well. The parameters for choosing a book/journal article were: in he student's field of study and in english. That's it. I don't know what to do or how to respond to what seems just persistent disrespect for me and the class itself. Half the class seems to be doing okay, they're engaged and they do the work and they talk. I have one student, a professor on sabbatical taking a second masters, who seems to really enjoy the class. She tells me I'm doing great and that she wants to use my methodology with the group work to help keep classes engaged. But it feels like whiplash when she says that, because I feel like I'm fighting non-stop to keep the rest of the group engaged. I don't know the best way to reach out to these students, and also...how to respond to the blatant lack of care for the course. Apparently this is a weighted class system, so even if they fail my class it will barely affect their overall average. But that doesn't mean they should just be so outright *rude.* They don't even *try* to lie. They just tell me that they're not going to do their work. What do I do with that? I could really use some advice. Assistant:

is9ujph

is9s37u

I can speak from a students perspective here. The problem with classes like "English for Scientists" is, that they are often the first thing you stop caring about when other classes get too stressful. They feel like they are not directly related to your degree, they often take up a lot of time and it's just more work you have to do. I'm very sorry that i can't offer a solution here and it's sad that you spend all that time and energy and students can't appreciate that.

I would ask them to leave. It's a master's. You can't have it if you don't earn it.

y3ohs2

askacademia_train

Human: Struggling with Disrespectful Masters Students Hello, I'm (30f) a north american doctoral researcher at a French university. This semester I'm teaching two classes: an undergraduate class and a masters class. My undergraduate students are wonderful, excited, and truly a joy to teach. I'm week 7/12 with them and I'm delighted each time I get to have them in my classroom. They're highly active, very engaged, and seem so passionate about the coursework. My masters students....are not. I'm on week 4/10 with them, and it's like pulling teeth. The purpose of the class is for them to practice speaking English in a scientific manner. That's the point. For the first half of the class, I designed it so we discuss readings that were given out as homework the week before. The second half, we break into group work so they can practice speaking in English to their colleagues. During week two, 33% of the class didn't do the readings. I'm flexible, so when I came to a student who didn't read, I changed questions. "What do you feel about the title of the paper?" -- "I don't know." "What do you think it means?" "I don't know." "What do you think about this topic in general?" "I don't know." Eventually, I moved on. During week three, they were meant to hand in an assignment -- the title of an article they'll be doing a five minute oral presentations on at the end of the semester, and the title of the book they'll do a book review on (also due at the end of the semester) Six students didn't show up. It's a class of 20. 10 in general didn't even turn in the assignment. Students have come up to me and said, they don't feel like doing the book review can they just do the oral presentation? No. A book is too long to read (over the course of 7 weeks), can they just do chapters instead? No. The most recent, tonight, was an email response to a reminder that I hadn't received this student's work. He told me he didn't know how to find a journal article, JSTOR and Research Gate has a paywall, can I just give it to him? I explained he could get institution access through the school library to find a journal article, that JSTOR has 100 free articles even without institution access, and Research Gate does as well. The parameters for choosing a book/journal article were: in he student's field of study and in english. That's it. I don't know what to do or how to respond to what seems just persistent disrespect for me and the class itself. Half the class seems to be doing okay, they're engaged and they do the work and they talk. I have one student, a professor on sabbatical taking a second masters, who seems to really enjoy the class. She tells me I'm doing great and that she wants to use my methodology with the group work to help keep classes engaged. But it feels like whiplash when she says that, because I feel like I'm fighting non-stop to keep the rest of the group engaged. I don't know the best way to reach out to these students, and also...how to respond to the blatant lack of care for the course. Apparently this is a weighted class system, so even if they fail my class it will barely affect their overall average. But that doesn't mean they should just be so outright *rude.* They don't even *try* to lie. They just tell me that they're not going to do their work. What do I do with that? I could really use some advice. Assistant:

is9m1j7

is9ujph

Why don’t you ask them? Set up a survey and ask what they like/don’t like/what they want to see more of and adapt.

I can speak from a students perspective here. The problem with classes like "English for Scientists" is, that they are often the first thing you stop caring about when other classes get too stressful. They feel like they are not directly related to your degree, they often take up a lot of time and it's just more work you have to do. I'm very sorry that i can't offer a solution here and it's sad that you spend all that time and energy and students can't appreciate that.

y3ohs2

askacademia_train

Human: north american doctoral researcher at a French university. This semester I'm teaching two classes: an undergraduate class and a masters class. My undergraduate students are wonderful, excited, and truly a joy to teach. I'm week 7/12 with them and I'm delighted each time I get to have them in my classroom. They're highly active, very engaged, and seem so passionate about the coursework. My masters students....are not. I'm on week 4/10 with them, and it's like pulling teeth. The purpose of the class is for them to practice speaking English in a scientific manner. That's the point. For the first half of the class, I designed it so we discuss readings that were given out as homework the week before. The second half, we break into group work so they can practice speaking in English to their colleagues. During week two, 33% of the class didn't do the readings. I'm flexible, so when I came to a student who didn't read, I changed questions. "What do you feel about the title of the paper?" -- "I don't know." "What do you think it means?" "I don't know." "What do you think about this topic in general?" "I don't know." Eventually, I moved on. During week three, they were meant to hand in an assignment -- the title of an article they'll be doing a five minute oral presentations on at the end of the semester, and the title of the book they'll do a book review on (also due at the end of the semester) Six students didn't show up. It's a class of 20. 10 in general didn't even turn in the assignment. Students have come up to me and said, they don't feel like doing the book review can they just do the oral presentation? No. A book is too long to read (over the course of 7 weeks), can they just do chapters instead? No. The most recent, tonight, was an email response to a reminder that I hadn't received this student's work. He told me he didn't know how to find a journal article, JSTOR and Research Gate has a paywall, can I just give it to him? I explained he could get institution access through the school library to find a journal article, that JSTOR has 100 free articles even without institution access, and Research Gate does as well. The parameters for choosing a book/journal article were: in he student's field of study and in english. That's it. I don't know what to do or how to respond to what seems just persistent disrespect for me and the class itself. Half the class seems to be doing okay, they're engaged and they do the work and they talk. I have one student, a professor on sabbatical taking a second masters, who seems to really enjoy the class. She tells me I'm doing great and that she wants to use my methodology with the group work to help keep classes engaged. But it feels like whiplash when she says that, because I feel like I'm fighting non-stop to keep the rest of the group engaged. I don't know the best way to reach out to these students, and also...how to respond to the blatant lack of care for the course. Apparently this is a weighted class system, so even if they fail my class it will barely affect their overall average. But that doesn't mean they should just be so outright *rude.* They don't even *try* to lie. They just tell me that they're not going to do their work. What do I do with that? I could really use some advice. Assistant:

is9ujph

is9rljs

I can speak from a students perspective here. The problem with classes like "English for Scientists" is, that they are often the first thing you stop caring about when other classes get too stressful. They feel like they are not directly related to your degree, they often take up a lot of time and it's just more work you have to do. I'm very sorry that i can't offer a solution here and it's sad that you spend all that time and energy and students can't appreciate that.

Is it perhaps a field-related thing? I noticed when taking and TAing some classes outside of my field (Humanities) that people from some other fields had much, much less experience finding assigned readings in the library or getting involved in conversations interpreting them. This was at an bachelors level rather than a masters, but I had a classmate (biology) at the time tell me that she had barely ever had the sort of interpretation discussions we had in a media analysis course, so when she was called upon she would just answer with "I don't know" because in her courses, an answer was either right or wrong, with much less room for discussion. Also, all of her readings had always been shared by the lecturer directly so, in 3 years of doing her Bachelors, she'd barelt ever used the library system and needed help with downloading something from JSTOR. Granted this might be an outlier or not apply to your students, but your description of the situation brought back some vivid memories.

tb7yxv

askacademia_train

Human: Can we explicitly state that some statement is about American academia when it is exclusively about American academia? Instead of just assuming that the reader is associated to and familiar with American academia? Thanks. Assistant:

i062v9s

i05u46i

I feel like all posts should explain the location and region just because each area is very different.

Yes please. There is also the issue of assuming that the person asking the question is in American academia and give advice that may be harmful career wise to follow.

tb7yxv

askacademia_train

Human: Can we explicitly state that some statement is about American academia when it is exclusively about American academia? Instead of just assuming that the reader is associated to and familiar with American academia? Thanks. Assistant:

i06brmr

i06dyrs

Wouldn't that equally be true of academics from other locations?

Ha, can we do the same for STEM? So many posts assume everyone is in a lab, has a PI, gets funded through soft money, publishes several multi-author articles per year, worries about author order….

tb7yxv

askacademia_train

Human: Can we explicitly state that some statement is about American academia when it is exclusively about American academia? Instead of just assuming that the reader is associated to and familiar with American academia? Thanks. Assistant:

i06duf1

i06dyrs

If it makes you feel better - terminology isn't even consistent within american academia, and universities can be such echo chamber.

Ha, can we do the same for STEM? So many posts assume everyone is in a lab, has a PI, gets funded through soft money, publishes several multi-author articles per year, worries about author order….

tb7yxv

askacademia_train

Human: Can we explicitly state that some statement is about American academia when it is exclusively about American academia? Instead of just assuming that the reader is associated to and familiar with American academia? Thanks. Assistant:

i06dyrs

i06b7po

Ha, can we do the same for STEM? So many posts assume everyone is in a lab, has a PI, gets funded through soft money, publishes several multi-author articles per year, worries about author order….

I'd be happy to tag my location, but never having been in academia in any other area of the world, how the hell would I know that my statement only applies the US? Put differently, if you can't tell from reading it that my statement only applies to the US and you need a label or tag to tell you so, why would you assume that person making that statement, being in the US, would know that their statement only applies to the states?

tb7yxv

askacademia_train

Human: Can we explicitly state that some statement is about American academia when it is exclusively about American academia? Instead of just assuming that the reader is associated to and familiar with American academia? Thanks. Assistant:

i06hoaf

i07jqws

Can we explicitly state that some statement is about American academia within a specific State when it is exclusively about a specific State.

Totally needed. Especially when it comes to posts regrding working hours (or even days for weekends), having burn outs all the time etc.

t49ztz

askacademia_train

Human: (large clinical) lab thought I was simply too young for him - but that otherwise they would have warned me. Apparently he's sexually harassed every woman who has come through this lab for decades. Our clinical half of the lab makes MILLIONS for the university though so it's not surprising he's been protected. So - I started the title ix investigation in December. It's still ongoing. As long as he's in the building, I do not go in - which means I am no longer able to complete lab work except for on weekends. I didn't have *a lot * left to complete, however, the stuff I do need to complete requires more than 2 days at a time and I'm getting desperate. I've tried to get in touch with the Title IX chair/coordinator/president? about needing to come in on weekdays but he hasn't gotten back to me. At this point I have no hope that I'll be able to get anything done. The two main issues I have are: I have zero motivation whatsoever to work at all. It might be depression, maybe burnout, IDK. My new PhD mentor is phenomenal and is really working hard to help me graduate on time, but my attention to detail is poor and my motivation is essentially zero. I even told her I'd be okay leaving without a PhD at all. She suggested I push back my defense. Unfortunately, the second issue is I am dual-degree MD/PhD. If I don't graduate by May, I have to wait a whole year before reentering the medical school. I can't just push graduation back to fall - I'd have to either work a whole year or take time off w/o pay. I'm just at the end of my rope. This isn't my fault, but I feel like I'm being punished. I am hoping someone here could advise me on what steps I can possibly take to make sure I graduate. Obviously finishing my dissertation/papers is key - and I'm on schedule despite low motivation to finish all writing this week. But regarding lab time, etc. - what do I do? I need to increase n for two experiments, but our lab techs are busy with clinical lab work and even if they weren't I've been doing all the research stuff alone due to COVID for 2 years anyway. I'm the only one who can do my protocols. Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. I really just want to drop the whole thing and take the next two months to prepare for clinicals. Honestly I'm at a point where I went from super excited and proud of my data in December to the realization that doing a PhD is the biggest regret of my life. That is probably clinical depression talking, but still. I feel no honor or pride in my work and cringe at the idea of being forever linked to this person professionally. TIA and sorry about the rambly nature of this post. FWIW I'm working on getting into therapy. Assistant:

hyx9m6l

hyxbedg

I’m sorry—he’s still ALLOWED ON CAMPUS? What the actual fuck?! In a Title IX investigation, he should be completely separated from his students and on paid leave. That’s how it worked when we reported the PI of our lab (luckily he resigned two months into the investigation). That is some bull shit. Your university is failing you all spectacularly. I am so sorry for everything you’re going through. Edit: I didn’t actually put any advice on here. I know it’s hard to fathom—it was for me—but based on what you say about burnout and your attention span, how hard it is concentrate—maybe you need to take a break. I know it would be another year entirely. I ended up taking a year of leave after our investigation ended (and that in itself took a year). You’re completely drained and you don’t want to enter medical school under those mental conditions. Leave terrified me but it was the best thing I ever did during my PhD. I would strongly consider it.

I'm so sorry this has happened to you, and that you're suffering the consequences of reduced research time during the investigation. Two thoughts: 1) Have you been very explicit with your new mentor that your ability to only be in the lab on weekends has impeded your ability to finish? If not, I suggest you write something along the lines of the following to your mentor: "I am struggling to finish my PhD work because I am only comfortable being in the lab when \[former advisor\] is not there. This means that I am suffering costs from reporting harassment under Title IX. I am hoping you can help me come up with an arrangement with the Title IX office that ensures I get the necessary time in lab to finish my degree. I do not want to be punished for trying to have a harassment-free workplace." Lay it out clearly that YOU are the one suffering consequences here. 2) You might also considering escalating to either your department head, the dean, or even the ombuds for the university. Usually escalating is a bad idea, and given too freely on these subs. But you absolutely should not suffer consequences for trying to have a harassment-free workplace. And that's the wording you should use in all of your communications. Is there any way for you to be able to go into your lab in the evenings, or is your former advisor potentially still there? Basically, don't let this asshole harass you out of getting the PhD you have worked so hard to earn! I know fighting can be exhausting, especially when it feels like the institution has let you down. But I encourage you to press this further and more forcefully with your new advisor and the department chair. Don't let them ignore you while they wait for Title IX. Sending so many good thoughts your way.

t49ztz

askacademia_train

Human: Title IX investigation preventing me from crucial lab work - defense scheduled in 3 weeks Hi - I need some advice regarding how to stay motivated and get work done. In December at a conference, my PI got super drunk and suggested we go back to his hotel room. When I confided in a lab tech, I was told that everyone in our (large clinical) lab thought I was simply too young for him - but that otherwise they would have warned me. Apparently he's sexually harassed every woman who has come through this lab for decades. Our clinical half of the lab makes MILLIONS for the university though so it's not surprising he's been protected. So - I started the title ix investigation in December. It's still ongoing. As long as he's in the building, I do not go in - which means I am no longer able to complete lab work except for on weekends. I didn't have *a lot * left to complete, however, the stuff I do need to complete requires more than 2 days at a time and I'm getting desperate. I've tried to get in touch with the Title IX chair/coordinator/president? about needing to come in on weekdays but he hasn't gotten back to me. At this point I have no hope that I'll be able to get anything done. The two main issues I have are: I have zero motivation whatsoever to work at all. It might be depression, maybe burnout, IDK. My new PhD mentor is phenomenal and is really working hard to help me graduate on time, but my attention to detail is poor and my motivation is essentially zero. I even told her I'd be okay leaving without a PhD at all. She suggested I push back my defense. Unfortunately, the second issue is I am dual-degree MD/PhD. If I don't graduate by May, I have to wait a whole year before reentering the medical school. I can't just push graduation back to fall - I'd have to either work a whole year or take time off w/o pay. I'm just at the end of my rope. This isn't my fault, but I feel like I'm being punished. I am hoping someone here could advise me on what steps I can possibly take to make sure I graduate. Obviously finishing my dissertation/papers is key - and I'm on schedule despite low motivation to finish all writing this week. But regarding lab time, etc. - what do I do? I need to increase n for two experiments, but our lab techs are busy with clinical lab work and even if they weren't I've been doing all the research stuff alone due to COVID for 2 years anyway. I'm the only one who can do my protocols. Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. I really just want to drop the whole thing and take the next two months to prepare for clinicals. Honestly I'm at a point where I went from super excited and proud of my data in December to the realization that doing a PhD is the biggest regret of my life. That is probably clinical depression talking, but still. I feel no honor or pride in my work and cringe at the idea of being forever linked to this person professionally. TIA and sorry about the rambly nature of this post. FWIW I'm working on getting into therapy. Assistant:

hyxd5hi

hyxh2sb

You did the right thing by starting the investigation. It's unfair that the repercussions fall on you, and that's probably exactly why no one spoke up before you. Ever heard the phrase, "No good deed goes unpunished"? You are suffering for the chance that other people won't have to. As for motivation, sometimes it helps to think back on whatever your original motivation was. What made you want to study this topic? What made you want to do research? Or you could focus on getting it done so that you can get it over with. It's good that you are getting into therapy. Hopefully they can help with motivation and with minimizing the psychic damage that you take from this situation. As for time in lab, you are not asking for a lot. If the Title IX office is not negotiating for you, maybe your department head, graduate program director, or academic dean could negotiate a few days when the PI is not there? Or maybe your lab mates know when the PI will be out of the office? Or maybe you could bring someone with you, who can serve as a witness and record it if he tries anything, but also just get rid of him if he tries to talk to you, so you can focus on your work and not engage with him at all. If a friend or colleague asked me to do this for them, I would happy to stand there and be the "bouncer" for them.

I'm sorry this has happened to you. The others here also have good advice, but I've only seen one other to say the following: >Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. IMHO, this is the way you should go. You're already "set" on your next path (med school). If you're going to be a medical researcher, you'll get more opportunities for that in med school, right? can you add samples to your project at a later date? if not publishing isn't going to "doom" your career, then you should do what you can to finish the Ph.D. on time and put this experience behind you. As long as your committee will pass you, then you're all set for them.

t49ztz

askacademia_train

Human: Title IX investigation preventing me from crucial lab work - defense scheduled in 3 weeks Hi - I need some advice regarding how to stay motivated and get work done. In December at a conference, my PI got super drunk and suggested we go back to his hotel room. When I confided in a lab tech, I was told that everyone in our (large clinical) lab thought I was simply too young for him - but that otherwise they would have warned me. Apparently he's sexually harassed every woman who has come through this lab for decades. Our clinical half of the lab makes MILLIONS for the university though so it's not surprising he's been protected. So - I started the title ix investigation in December. It's still ongoing. As long as he's in the building, I do not go in - which means I am no longer able to complete lab work except for on weekends. I didn't have *a lot * left to complete, however, the stuff I do need to complete requires more than 2 days at a time and I'm getting desperate. I've tried to get in touch with the Title IX chair/coordinator/president? about needing to come in on weekdays but he hasn't gotten back to me. At this point I have no hope that I'll be able to get anything done. The two main issues I have are: I have zero motivation whatsoever to work at all. It might be depression, maybe burnout, IDK. My new PhD mentor is phenomenal and is really working hard to help me graduate on time, but my attention to detail is poor and my motivation is essentially zero. I even told her I'd be okay leaving without a PhD at all. She suggested I push back my defense. Unfortunately, the second issue is I am dual-degree MD/PhD. If I don't graduate by May, I have to wait a whole year before reentering the medical school. I can't just push graduation back to fall - I'd have to either work a whole year or take time off w/o pay. I'm just at the end of my rope. This isn't my fault, but I feel like I'm being punished. I am hoping someone here could advise me on what steps I can possibly take to make sure I graduate. Obviously finishing my dissertation/papers is key - and I'm on schedule despite low motivation to finish all writing this week. But regarding lab time, etc. - what do I do? I need to increase n for two experiments, but our lab techs are busy with clinical lab work and even if they weren't I've been doing all the research stuff alone due to COVID for 2 years anyway. I'm the only one who can do my protocols. Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. I really just want to drop the whole thing and take the next two months to prepare for clinicals. Honestly I'm at a point where I went from super excited and proud of my data in December to the realization that doing a PhD is the biggest regret of my life. That is probably clinical depression talking, but still. I feel no honor or pride in my work and cringe at the idea of being forever linked to this person professionally. TIA and sorry about the rambly nature of this post. FWIW I'm working on getting into therapy. Assistant:

hyxgorc

hyxh2sb

I’m so sorry you’re having to deal with this. The Title IX process is vastly inadequate and does not protect victims of sexual harassment. It works the same way in my school as in yours - the perpetrator continues to work as usual while the school investigates. Sanctions (if any) are only placed at the end of the investigation, which can drag out for years. Is there a grad student union in your university? If so, please reach out to them for legal support and support in negotiating lab time without interference.

I'm sorry this has happened to you. The others here also have good advice, but I've only seen one other to say the following: >Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. IMHO, this is the way you should go. You're already "set" on your next path (med school). If you're going to be a medical researcher, you'll get more opportunities for that in med school, right? can you add samples to your project at a later date? if not publishing isn't going to "doom" your career, then you should do what you can to finish the Ph.D. on time and put this experience behind you. As long as your committee will pass you, then you're all set for them.

t49ztz

askacademia_train

Human: Title IX investigation preventing me from crucial lab work - defense scheduled in 3 weeks Hi - I need some advice regarding how to stay motivated and get work done. In December at a conference, my PI got super drunk and suggested we go back to his hotel room. When I confided in a lab tech, I was told that everyone in our (large clinical) lab thought I was simply too young for him - but that otherwise they would have warned me. Apparently he's sexually harassed every woman who has come through this lab for decades. Our clinical half of the lab makes MILLIONS for the university though so it's not surprising he's been protected. So - I started the title ix investigation in December. It's still ongoing. As long as he's in the building, I do not go in - which means I am no longer able to complete lab work except for on weekends. I didn't have *a lot * left to complete, however, the stuff I do need to complete requires more than 2 days at a time and I'm getting desperate. I've tried to get in touch with the Title IX chair/coordinator/president? about needing to come in on weekdays but he hasn't gotten back to me. At this point I have no hope that I'll be able to get anything done. The two main issues I have are: I have zero motivation whatsoever to work at all. It might be depression, maybe burnout, IDK. My new PhD mentor is phenomenal and is really working hard to help me graduate on time, but my attention to detail is poor and my motivation is essentially zero. I even told her I'd be okay leaving without a PhD at all. She suggested I push back my defense. Unfortunately, the second issue is I am dual-degree MD/PhD. If I don't graduate by May, I have to wait a whole year before reentering the medical school. I can't just push graduation back to fall - I'd have to either work a whole year or take time off w/o pay. I'm just at the end of my rope. This isn't my fault, but I feel like I'm being punished. I am hoping someone here could advise me on what steps I can possibly take to make sure I graduate. Obviously finishing my dissertation/papers is key - and I'm on schedule despite low motivation to finish all writing this week. But regarding lab time, etc. - what do I do? I need to increase n for two experiments, but our lab techs are busy with clinical lab work and even if they weren't I've been doing all the research stuff alone due to COVID for 2 years anyway. I'm the only one who can do my protocols. Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. I really just want to drop the whole thing and take the next two months to prepare for clinicals. Honestly I'm at a point where I went from super excited and proud of my data in December to the realization that doing a PhD is the biggest regret of my life. That is probably clinical depression talking, but still. I feel no honor or pride in my work and cringe at the idea of being forever linked to this person professionally. TIA and sorry about the rambly nature of this post. FWIW I'm working on getting into therapy. Assistant:

hyxf08t

hyxh2sb

I think in addition to the suggestion already made about talking to new supervisor and explicitly finding a schedule, you should consider the possibility that you could defend in 3 weeks with the lower n and add data later before submitting.

I'm sorry this has happened to you. The others here also have good advice, but I've only seen one other to say the following: >Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. IMHO, this is the way you should go. You're already "set" on your next path (med school). If you're going to be a medical researcher, you'll get more opportunities for that in med school, right? can you add samples to your project at a later date? if not publishing isn't going to "doom" your career, then you should do what you can to finish the Ph.D. on time and put this experience behind you. As long as your committee will pass you, then you're all set for them.

t49ztz

askacademia_train

Human: Title IX investigation preventing me from crucial lab work - defense scheduled in 3 weeks Hi - I need some advice regarding how to stay motivated and get work done. In December at a conference, my PI got super drunk and suggested we go back to his hotel room. When I confided in a lab tech, I was told that everyone in our (large clinical) lab thought I was simply too young for him - but that otherwise they would have warned me. Apparently he's sexually harassed every woman who has come through this lab for decades. Our clinical half of the lab makes MILLIONS for the university though so it's not surprising he's been protected. So - I started the title ix investigation in December. It's still ongoing. As long as he's in the building, I do not go in - which means I am no longer able to complete lab work except for on weekends. I didn't have *a lot * left to complete, however, the stuff I do need to complete requires more than 2 days at a time and I'm getting desperate. I've tried to get in touch with the Title IX chair/coordinator/president? about needing to come in on weekdays but he hasn't gotten back to me. At this point I have no hope that I'll be able to get anything done. The two main issues I have are: I have zero motivation whatsoever to work at all. It might be depression, maybe burnout, IDK. My new PhD mentor is phenomenal and is really working hard to help me graduate on time, but my attention to detail is poor and my motivation is essentially zero. I even told her I'd be okay leaving without a PhD at all. She suggested I push back my defense. Unfortunately, the second issue is I am dual-degree MD/PhD. If I don't graduate by May, I have to wait a whole year before reentering the medical school. I can't just push graduation back to fall - I'd have to either work a whole year or take time off w/o pay. I'm just at the end of my rope. This isn't my fault, but I feel like I'm being punished. I am hoping someone here could advise me on what steps I can possibly take to make sure I graduate. Obviously finishing my dissertation/papers is key - and I'm on schedule despite low motivation to finish all writing this week. But regarding lab time, etc. - what do I do? I need to increase n for two experiments, but our lab techs are busy with clinical lab work and even if they weren't I've been doing all the research stuff alone due to COVID for 2 years anyway. I'm the only one who can do my protocols. Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. I really just want to drop the whole thing and take the next two months to prepare for clinicals. Honestly I'm at a point where I went from super excited and proud of my data in December to the realization that doing a PhD is the biggest regret of my life. That is probably clinical depression talking, but still. I feel no honor or pride in my work and cringe at the idea of being forever linked to this person professionally. TIA and sorry about the rambly nature of this post. FWIW I'm working on getting into therapy. Assistant:

hyxh2sb

hyxebag

I'm sorry this has happened to you. The others here also have good advice, but I've only seen one other to say the following: >Should I settle for lower quality data and just accept I might not be published? Should I suck it up and go into lab even if he's going to be there? It's only 3 more weeks. IMHO, this is the way you should go. You're already "set" on your next path (med school). If you're going to be a medical researcher, you'll get more opportunities for that in med school, right? can you add samples to your project at a later date? if not publishing isn't going to "doom" your career, then you should do what you can to finish the Ph.D. on time and put this experience behind you. As long as your committee will pass you, then you're all set for them.

You did not deserve the unwanted solicitation nor do you deserve this bullshit. First and foremost - document EVERYTHING about this investigation if you are not already. Second, check school policy about how your work should be protected. It may be that they are violating their own policies by these conditions. If they are, call them on it. May need to lawyer up as well. Does your school (could be Title IX or Women’s Center) or a nearby nonprofit have a confidential advocate? If yes, see if you can chat with the person to determine whether or not you’d like to work with them. Such a person can be a great asset if you trust them. Dean of students might also be able to assist with leveraging for accommodations better suited for your success.

iumw57

askacademia_train

Human: Why are all geology professors so nice? Between undergraduate electives and studying energy in graduate school, I've taken 4 different lower/upper level geology courses. Every professor I've had in that subject area has been incredibly nice, cool, and genuine. What's up with this? Is "being a nice person" part of the requirements on Geology PhD applications? Assistant:

g5m97dm

g5m0s7a

This could be very wrong: I think it is because these disciplines are the most distanced from being "glorious". If you are a top cancer researcher or physicist, people get a sense that you are some sort of super genius. Scientists who do care about that glory, even a little, will end up drawn to those fields. However if you are an expert at rocks, nobody is going to look at you like some sort of powerful einstein-like figure. People who are into geology are aware of this but it does not bother them. I believe they are motivated by the sheer joy of rocks. They are not tainted by the evil energy of the other sciences so they can remain completely good.

Because they... rock. I'll see myself out.

iumw57

askacademia_train

Human: Why are all geology professors so nice? Between undergraduate electives and studying energy in graduate school, I've taken 4 different lower/upper level geology courses. Every professor I've had in that subject area has been incredibly nice, cool, and genuine. What's up with this? Is "being a nice person" part of the requirements on Geology PhD applications? Assistant:

g5lweu0

g5m97dm

I have always thought this with Geography as well (for the most part). That may just be due to me being in a niche community for my research interests though.

This could be very wrong: I think it is because these disciplines are the most distanced from being "glorious". If you are a top cancer researcher or physicist, people get a sense that you are some sort of super genius. Scientists who do care about that glory, even a little, will end up drawn to those fields. However if you are an expert at rocks, nobody is going to look at you like some sort of powerful einstein-like figure. People who are into geology are aware of this but it does not bother them. I believe they are motivated by the sheer joy of rocks. They are not tainted by the evil energy of the other sciences so they can remain completely good.

iumw57

askacademia_train

Human: Why are all geology professors so nice? Between undergraduate electives and studying energy in graduate school, I've taken 4 different lower/upper level geology courses. Every professor I've had in that subject area has been incredibly nice, cool, and genuine. What's up with this? Is "being a nice person" part of the requirements on Geology PhD applications? Assistant:

g5lweu0

g5m97w6

I have always thought this with Geography as well (for the most part). That may just be due to me being in a niche community for my research interests though.

hahah I've experienced this phenomenon, I was a geo major. My theory is based on how very aware geologists are of our laughably short presence on the geologic timescale. Maybe once you contemplate your insignificance you have more fucks to give in the "be a decent person" department and fewer in the "People must know my intellectual might! No time for kindness". Just a working theory on the matter.

iumw57

askacademia_train

Human: Why are all geology professors so nice? Between undergraduate electives and studying energy in graduate school, I've taken 4 different lower/upper level geology courses. Every professor I've had in that subject area has been incredibly nice, cool, and genuine. What's up with this? Is "being a nice person" part of the requirements on Geology PhD applications? Assistant:

g5lweu0

g5m0s7a

I have always thought this with Geography as well (for the most part). That may just be due to me being in a niche community for my research interests though.

Because they... rock. I'll see myself out.

iumw57

askacademia_train

Human: Why are all geology professors so nice? Between undergraduate electives and studying energy in graduate school, I've taken 4 different lower/upper level geology courses. Every professor I've had in that subject area has been incredibly nice, cool, and genuine. What's up with this? Is "being a nice person" part of the requirements on Geology PhD applications? Assistant:

g5mogha

g5lweu0

The assholes go work for oil and mining companies.

I have always thought this with Geography as well (for the most part). That may just be due to me being in a niche community for my research interests though.

zb48ps

askacademia_train

Human: Why should I peer-review a paper? (Honest question) Today I received two emails from a journal I never published in. In the first email, they communicated to me that I was added to their database. In the second email, I have been asked to I) review the paper before the 1st of Jan, or II) suggest another expert in the field. My question is: why would I ever work for them, for free? And why is it even acceptable that I get registered on a database of a journal that I have never had anything to do without my consent? I completely understand the idea that I should do it for science, and that someone else did the same for my manuscripts. But isn’t that crazy? I mean, they are asking me to work on a tight schedule entirely for free, on a paper that they will most likely ask money to access. And I don’t even see one way how this will benefit my career. Am I missing something here? Should I accept this review for some reason obscure to me? Assistant:

iyp4naj

iyp58we

Do you submit any papers? If so, you should review as many as you need reviewers in an average year. At least in my field, 3 reviewers per paper is typical, so I try to review at least 3x the number of manuscripts I submit / plan to submit in a year. You say you get this, but it doesn't seem like you do? >I completely understand the idea that I should do it for science, and that someone else did the same for my manuscripts.

Speaking from an entirely 'selfish' point of view, you review papers for two reasons: 1. Forces you to keep up with the literature in the field and will give you new ideas. 2. Reviewing journal articles is seen as an 'essential' part of your job as an academic. You have to show that you regularly review papers for applying to fellowships, grants, tenure, etc.

zb48ps

askacademia_train

Human: Why should I peer-review a paper? (Honest question) Today I received two emails from a journal I never published in. In the first email, they communicated to me that I was added to their database. In the second email, I have been asked to I) review the paper before the 1st of Jan, or II) suggest another expert in the field. My question is: why would I ever work for them, for free? And why is it even acceptable that I get registered on a database of a journal that I have never had anything to do without my consent? I completely understand the idea that I should do it for science, and that someone else did the same for my manuscripts. But isn’t that crazy? I mean, they are asking me to work on a tight schedule entirely for free, on a paper that they will most likely ask money to access. And I don’t even see one way how this will benefit my career. Am I missing something here? Should I accept this review for some reason obscure to me? Assistant:

iyp5ayc

iyp5e5o

If you’re asking if it’s exploitative, the answer is yes. However, academia has very strong feelings about this from a position that frames that exploitation as service to some ethical ideal. It seems like Stockholm Syndrome to me, but you’ll no doubt be inundated with responses that draw from the perspective that questioning this system is tantamount to trying to get away with something. They absolutely should, and can afford to, pay you for your time.

And who reviews your papers? Magical Christmas elves? If you're submitting papers you should be willing to review others.

zb48ps

askacademia_train

Human: Why should I peer-review a paper? (Honest question) Today I received two emails from a journal I never published in. In the first email, they communicated to me that I was added to their database. In the second email, I have been asked to I) review the paper before the 1st of Jan, or II) suggest another expert in the field. My question is: why would I ever work for them, for free? And why is it even acceptable that I get registered on a database of a journal that I have never had anything to do without my consent? I completely understand the idea that I should do it for science, and that someone else did the same for my manuscripts. But isn’t that crazy? I mean, they are asking me to work on a tight schedule entirely for free, on a paper that they will most likely ask money to access. And I don’t even see one way how this will benefit my career. Am I missing something here? Should I accept this review for some reason obscure to me? Assistant:

iyp83kg

iypbae6

I know we live in a capitalist society, but sheesh, sometimes you do things even if it doesn’t directly benefit you.

If you want to submit articles to journals and have other people review your work for publication then you should feel an obligation to review other scholars work for publication.

zb48ps

askacademia_train

Human: Why should I peer-review a paper? (Honest question) Today I received two emails from a journal I never published in. In the first email, they communicated to me that I was added to their database. In the second email, I have been asked to I) review the paper before the 1st of Jan, or II) suggest another expert in the field. My question is: why would I ever work for them, for free? And why is it even acceptable that I get registered on a database of a journal that I have never had anything to do without my consent? I completely understand the idea that I should do it for science, and that someone else did the same for my manuscripts. But isn’t that crazy? I mean, they are asking me to work on a tight schedule entirely for free, on a paper that they will most likely ask money to access. And I don’t even see one way how this will benefit my career. Am I missing something here? Should I accept this review for some reason obscure to me? Assistant:

iypfs9e

iyp83kg

I think it really depends on the journal. Is it a journal that you want to publish in? Have you ever read an article published there? Do your colleagues or mentors publish there? If you have no imaginable connection to it and no desire to form that connection, I can see why being added to their reviewer database would be pesky. However, if you have even a weak connection, you should do the review.

I know we live in a capitalist society, but sheesh, sometimes you do things even if it doesn’t directly benefit you.

zb48ps

askacademia_train

Human: Why should I peer-review a paper? (Honest question) Today I received two emails from a journal I never published in. In the first email, they communicated to me that I was added to their database. In the second email, I have been asked to I) review the paper before the 1st of Jan, or II) suggest another expert in the field. My question is: why would I ever work for them, for free? And why is it even acceptable that I get registered on a database of a journal that I have never had anything to do without my consent? I completely understand the idea that I should do it for science, and that someone else did the same for my manuscripts. But isn’t that crazy? I mean, they are asking me to work on a tight schedule entirely for free, on a paper that they will most likely ask money to access. And I don’t even see one way how this will benefit my career. Am I missing something here? Should I accept this review for some reason obscure to me? Assistant:

iypbi68

iypfs9e

Yes it's a shitty, exploitative system when it's done by for-profit publishers. But if you want to/ have/ plan to submit to those journals, you should review for them or you're a hypocrite. The only way to change this system is for all of us to go "on strike" from reviewing simutaneously. If you do it alone, you accomplish nothing.

I think it really depends on the journal. Is it a journal that you want to publish in? Have you ever read an article published there? Do your colleagues or mentors publish there? If you have no imaginable connection to it and no desire to form that connection, I can see why being added to their reviewer database would be pesky. However, if you have even a weak connection, you should do the review.

z6at47

askacademia_train

Human: Is it common to fail to get a PhD after 10 years of being in the program? Someone I know is returning to our (mutual) home country without finishing her dissertation after 10 years in the PhD program. She said she can't stay in the states longer I thought she was graduating late because she was in humanities. I never imagined someone can fail to graduate after whopping 10 years Is this a common story? Assistant:

iy0ha1t

iy0eamz

It certainly *used* to be common. Back in the 90s when I was in grad school there was no limit on time to degree, so we had a bunch of people in residence that were 10+ years into the program. Most of them never finished. In fact, the completion rate in my program was about 10% in the late 90s, despite it being highly ranked; a lot of that was due to people dropping out and taking tech jobs, but another big chunk were those ABDs who just stayed around on the books forever and never managed to schedule a defense. Around 2000 or so they instituted a policy that limited people to seven years in candidacy; the clock would start when they passed comps and after seven years their coursework credits would start to drop off. That pretty much put an end to the 15+ year grad students, but I'd imagine it also led to more "failures" in that it would be pretty remarkable for someone to hit that 7 year deadline and then actually start taking classes again. More likely they would just finally pack up and move on to something else. Sometimes these long time-to-degree delays are related to money...many of my friends, for example, had to do field research abroad. But there's seldom much funding available for humanities dissertations, so they'd have to work for 1-2 years to save up enough to spend six months in European archives or whatever. In other cases there were relationships involved, so leaving the university town wasn't an option. Still others realized the job market was terrible so intentionally put off their defense so their student loans would remain in deferral.

Extremely common to use a PHD as your excuse to keep your visa for as long as possible.

z6at47

askacademia_train

Human: Is it common to fail to get a PhD after 10 years of being in the program? Someone I know is returning to our (mutual) home country without finishing her dissertation after 10 years in the PhD program. She said she can't stay in the states longer I thought she was graduating late because she was in humanities. I never imagined someone can fail to graduate after whopping 10 years Is this a common story? Assistant:

iy0ha1t

iy0dl37

It certainly *used* to be common. Back in the 90s when I was in grad school there was no limit on time to degree, so we had a bunch of people in residence that were 10+ years into the program. Most of them never finished. In fact, the completion rate in my program was about 10% in the late 90s, despite it being highly ranked; a lot of that was due to people dropping out and taking tech jobs, but another big chunk were those ABDs who just stayed around on the books forever and never managed to schedule a defense. Around 2000 or so they instituted a policy that limited people to seven years in candidacy; the clock would start when they passed comps and after seven years their coursework credits would start to drop off. That pretty much put an end to the 15+ year grad students, but I'd imagine it also led to more "failures" in that it would be pretty remarkable for someone to hit that 7 year deadline and then actually start taking classes again. More likely they would just finally pack up and move on to something else. Sometimes these long time-to-degree delays are related to money...many of my friends, for example, had to do field research abroad. But there's seldom much funding available for humanities dissertations, so they'd have to work for 1-2 years to save up enough to spend six months in European archives or whatever. In other cases there were relationships involved, so leaving the university town wasn't an option. Still others realized the job market was terrible so intentionally put off their defense so their student loans would remain in deferral.

People do fail to get across the line. It’s a tough journey. Things can get in the way. Research labs can take advantage of you. There are a lot of barriers. I hope your friend is okay!

z6at47

askacademia_train

Human: Is it common to fail to get a PhD after 10 years of being in the program? Someone I know is returning to our (mutual) home country without finishing her dissertation after 10 years in the PhD program. She said she can't stay in the states longer I thought she was graduating late because she was in humanities. I never imagined someone can fail to graduate after whopping 10 years Is this a common story? Assistant:

iy0ha1t

iy0cxge

It certainly *used* to be common. Back in the 90s when I was in grad school there was no limit on time to degree, so we had a bunch of people in residence that were 10+ years into the program. Most of them never finished. In fact, the completion rate in my program was about 10% in the late 90s, despite it being highly ranked; a lot of that was due to people dropping out and taking tech jobs, but another big chunk were those ABDs who just stayed around on the books forever and never managed to schedule a defense. Around 2000 or so they instituted a policy that limited people to seven years in candidacy; the clock would start when they passed comps and after seven years their coursework credits would start to drop off. That pretty much put an end to the 15+ year grad students, but I'd imagine it also led to more "failures" in that it would be pretty remarkable for someone to hit that 7 year deadline and then actually start taking classes again. More likely they would just finally pack up and move on to something else. Sometimes these long time-to-degree delays are related to money...many of my friends, for example, had to do field research abroad. But there's seldom much funding available for humanities dissertations, so they'd have to work for 1-2 years to save up enough to spend six months in European archives or whatever. In other cases there were relationships involved, so leaving the university town wasn't an option. Still others realized the job market was terrible so intentionally put off their defense so their student loans would remain in deferral.

If you're there for a full decade, you're probably being abused for labour by your supervisor. That or you honestly just aren't cut out for research work. It's not unheard of, and there are a few legitimate cases that just unfortunately take *very* long, but most PhD programs last 4-7 years in the USA. And in most other countries are even shorter, since it's often common practice to do a Master's first before PhD outside of the states.

z6at47

askacademia_train

Human: Is it common to fail to get a PhD after 10 years of being in the program? Someone I know is returning to our (mutual) home country without finishing her dissertation after 10 years in the PhD program. She said she can't stay in the states longer I thought she was graduating late because she was in humanities. I never imagined someone can fail to graduate after whopping 10 years Is this a common story? Assistant:

iy0eamz

iy0cxge

Extremely common to use a PHD as your excuse to keep your visa for as long as possible.

If you're there for a full decade, you're probably being abused for labour by your supervisor. That or you honestly just aren't cut out for research work. It's not unheard of, and there are a few legitimate cases that just unfortunately take *very* long, but most PhD programs last 4-7 years in the USA. And in most other countries are even shorter, since it's often common practice to do a Master's first before PhD outside of the states.

z6at47

askacademia_train

Human: Is it common to fail to get a PhD after 10 years of being in the program? Someone I know is returning to our (mutual) home country without finishing her dissertation after 10 years in the PhD program. She said she can't stay in the states longer I thought she was graduating late because she was in humanities. I never imagined someone can fail to graduate after whopping 10 years Is this a common story? Assistant:

iy1dg96

iy16f8o

My anthropology department average was 10 years when I entered. One person managed it in 4 by coming in with a project and being on the bio side of things, but I count myself lucky to have made it out in 8 years. You need at least three years of course work, to pass quals, then prelim. The slowest amount of time you could take to do that would be 5 years, (and the fastest 2 but you had to come in with a masters), then you have however long to do your research and write the dissertation. What seemed to delay most people in my department if they made it to that point was making enough money to live while still finding time to write, but there's also the usual delays of getting funding, permission to go places, and traveling for research. And at least one person I knew had health issues delaying them. Oddly, I do know someone who was on a 5 year visa and rushed through (by switching to the most lenient of the professors in the department) so they could get it done before their visa ran out, but most other foreign students I know had no time limits on their visa and stuck to the usual 7-10 years.

I've seen it. I honestly view something like that as just as much a failure of the program/advisors, etc. as the student, if not more--they probably should have had more/different support, been helped in realizing it wasn't going to work out far earlier, etc.

hko00o

askacademia_train

Human: What are some obvious issues in academia, nobody wants to talk about? Like inter-departmental politics, everybody knows but people rarely talk about it to resolve it. Assistant:

fwud12c

fwury1t

A number of issues. The replication crisis, aided and abetted by the publish or perish conundrum caused by the increasingly lack of academic jobs. There continues to be an ivory tower problem. The knowledge created is simply not being transmitted to the general public. This has not helped the growing anti-intellectualism movement in the USA, where we can’t even agree to put on a fucking mask to reduce transmission. Racism and sexism is as pervasive as ever, it’s only transformed from blatant (in some cases, although blatant bigotry still exists) to latent. As academics we are not immune to this, and it boggles my mind how “woke” people can agree affirmative action is necessary on the undergrad level but scoff at “diversity hires taking away my spots”. Maddening.

Expectations that a single academic will do everything - teach, do cutting edge research, manage people, do admin work, write papers, communicate science to general public, service equipment and so on. No support staff, no division of work between people, you need to do everything and be excellent in every aspect.

hko00o

askacademia_train

Human: What are some obvious issues in academia, nobody wants to talk about? Like inter-departmental politics, everybody knows but people rarely talk about it to resolve it. Assistant:

fwubtcp

fwury1t

We're encouraging more and more people to earn college degrees, only to compete for a fixed number of "good" jobs. Because there aren't enough high-paying, stable jobs to go around, college graduates are now filling jobs that high school graduates used to do. High school graduates get pushed out entirely. Recessions accelerate this. Don't get me wrong, education is great! I wish everyone could get all of the education they want (without incurring ruinous debt), and I also wish people could enjoy humane working conditions, financial stability, and reliable access to health care whether they have a four-year degree or not. Turning the degree into table stakes for the job market is not how we get there.

Expectations that a single academic will do everything - teach, do cutting edge research, manage people, do admin work, write papers, communicate science to general public, service equipment and so on. No support staff, no division of work between people, you need to do everything and be excellent in every aspect.

hko00o

askacademia_train

Human: What are some obvious issues in academia, nobody wants to talk about? Like inter-departmental politics, everybody knows but people rarely talk about it to resolve it. Assistant:

fwu2apx

fwury1t

Racism

Expectations that a single academic will do everything - teach, do cutting edge research, manage people, do admin work, write papers, communicate science to general public, service equipment and so on. No support staff, no division of work between people, you need to do everything and be excellent in every aspect.

hko00o

askacademia_train

Human: What are some obvious issues in academia, nobody wants to talk about? Like inter-departmental politics, everybody knows but people rarely talk about it to resolve it. Assistant:

fwtusqj

fwury1t

Leaky Pipeline

Expectations that a single academic will do everything - teach, do cutting edge research, manage people, do admin work, write papers, communicate science to general public, service equipment and so on. No support staff, no division of work between people, you need to do everything and be excellent in every aspect.

hko00o

askacademia_train

Human: What are some obvious issues in academia, nobody wants to talk about? Like inter-departmental politics, everybody knows but people rarely talk about it to resolve it. Assistant:

fwu2apx

fwup83k

Racism

Controversial opinion: How about the lack of retirements so that new positions for new generations of PhDs can open. The age of retirement in academia is much older than in most careers. Couple this with a long refusal of retirements during and after the recession and you end up with a large portion of tenured faculty members nearing or over retirement age and a slew of PhDs who want their jobs. I don't mean this as an ageist attack but rather as something that many refuse to address.

nd18cd

askacademia_train

Human: Social scientists and philosophers, what have you learned professionally about human nature that you still have trouble applying to your own life? For me, while I've learned plenty of useful, empirically validated things about how people process information, I still incorrectly think I can write perfect communications everyone will understand. Assistant:

gy8gybg

gy8jrp1

Two things for me: Assumptions about what you know and what your readers know. As in, the importance of explaining and justifying everything you write. Assumptions about values and learning not to think for your respondents - I guess this might apply more to qualitative work. I always need to remind myself to remain neutral and avoid putting words into peoples’ mouths.

Biases are everywhere and your reasoning is never independent of emotion or potential manipulation. Yet, I think my decisions are sound and logical.

nd18cd

askacademia_train

Human: Social scientists and philosophers, what have you learned professionally about human nature that you still have trouble applying to your own life? For me, while I've learned plenty of useful, empirically validated things about how people process information, I still incorrectly think I can write perfect communications everyone will understand. Assistant:

gy8jrp1

gy8h3o0

Biases are everywhere and your reasoning is never independent of emotion or potential manipulation. Yet, I think my decisions are sound and logical.

I read this unorthodox book on how academic psychology didn't really work out in real life by Harvard psychologist Prof Jeff Kagle (Krishna Das) - Be Here Now. It was a nice read.

nd18cd

askacademia_train

Human: Social scientists and philosophers, what have you learned professionally about human nature that you still have trouble applying to your own life? For me, while I've learned plenty of useful, empirically validated things about how people process information, I still incorrectly think I can write perfect communications everyone will understand. Assistant:

gy8um52

gy8h3o0

The idea of "epistemic humility", which boils down to recognising that there are things that you don't know that you don't know, and that taking a step back before imposing my understanding on something is essential. And yet, my work is pretty much imposing my understanding of an issue on something and investigating it with research: which ironically could further entrench me in an epistemology that's not adequate for that issue.

I read this unorthodox book on how academic psychology didn't really work out in real life by Harvard psychologist Prof Jeff Kagle (Krishna Das) - Be Here Now. It was a nice read.

gy6y0o

askacademia_train

Human: For Ph.D. students that used to work out consistently during college. Is it possible to do it during a Ph.D.? I'll be starting my Ph.D. this Fall. I've been lifting all of college, would such a lifestyle still be possible during my Ph.D.? I'd spend about 1 hour and 30 minutes at the gym 4-5 times a week (still do). Do any of you guys lift on the regular while still finishing your responsabilities? ​ I love fitness and its a big part of my life. ​ Thank you. Assistant:

ft8t9h0

ft8tgb7

So long as it's a priority for you, you'll find the time. I didn't get into regular lifting until I got my first faculty job. But I'm much busier as faculty than I was as a grad student, and I'm still in the gym most mornings.

Yes, of course it is possible. I worked hard during my PhD, but I still had to to take musical instrument lessons, go dancing, throw pottery, enjoy parties and happy hours. I know it seems like there are a lot of unknowns, but grad school can be a great time with a great sense of community. For reference I am in a STEM field.

gy6y0o

askacademia_train

Human: For Ph.D. students that used to work out consistently during college. Is it possible to do it during a Ph.D.? I'll be starting my Ph.D. this Fall. I've been lifting all of college, would such a lifestyle still be possible during my Ph.D.? I'd spend about 1 hour and 30 minutes at the gym 4-5 times a week (still do). Do any of you guys lift on the regular while still finishing your responsabilities? ​ I love fitness and its a big part of my life. ​ Thank you. Assistant:

ft920oh

ft8y74a

I don't lift, but I do work out for a minimum of 30 minutes every day and I spend a minimum of 1 hour on a hobby of mine. My PhD is my job, so I'm done with it by 6 every day. Don't buy into the hype that you have to work 12 hours days on your PhD.

I'd say it's an important part of PhD to have a completely alternative activity that you take very seriously so that you don't be overwhelmed by the PhD. I did actively go to the gym on a daily basis, about 1 to 1.5 hours each time, and it helps mentally to recharge.

gy6y0o

askacademia_train

Human: For Ph.D. students that used to work out consistently during college. Is it possible to do it during a Ph.D.? I'll be starting my Ph.D. this Fall. I've been lifting all of college, would such a lifestyle still be possible during my Ph.D.? I'd spend about 1 hour and 30 minutes at the gym 4-5 times a week (still do). Do any of you guys lift on the regular while still finishing your responsabilities? ​ I love fitness and its a big part of my life. ​ Thank you. Assistant:

ft8zwfb

ft920oh

There was a guy I knew in my PhD cohort who became ripped over the years. He told me he would use the gym as an outlet and that is really important to have when you are doing your PhD. So yes, 100%, don't worry about your life changing too much. If you let your life change where you ditch everything that you like and want to do, you will become miserable and it will have an impact on your studies.

I don't lift, but I do work out for a minimum of 30 minutes every day and I spend a minimum of 1 hour on a hobby of mine. My PhD is my job, so I'm done with it by 6 every day. Don't buy into the hype that you have to work 12 hours days on your PhD.

gy6y0o

askacademia_train

Human: For Ph.D. students that used to work out consistently during college. Is it possible to do it during a Ph.D.? I'll be starting my Ph.D. this Fall. I've been lifting all of college, would such a lifestyle still be possible during my Ph.D.? I'd spend about 1 hour and 30 minutes at the gym 4-5 times a week (still do). Do any of you guys lift on the regular while still finishing your responsabilities? ​ I love fitness and its a big part of my life. ​ Thank you. Assistant:

ft920oh

ft8wpgn

I don't lift, but I do work out for a minimum of 30 minutes every day and I spend a minimum of 1 hour on a hobby of mine. My PhD is my job, so I'm done with it by 6 every day. Don't buy into the hype that you have to work 12 hours days on your PhD.

Having a progression hobby can greatly help your mental state especially when research is in a lull where there isn't a great deal of visible progress. Working out is an obvious one with additional benefits.

gy6y0o

askacademia_train

Human: For Ph.D. students that used to work out consistently during college. Is it possible to do it during a Ph.D.? I'll be starting my Ph.D. this Fall. I've been lifting all of college, would such a lifestyle still be possible during my Ph.D.? I'd spend about 1 hour and 30 minutes at the gym 4-5 times a week (still do). Do any of you guys lift on the regular while still finishing your responsabilities? ​ I love fitness and its a big part of my life. ​ Thank you. Assistant:

ft920oh

ft8uw6l

I don't lift, but I do work out for a minimum of 30 minutes every day and I spend a minimum of 1 hour on a hobby of mine. My PhD is my job, so I'm done with it by 6 every day. Don't buy into the hype that you have to work 12 hours days on your PhD.

Working out will be important for your focus and energy. Self care is critical for getting through.

fcingy

askacademia_train

Human: My undergraduate students suck at writing essays. How do I even grade them fairly? Long story short, my undergraduate students are terrible at writing essays. So bad, that I can't understand a single idea being communicated by many of them. I know that I most likely wrote like this in undergrad, but I'm having a hard time grading their papers consistently. What strategy do you use, and how have you been able to help improve your students' writing? Assistant:

fjb583o

fjazybl

As an undergrad that sucks at writing the best thing was if I was given the opportunity to submit a regrade. This way I understood my mistakes and was able to fix them to not fail. I also learned a lot from doing evaluations on other student essays.

Clear instructions, easy to understand rubrics, and exemplars. Also - if you have particular expectations on writing you should be giving some amount of instruction on it.

fcingy

askacademia_train

Human: My undergraduate students suck at writing essays. How do I even grade them fairly? Long story short, my undergraduate students are terrible at writing essays. So bad, that I can't understand a single idea being communicated by many of them. I know that I most likely wrote like this in undergrad, but I'm having a hard time grading their papers consistently. What strategy do you use, and how have you been able to help improve your students' writing? Assistant:

fjb4wsf

fjb583o

As all other said, rubrics... Also, I’ve used going to the campus writing center for a point of extra credit as a good incentive. Their writing improves, their grades improve, your sanity improves.

As an undergrad that sucks at writing the best thing was if I was given the opportunity to submit a regrade. This way I understood my mistakes and was able to fix them to not fail. I also learned a lot from doing evaluations on other student essays.

fcingy

askacademia_train

Human: My undergraduate students suck at writing essays. How do I even grade them fairly? Long story short, my undergraduate students are terrible at writing essays. So bad, that I can't understand a single idea being communicated by many of them. I know that I most likely wrote like this in undergrad, but I'm having a hard time grading their papers consistently. What strategy do you use, and how have you been able to help improve your students' writing? Assistant:

fjazybl

fjb6yz8

Clear instructions, easy to understand rubrics, and exemplars. Also - if you have particular expectations on writing you should be giving some amount of instruction on it.

Clear rubrics are a good start, but let's be honest, if they haven't been taught how to write a clear sentence/paragraph, a rubric isn't going to open that door for them. You need to set real (reasonable and high) expectations and help them reach them. Here are some other ideas to throw in the mix: * Specific, narrowly-focused writing prompts/assignments * Unlimited re-writes. Your students are all turning in their first drafts and just getting them to re-write a second draft will be extremely useful for most of them. No one will do that many draft, the "unlimited" part kind of just speaks to the spirit of the process. * Give low grades (Cs, Ds, Fs) to bad first drafts, and give them liberally, but give them clear feedback and allow re-writes. Refer them to the writing center on campus. * The #1 thing that will really help them is **one-on-one feedback sessions** outside of class where you go through what they turned in, discuss what's working and what isn't and make sure they understand what they should do. This is a lot more work for you and for them, so it really depends on how invested you are in this mission. * The absolute best tip you can give them is to start the second draft in a completely blank new document. If any of them take this advice I guarantee that (1) you will be able to tell and (2) that draft will be 2+ letter grades higher than the first one. Most students will not take this tip because they think they are lazy, when in fact starting from a blank new document for draft #2 is the laziest way to improve dramatically without breaking a sweat.

fcingy

askacademia_train

Human: My undergraduate students suck at writing essays. How do I even grade them fairly? Long story short, my undergraduate students are terrible at writing essays. So bad, that I can't understand a single idea being communicated by many of them. I know that I most likely wrote like this in undergrad, but I'm having a hard time grading their papers consistently. What strategy do you use, and how have you been able to help improve your students' writing? Assistant:

fjb6yz8

fjb4wsf

Clear rubrics are a good start, but let's be honest, if they haven't been taught how to write a clear sentence/paragraph, a rubric isn't going to open that door for them. You need to set real (reasonable and high) expectations and help them reach them. Here are some other ideas to throw in the mix: * Specific, narrowly-focused writing prompts/assignments * Unlimited re-writes. Your students are all turning in their first drafts and just getting them to re-write a second draft will be extremely useful for most of them. No one will do that many draft, the "unlimited" part kind of just speaks to the spirit of the process. * Give low grades (Cs, Ds, Fs) to bad first drafts, and give them liberally, but give them clear feedback and allow re-writes. Refer them to the writing center on campus. * The #1 thing that will really help them is **one-on-one feedback sessions** outside of class where you go through what they turned in, discuss what's working and what isn't and make sure they understand what they should do. This is a lot more work for you and for them, so it really depends on how invested you are in this mission. * The absolute best tip you can give them is to start the second draft in a completely blank new document. If any of them take this advice I guarantee that (1) you will be able to tell and (2) that draft will be 2+ letter grades higher than the first one. Most students will not take this tip because they think they are lazy, when in fact starting from a blank new document for draft #2 is the laziest way to improve dramatically without breaking a sweat.

As all other said, rubrics... Also, I’ve used going to the campus writing center for a point of extra credit as a good incentive. Their writing improves, their grades improve, your sanity improves.

fcingy

askacademia_train

Human: My undergraduate students suck at writing essays. How do I even grade them fairly? Long story short, my undergraduate students are terrible at writing essays. So bad, that I can't understand a single idea being communicated by many of them. I know that I most likely wrote like this in undergrad, but I'm having a hard time grading their papers consistently. What strategy do you use, and how have you been able to help improve your students' writing? Assistant:

fjb6t9o

fjb6yz8

Is it possible to not assign essays? As in, find some other writing format that makes sense for your field--I've found annotated bibliographies are pretty magical for teaching research, and response essays improve when I give them extremely specific goals. Also, echoing rubrics. AND including a space on the rubric for 'being on topic' because holy mother of cheese, that is a thing. Oh, last thing: if you have time in your semester, I would suggest a grade norming mini lesson. Show them what a good paper looks like, what a bad paper looks like, what a good but poorly worded paper looks like, etc.

Clear rubrics are a good start, but let's be honest, if they haven't been taught how to write a clear sentence/paragraph, a rubric isn't going to open that door for them. You need to set real (reasonable and high) expectations and help them reach them. Here are some other ideas to throw in the mix: * Specific, narrowly-focused writing prompts/assignments * Unlimited re-writes. Your students are all turning in their first drafts and just getting them to re-write a second draft will be extremely useful for most of them. No one will do that many draft, the "unlimited" part kind of just speaks to the spirit of the process. * Give low grades (Cs, Ds, Fs) to bad first drafts, and give them liberally, but give them clear feedback and allow re-writes. Refer them to the writing center on campus. * The #1 thing that will really help them is **one-on-one feedback sessions** outside of class where you go through what they turned in, discuss what's working and what isn't and make sure they understand what they should do. This is a lot more work for you and for them, so it really depends on how invested you are in this mission. * The absolute best tip you can give them is to start the second draft in a completely blank new document. If any of them take this advice I guarantee that (1) you will be able to tell and (2) that draft will be 2+ letter grades higher than the first one. Most students will not take this tip because they think they are lazy, when in fact starting from a blank new document for draft #2 is the laziest way to improve dramatically without breaking a sweat.

m6m5ne

askacademia_train

Human: Academics who publish more than your peers: what do you do differently? I've been using Scopus to compare publication records of academics in my field who have received early career grants to get an idea of what I should be aiming for. In doing this I've noticed that most people have a similar number of publications - usually 1-2 first author papers per year, plus a more variable number of co-authored papers further down the author list. However, there are some people who are comparably prolific, publishing upwards of 4 first-author publications a year multiple times in the first 5 years of their career (highest I've seen is 7 in one year), usually alongside many more co-authored papers. These authors are publishing in reputable journals with solid citations so they aren't just targeting easier journals. I've noticed that this usually occurs when the authors sticks closely to the same topic, sometimes even the same dataset (cohort studies in public health/psychology/psychiatry), or studies of different cohorts testing the same/similar research question. I'm curious about some less obvious differences that might be present. Writing on the same topic/data over and over of course is going to make writing faster and reduce time spent collecting data, but I don't think it's the whole story. I assume there must be other contextual factors at play, as well some differences in how these authors work. If you are someone with a lot of first-author publications (in a field where that matters) compared to your peers, or you know someone like this, what do you think allows them to publish twice as much as their peers? Assistant:

gr6otqs

gr6oqmt

No kids and a spouse who also has a career. It allowed me to spend as much time as I wanted publishing papers that I really enjoyed writing. I’m not crazy prolific, but I do tend to fall above the mean. The prolific folks I know in my field (social sciences) seem to be in that boat (at least in the earlier stages of their career). The most prolific person in my field publishes 20 or so a year first author. In chatting with him, it’s because he has a formula he uses to “tell the story” for each article. It works really well and his articles are always some of the best I ever read.

Countless writers have some variation of this, but I like David McCullough’s story. He saw an older author at a party who published nearly 100 books. When McCullough asked him how he was so prolific, he replied: “Simple. I write four pages every day.” There really is no trick to it, no shortcut. Just write—consistently! Now, obviously questions of quality quickly emerge, but in the short term, just write.

m6m5ne

askacademia_train

Human: Academics who publish more than your peers: what do you do differently? I've been using Scopus to compare publication records of academics in my field who have received early career grants to get an idea of what I should be aiming for. In doing this I've noticed that most people have a similar number of publications - usually 1-2 first author papers per year, plus a more variable number of co-authored papers further down the author list. However, there are some people who are comparably prolific, publishing upwards of 4 first-author publications a year multiple times in the first 5 years of their career (highest I've seen is 7 in one year), usually alongside many more co-authored papers. These authors are publishing in reputable journals with solid citations so they aren't just targeting easier journals. I've noticed that this usually occurs when the authors sticks closely to the same topic, sometimes even the same dataset (cohort studies in public health/psychology/psychiatry), or studies of different cohorts testing the same/similar research question. I'm curious about some less obvious differences that might be present. Writing on the same topic/data over and over of course is going to make writing faster and reduce time spent collecting data, but I don't think it's the whole story. I assume there must be other contextual factors at play, as well some differences in how these authors work. If you are someone with a lot of first-author publications (in a field where that matters) compared to your peers, or you know someone like this, what do you think allows them to publish twice as much as their peers? Assistant:

gr6pnpa

gr6oqmt

I publish significantly more than my peers (12-14 papers a year compared to a peer average of 4-5/yr). I don’t think there’s really any one secret, though. Here are a few things I try to keep in mind: 1. Pick projects that are important enough that even middling results yield papers. 2. Know when to wrap up a project into a paper (I.e. don’t do too many experiments). Once each of the important figures are in place, start writing immediately and finish writing in 3-4 days. 3. Say “no” to extraneous, non-productive tasks within the university. 4. Work HARD for the 9 hours you’re at work (no internet, no coffee breaks, no colleague gossip, short lunch), and try not to think about work the rest of the time (nights and weekends). 5. WRITE. Just write. Stop talking about writing. Stop thinking about writing. Just write. And love it. 6. Don’t vomit words onto paper. Think as you write, so that what you’re writing can be the first of three drafts (the third ready for publication).

Countless writers have some variation of this, but I like David McCullough’s story. He saw an older author at a party who published nearly 100 books. When McCullough asked him how he was so prolific, he replied: “Simple. I write four pages every day.” There really is no trick to it, no shortcut. Just write—consistently! Now, obviously questions of quality quickly emerge, but in the short term, just write.

m6m5ne

askacademia_train

Human: Academics who publish more than your peers: what do you do differently? I've been using Scopus to compare publication records of academics in my field who have received early career grants to get an idea of what I should be aiming for. In doing this I've noticed that most people have a similar number of publications - usually 1-2 first author papers per year, plus a more variable number of co-authored papers further down the author list. However, there are some people who are comparably prolific, publishing upwards of 4 first-author publications a year multiple times in the first 5 years of their career (highest I've seen is 7 in one year), usually alongside many more co-authored papers. These authors are publishing in reputable journals with solid citations so they aren't just targeting easier journals. I've noticed that this usually occurs when the authors sticks closely to the same topic, sometimes even the same dataset (cohort studies in public health/psychology/psychiatry), or studies of different cohorts testing the same/similar research question. I'm curious about some less obvious differences that might be present. Writing on the same topic/data over and over of course is going to make writing faster and reduce time spent collecting data, but I don't think it's the whole story. I assume there must be other contextual factors at play, as well some differences in how these authors work. If you are someone with a lot of first-author publications (in a field where that matters) compared to your peers, or you know someone like this, what do you think allows them to publish twice as much as their peers? Assistant:

gr6p1o4

gr6oqmt

I’m in history and area studies. I like to think of my projects in terms of trilogies of interrelated articles, which are vehicles to communicate new information and perspectives while the longer-term project is ongoing. Associating myself with European and East Asian grant-funded research projects has also helped, since those often have publication requirements, which less to articles in special issues, edited volume chapters, etc. Also, colleagues and I (at a poor institution where we had to push extra hard to get external funding and a chance to move) used to talk about the “minimum publishable unit” (MPU). An MPU roughly represents the amount of data and analysis necessary to make a valuable contribution to the field, such that it would be publishable as a journal article roughly 6,000-10,000 words in length. Thinking in terms of MPUs helped us restrain our natural tendency to put too much information into an article, and pushed us instead to streamline our writing and target a specific audience. For example: If an article draft is 12,000 words and covers two related topics... maybe that’s actually 2 MPUs, and ought to be divided into two articles, so the ideas have space to breathe. If a draft uses three methodologies to examine one subject... could it be 3 MPUs, each of which ought to go to a different journal? Could each part be fleshed out? If not, maybe it’s just 1 MPU. 4-6 MPUs, of course, would be a book. 1-2 of those MPUs could be published separately as articles earlier on. The idea isn’t to cheapen our work, but to avoid the compulsion to say everything in one massive super-article, and instead sharpen our arguments and speak to different audiences. I’ve seen senior European academics in my field do something similar.

Countless writers have some variation of this, but I like David McCullough’s story. He saw an older author at a party who published nearly 100 books. When McCullough asked him how he was so prolific, he replied: “Simple. I write four pages every day.” There really is no trick to it, no shortcut. Just write—consistently! Now, obviously questions of quality quickly emerge, but in the short term, just write.

m6m5ne

askacademia_train

Human: Academics who publish more than your peers: what do you do differently? I've been using Scopus to compare publication records of academics in my field who have received early career grants to get an idea of what I should be aiming for. In doing this I've noticed that most people have a similar number of publications - usually 1-2 first author papers per year, plus a more variable number of co-authored papers further down the author list. However, there are some people who are comparably prolific, publishing upwards of 4 first-author publications a year multiple times in the first 5 years of their career (highest I've seen is 7 in one year), usually alongside many more co-authored papers. These authors are publishing in reputable journals with solid citations so they aren't just targeting easier journals. I've noticed that this usually occurs when the authors sticks closely to the same topic, sometimes even the same dataset (cohort studies in public health/psychology/psychiatry), or studies of different cohorts testing the same/similar research question. I'm curious about some less obvious differences that might be present. Writing on the same topic/data over and over of course is going to make writing faster and reduce time spent collecting data, but I don't think it's the whole story. I assume there must be other contextual factors at play, as well some differences in how these authors work. If you are someone with a lot of first-author publications (in a field where that matters) compared to your peers, or you know someone like this, what do you think allows them to publish twice as much as their peers? Assistant:

gr6qfxx

gr6w3zn

A few anecdotal observations as a PhD student - a lot of people who publish prolifically appear to do so because they are successful at grant writing - grant money means research assistants, research assistants means a lot of the groundwork gets done for you. Also, a lot of prolific writers I’ve worked with have a big network. They collaborate a lot but also get exposed to a lot of ideas that appears to spark inspiration or debate. Lastly, some scholars seem to lack basic organizational skills and that can create a gap in output between scholars. Research is amenable to project management, just like other work tasks. Keeping track of a lot of moving pieces (ideas, funding, new research, data, etc.) seems to help save time and improve efficiency.

My old PI was prolific. Her secret was: -have a lot of graduate students (5-8) -be mostly absent so you aren't bothered by interruptions. -write a book and fly around speaking, gaining collaborators. -introduce the graduate students and collaborators, think of a study. -don't spend any time doing research, have grad students do it all and train each other. -have your grad students run the study, analyze the data, write the first draft of everything. -don't waste time with datasets, organizing them or analyzing. Don't waste time on research assistants. -have grad students co-apply to grants, where they write the first draft and you edit, to keep the funding flowing.

m6m5ne

askacademia_train

Human: Academics who publish more than your peers: what do you do differently? I've been using Scopus to compare publication records of academics in my field who have received early career grants to get an idea of what I should be aiming for. In doing this I've noticed that most people have a similar number of publications - usually 1-2 first author papers per year, plus a more variable number of co-authored papers further down the author list. However, there are some people who are comparably prolific, publishing upwards of 4 first-author publications a year multiple times in the first 5 years of their career (highest I've seen is 7 in one year), usually alongside many more co-authored papers. These authors are publishing in reputable journals with solid citations so they aren't just targeting easier journals. I've noticed that this usually occurs when the authors sticks closely to the same topic, sometimes even the same dataset (cohort studies in public health/psychology/psychiatry), or studies of different cohorts testing the same/similar research question. I'm curious about some less obvious differences that might be present. Writing on the same topic/data over and over of course is going to make writing faster and reduce time spent collecting data, but I don't think it's the whole story. I assume there must be other contextual factors at play, as well some differences in how these authors work. If you are someone with a lot of first-author publications (in a field where that matters) compared to your peers, or you know someone like this, what do you think allows them to publish twice as much as their peers? Assistant:

gr6rx3t

gr6w3zn

I dialed way back in recent years but my approach used to be to treat it like a job with set hours. I would write MWF from 8-noon. I worked in a space where I did not have access to the Internet to avoid the temptation to browse and kept my phone in my backpack across the room. I would outline what I was going to write and gathered printed copies of any research I needed the night before and only used that four hour block to write. It was easy to write when you had absolutely nothing else you could do for four hours at a time.

My old PI was prolific. Her secret was: -have a lot of graduate students (5-8) -be mostly absent so you aren't bothered by interruptions. -write a book and fly around speaking, gaining collaborators. -introduce the graduate students and collaborators, think of a study. -don't spend any time doing research, have grad students do it all and train each other. -have your grad students run the study, analyze the data, write the first draft of everything. -don't waste time with datasets, organizing them or analyzing. Don't waste time on research assistants. -have grad students co-apply to grants, where they write the first draft and you edit, to keep the funding flowing.

gv4rm3

askacademia_train

Human: Leave Academia at 30? Hi all, I am writing here because I feel confused and I am currently searching for some advice. I am 30 years old, I live in europe and I graduated as a medical doctor and got a PhD in Neuroscience. During these years I've been focusing on the physiology of memory and Alzheimer's Disease. I had the opportunity to learn a lot focusing on various electrophysiological techniques (recording of neuronal activity), 3D design and modelling, python, and various research techniques. I also spent some time abroad (1 year) in an Ivy league university in the US. I've got a good record of publications, got some prices, and had the chance to share my results in many international meetings. Right now, I'm doing my post-doc, but I feel that this is not my path. I am gradually loosing my interest toward research also due to some personal bad experiences. My year in US was inconclusive and had a really bad experience with my boss there. People keep telling me that at this age I can do whatever I want, but the truth is that I feel like I have to get out of my comfort zone and try something new, but I really don't know how to proceed. I like science and technology, and I think that I could do more, but at the moment I feel like it is impossible to get out of Academia (and at the same time staying in it). I have been looking for various job opportunities, but I have the feeling that I am useless out of my field or sometimes overqualified to certain positions. To make some context I am trying to consider jobs that are reasonably close to what I have done until now. What I feel i could try to do is: * going back to MD path and get a residency in Neurology/psychiatry or public health (I have some experience in handling data and it seems reasonable) * move out from my country and try other research paths * try to get into industry business. I am not so convinced about pharmaceutical companies because I fear that I will end up doing exactly the same stuff I do now and feel miserable again. Therefore, I have looked into emerging companies that are specialized in brain machine interfaces etc. My problem is that whatever I think to approach gives me the feeling that I could not do it. I have about one year of contract and I am trying to improve my programming skills and keep myself updated on medicine (this works fine because among my duties I have to teach physiology to MD students and that helps me being up to date). But the truth is that I feel I am lost and have no idea how to proceed. I am afraid of making wrong life choices and feel unable to really commit and hold into something. I don't know if any of you have a similar feeling or have been in a similar situation, but all kinds of feedback are welcome. Whoever read this, thank you for your time in reading my story. Assistant:

fsmgsnw

fsmig4i

Upvoting so more people see and maybe someone has good advice. Brain machine interface stuff is going to go big though. Your MD would really help some tech companies here in the US

I just want to advise, you need to stop thinking there is a wrong choice. All of your choices can be good choices, you also have a lot of skills to fall back on. Whatever you do you’ll be fine. I don’t think the human brain is really set up to have so many good choices and it has a tendency to stall people when it happens. I bet you’ll know more about this than me!

gv4rm3

askacademia_train

Human: Leave Academia at 30? Hi all, I am writing here because I feel confused and I am currently searching for some advice. I am 30 years old, I live in europe and I graduated as a medical doctor and got a PhD in Neuroscience. During these years I've been focusing on the physiology of memory and Alzheimer's Disease. I had the opportunity to learn a lot focusing on various electrophysiological techniques (recording of neuronal activity), 3D design and modelling, python, and various research techniques. I also spent some time abroad (1 year) in an Ivy league university in the US. I've got a good record of publications, got some prices, and had the chance to share my results in many international meetings. Right now, I'm doing my post-doc, but I feel that this is not my path. I am gradually loosing my interest toward research also due to some personal bad experiences. My year in US was inconclusive and had a really bad experience with my boss there. People keep telling me that at this age I can do whatever I want, but the truth is that I feel like I have to get out of my comfort zone and try something new, but I really don't know how to proceed. I like science and technology, and I think that I could do more, but at the moment I feel like it is impossible to get out of Academia (and at the same time staying in it). I have been looking for various job opportunities, but I have the feeling that I am useless out of my field or sometimes overqualified to certain positions. To make some context I am trying to consider jobs that are reasonably close to what I have done until now. What I feel i could try to do is: * going back to MD path and get a residency in Neurology/psychiatry or public health (I have some experience in handling data and it seems reasonable) * move out from my country and try other research paths * try to get into industry business. I am not so convinced about pharmaceutical companies because I fear that I will end up doing exactly the same stuff I do now and feel miserable again. Therefore, I have looked into emerging companies that are specialized in brain machine interfaces etc. My problem is that whatever I think to approach gives me the feeling that I could not do it. I have about one year of contract and I am trying to improve my programming skills and keep myself updated on medicine (this works fine because among my duties I have to teach physiology to MD students and that helps me being up to date). But the truth is that I feel I am lost and have no idea how to proceed. I am afraid of making wrong life choices and feel unable to really commit and hold into something. I don't know if any of you have a similar feeling or have been in a similar situation, but all kinds of feedback are welcome. Whoever read this, thank you for your time in reading my story. Assistant:

fsmlzea

fsmgsnw

I made the same choice recently - I was around a year through my first postdoc, and had a good relationship with faculty, etc - there was the possibility of a lectureship further down the line. But... I'm now 29 and living in London, and I just needed more financial certainty in my life. So I took an exit to industry (engineering), which has happened in the last couple of months. There are definitely regrets - I'll miss the academic environment, freedom and travel. But, I'm enjoying a new role, and at this stage I just coudn't turn down a ~80% salary increase. Unfortunately the reality of getting a house/kids/life has taken precedence, and it's a trade-off I don't think a lot of the more senior staff understand.

Upvoting so more people see and maybe someone has good advice. Brain machine interface stuff is going to go big though. Your MD would really help some tech companies here in the US

gv4rm3

askacademia_train

Human: Leave Academia at 30? Hi all, I am writing here because I feel confused and I am currently searching for some advice. I am 30 years old, I live in europe and I graduated as a medical doctor and got a PhD in Neuroscience. During these years I've been focusing on the physiology of memory and Alzheimer's Disease. I had the opportunity to learn a lot focusing on various electrophysiological techniques (recording of neuronal activity), 3D design and modelling, python, and various research techniques. I also spent some time abroad (1 year) in an Ivy league university in the US. I've got a good record of publications, got some prices, and had the chance to share my results in many international meetings. Right now, I'm doing my post-doc, but I feel that this is not my path. I am gradually loosing my interest toward research also due to some personal bad experiences. My year in US was inconclusive and had a really bad experience with my boss there. People keep telling me that at this age I can do whatever I want, but the truth is that I feel like I have to get out of my comfort zone and try something new, but I really don't know how to proceed. I like science and technology, and I think that I could do more, but at the moment I feel like it is impossible to get out of Academia (and at the same time staying in it). I have been looking for various job opportunities, but I have the feeling that I am useless out of my field or sometimes overqualified to certain positions. To make some context I am trying to consider jobs that are reasonably close to what I have done until now. What I feel i could try to do is: * going back to MD path and get a residency in Neurology/psychiatry or public health (I have some experience in handling data and it seems reasonable) * move out from my country and try other research paths * try to get into industry business. I am not so convinced about pharmaceutical companies because I fear that I will end up doing exactly the same stuff I do now and feel miserable again. Therefore, I have looked into emerging companies that are specialized in brain machine interfaces etc. My problem is that whatever I think to approach gives me the feeling that I could not do it. I have about one year of contract and I am trying to improve my programming skills and keep myself updated on medicine (this works fine because among my duties I have to teach physiology to MD students and that helps me being up to date). But the truth is that I feel I am lost and have no idea how to proceed. I am afraid of making wrong life choices and feel unable to really commit and hold into something. I don't know if any of you have a similar feeling or have been in a similar situation, but all kinds of feedback are welcome. Whoever read this, thank you for your time in reading my story. Assistant:

fsmgsnw

fsmkve3

Upvoting so more people see and maybe someone has good advice. Brain machine interface stuff is going to go big though. Your MD would really help some tech companies here in the US

I don't have some specific advice, but I am very familiar with the feeling that I am useless outside of my particular field of expertise (I am a postdoc too). One thing I try to remind myself of is that *it is not your responsibility to be the judge of that:* it is the responsibility of the person hiring you. So don't overthink things, and don't hesitate to aim for things that look interesting, even if you don't feel particularly suited for the job. Self-censorship is your worse enemy!

gv4rm3

askacademia_train

Human: Leave Academia at 30? Hi all, I am writing here because I feel confused and I am currently searching for some advice. I am 30 years old, I live in europe and I graduated as a medical doctor and got a PhD in Neuroscience. During these years I've been focusing on the physiology of memory and Alzheimer's Disease. I had the opportunity to learn a lot focusing on various electrophysiological techniques (recording of neuronal activity), 3D design and modelling, python, and various research techniques. I also spent some time abroad (1 year) in an Ivy league university in the US. I've got a good record of publications, got some prices, and had the chance to share my results in many international meetings. Right now, I'm doing my post-doc, but I feel that this is not my path. I am gradually loosing my interest toward research also due to some personal bad experiences. My year in US was inconclusive and had a really bad experience with my boss there. People keep telling me that at this age I can do whatever I want, but the truth is that I feel like I have to get out of my comfort zone and try something new, but I really don't know how to proceed. I like science and technology, and I think that I could do more, but at the moment I feel like it is impossible to get out of Academia (and at the same time staying in it). I have been looking for various job opportunities, but I have the feeling that I am useless out of my field or sometimes overqualified to certain positions. To make some context I am trying to consider jobs that are reasonably close to what I have done until now. What I feel i could try to do is: * going back to MD path and get a residency in Neurology/psychiatry or public health (I have some experience in handling data and it seems reasonable) * move out from my country and try other research paths * try to get into industry business. I am not so convinced about pharmaceutical companies because I fear that I will end up doing exactly the same stuff I do now and feel miserable again. Therefore, I have looked into emerging companies that are specialized in brain machine interfaces etc. My problem is that whatever I think to approach gives me the feeling that I could not do it. I have about one year of contract and I am trying to improve my programming skills and keep myself updated on medicine (this works fine because among my duties I have to teach physiology to MD students and that helps me being up to date). But the truth is that I feel I am lost and have no idea how to proceed. I am afraid of making wrong life choices and feel unable to really commit and hold into something. I don't know if any of you have a similar feeling or have been in a similar situation, but all kinds of feedback are welcome. Whoever read this, thank you for your time in reading my story. Assistant:

fsmmevk

fsmgsnw

I’m not in the STEM field but I’m also doing my postdoc. I personally feel the world outside of us is changing very quickly and nobody really knows how or in what direction it’s going to change. It’s an exciting time to be doing research but also very uncomfortable because you are inevitably part of the change you want to study. I’m wondering if losing interest in research comes from the instability you feel in the world? If that’s the case then I don’t think much will change by changing your career. It sounds like you have a wonderful family and a partner so perhaps it’s time to look within and do some soul searching? Meditate? Go hiking? Go diving? Write a diary? I think you are already on your path by simply posting this question. I believe you will find your way one step at a time! Good luck!

Upvoting so more people see and maybe someone has good advice. Brain machine interface stuff is going to go big though. Your MD would really help some tech companies here in the US

gv4rm3

askacademia_train

Human: Leave Academia at 30? Hi all, I am writing here because I feel confused and I am currently searching for some advice. I am 30 years old, I live in europe and I graduated as a medical doctor and got a PhD in Neuroscience. During these years I've been focusing on the physiology of memory and Alzheimer's Disease. I had the opportunity to learn a lot focusing on various electrophysiological techniques (recording of neuronal activity), 3D design and modelling, python, and various research techniques. I also spent some time abroad (1 year) in an Ivy league university in the US. I've got a good record of publications, got some prices, and had the chance to share my results in many international meetings. Right now, I'm doing my post-doc, but I feel that this is not my path. I am gradually loosing my interest toward research also due to some personal bad experiences. My year in US was inconclusive and had a really bad experience with my boss there. People keep telling me that at this age I can do whatever I want, but the truth is that I feel like I have to get out of my comfort zone and try something new, but I really don't know how to proceed. I like science and technology, and I think that I could do more, but at the moment I feel like it is impossible to get out of Academia (and at the same time staying in it). I have been looking for various job opportunities, but I have the feeling that I am useless out of my field or sometimes overqualified to certain positions. To make some context I am trying to consider jobs that are reasonably close to what I have done until now. What I feel i could try to do is: * going back to MD path and get a residency in Neurology/psychiatry or public health (I have some experience in handling data and it seems reasonable) * move out from my country and try other research paths * try to get into industry business. I am not so convinced about pharmaceutical companies because I fear that I will end up doing exactly the same stuff I do now and feel miserable again. Therefore, I have looked into emerging companies that are specialized in brain machine interfaces etc. My problem is that whatever I think to approach gives me the feeling that I could not do it. I have about one year of contract and I am trying to improve my programming skills and keep myself updated on medicine (this works fine because among my duties I have to teach physiology to MD students and that helps me being up to date). But the truth is that I feel I am lost and have no idea how to proceed. I am afraid of making wrong life choices and feel unable to really commit and hold into something. I don't know if any of you have a similar feeling or have been in a similar situation, but all kinds of feedback are welcome. Whoever read this, thank you for your time in reading my story. Assistant:

fsmqvq0

fsmgsnw

Therapy. I was stuck in the post-doc from hell, and needed clarity. A few sessions with a therapist helped me clarify my life goals and career goals and chart a path forward. I ended up sort of where I had set my goal, although as per my usual, my timing was poor and I did not manage relationships well, but that’s a me thing. Also, job markets and economic factors affecting them are part of the the timing issue, but not much to be done about it. It is helpful to get counseling to push through to what you value. Good luck! You have a lot to offer, either path. For me, I value the academy over industry, even though it too is a business.

Upvoting so more people see and maybe someone has good advice. Brain machine interface stuff is going to go big though. Your MD would really help some tech companies here in the US

ox6k7a

askacademia_train

Human: I was offered a PhD position. Would it be weird if I asked to talk to a PhD student I would work with before deciding to accept? The interviews involved only people who would supervise my work and while I got the impression the atmosphere in the team is good I would like to talk to someone whose perspective would be closer to mine. This is going to be the next 3 years of my life so I want to be as sure as possible I'm not being lured into an unhealthy environment. I already know there are 2 other PhD students working on the project so they would become my colleagues and I would get to know them anyway. Assistant:

h7ke4re

h7kocqg

I don't think it would be weird. It's important to know what the culture is from a student perspective.

Nope! Not at all. I think that's expected. It's a big commitment. I've done it myself and I've spoke to incoming PhD students.