Datasets:

Dahoas

/

filtered-SHP

like 2

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

h7ktlpl

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

Perfectly normal. It would be a red flag if such a request were denied.

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:

h7krbna

h7ktlpl

Not weird. Contact them.

Perfectly normal. It would be a red flag if such a request were denied.

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

h7kuozu

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

Definitely do it! I suggest making sure you talk to people at all stages too- new student, middle, near dissertation, even an alumni. As a PI, I give prospective students the contact info. A lab can be great and have a great culture, but not be the right fit for someone.

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:

h7kuozu

h7krbna

Definitely do it! I suggest making sure you talk to people at all stages too- new student, middle, near dissertation, even an alumni. As a PI, I give prospective students the contact info. A lab can be great and have a great culture, but not be the right fit for someone.

Not weird. Contact them.

jf2a1a

askacademia_train

Human: The student that just brings a notebook to class... My whole academic career I’ve never brought more than my notebook, a pen, and an open engaged mind to class... I do it for myself, and I’ve never really questioned it - for me it allows me to make the most free form / interconnected notes, when I hand-write things I feel it helps me retain the things I’m learning better, not having a computer in front of me forces me to engage in the lecture or seminar - there’s no distractions, there’s no laptop to hide behind - I’m not just attending I’m present. This has never been something I’ve questioned much, in my undergrad sure most other students had laptops but I never thought anything of it and they never thought anything of me. I’ve recently started grad school, at a quite elite institution with lots of very wealthy international students (that’s far from my socio-economic background). I’ve been showing up to class with my trusty notebook and pen, stowing my notes in nicely divided folders... my usual thing. But for the first time ever I’ve been getting comments about it from my peers - ‘oh that’s so old school’ - ‘how do you work like that?’ - ‘we’re going to need you to type up your notes for our google drive!’ Etc. It’s suddenly made me very self-conscious about my approach to learning, and I have noticed that when I show up to the seminars I’m the only person in the room without a laptop in front of me, when I get out my paper and pen I almost feel naked in the classroom. I wonder what my professors think, because clearly the other students with their shiny MacBook Pro’s have noticed it... it’s not that I don’t have a laptop, it’s just my entire life I’ve never been encouraged to use one in a classroom environment - in school electronics were banned! So I wanted to get the perspective from ideally academics and other post-grad students about this, am I doing something wrong? What’s your perception of the student with just a notepad?? reminds me of this meme (which I feel on a spiritual level!) Assistant:

g9ht8vc

g9ht0j8

None of your professors cares what you take notes with. If it’s what you prefer, go hog wild.

When I was taking class I did it the same way you've described and never had an issue. Focusing on the lecture and writing things down as I hear them works for me for remembering and I credit it for not needing to study as much as my peers for exams. FWIW my classmates I sat behind who brought laptops and browsed reddit or chatted on imessage all class consistently performed worse than those who didn't on exams but ultimately none failed so was it worth it? I'm not sure. Don't feel insecure and keep taking notes however you want. Screw the haters!

jf2a1a

askacademia_train

Human: The student that just brings a notebook to class... My whole academic career I’ve never brought more than my notebook, a pen, and an open engaged mind to class... I do it for myself, and I’ve never really questioned it - for me it allows me to make the most free form / interconnected notes, when I hand-write things I feel it helps me retain the things I’m learning better, not having a computer in front of me forces me to engage in the lecture or seminar - there’s no distractions, there’s no laptop to hide behind - I’m not just attending I’m present. This has never been something I’ve questioned much, in my undergrad sure most other students had laptops but I never thought anything of it and they never thought anything of me. I’ve recently started grad school, at a quite elite institution with lots of very wealthy international students (that’s far from my socio-economic background). I’ve been showing up to class with my trusty notebook and pen, stowing my notes in nicely divided folders... my usual thing. But for the first time ever I’ve been getting comments about it from my peers - ‘oh that’s so old school’ - ‘how do you work like that?’ - ‘we’re going to need you to type up your notes for our google drive!’ Etc. It’s suddenly made me very self-conscious about my approach to learning, and I have noticed that when I show up to the seminars I’m the only person in the room without a laptop in front of me, when I get out my paper and pen I almost feel naked in the classroom. I wonder what my professors think, because clearly the other students with their shiny MacBook Pro’s have noticed it... it’s not that I don’t have a laptop, it’s just my entire life I’ve never been encouraged to use one in a classroom environment - in school electronics were banned! So I wanted to get the perspective from ideally academics and other post-grad students about this, am I doing something wrong? What’s your perception of the student with just a notepad?? reminds me of this meme (which I feel on a spiritual level!) Assistant:

g9hues2

g9huulh

Everyone learns differently and I think it's important to know your learning style and do what works for you

The other comments are spot on. I would add that your professors are most likely from a generation where notebooks were the norm. Also, in a sea of laptops the only face that stands out is yours. I think that's an advantage.

jf2a1a

askacademia_train

Human: The student that just brings a notebook to class... My whole academic career I’ve never brought more than my notebook, a pen, and an open engaged mind to class... I do it for myself, and I’ve never really questioned it - for me it allows me to make the most free form / interconnected notes, when I hand-write things I feel it helps me retain the things I’m learning better, not having a computer in front of me forces me to engage in the lecture or seminar - there’s no distractions, there’s no laptop to hide behind - I’m not just attending I’m present. This has never been something I’ve questioned much, in my undergrad sure most other students had laptops but I never thought anything of it and they never thought anything of me. I’ve recently started grad school, at a quite elite institution with lots of very wealthy international students (that’s far from my socio-economic background). I’ve been showing up to class with my trusty notebook and pen, stowing my notes in nicely divided folders... my usual thing. But for the first time ever I’ve been getting comments about it from my peers - ‘oh that’s so old school’ - ‘how do you work like that?’ - ‘we’re going to need you to type up your notes for our google drive!’ Etc. It’s suddenly made me very self-conscious about my approach to learning, and I have noticed that when I show up to the seminars I’m the only person in the room without a laptop in front of me, when I get out my paper and pen I almost feel naked in the classroom. I wonder what my professors think, because clearly the other students with their shiny MacBook Pro’s have noticed it... it’s not that I don’t have a laptop, it’s just my entire life I’ve never been encouraged to use one in a classroom environment - in school electronics were banned! So I wanted to get the perspective from ideally academics and other post-grad students about this, am I doing something wrong? What’s your perception of the student with just a notepad?? reminds me of this meme (which I feel on a spiritual level!) Assistant:

g9hujil

g9hues2

I like taking notes by cursive instead of by typing - this kinetic approach helps me remember better. If I type notes then I don’t remember as well. I was taking PhD classes recently and half the class had laptops and the other half had notebooks and pens. Do what works for YOU. And no, when we teach we don’t care what laptops our students bring to class.

Everyone learns differently and I think it's important to know your learning style and do what works for you

jf2a1a

askacademia_train

Human: The student that just brings a notebook to class... My whole academic career I’ve never brought more than my notebook, a pen, and an open engaged mind to class... I do it for myself, and I’ve never really questioned it - for me it allows me to make the most free form / interconnected notes, when I hand-write things I feel it helps me retain the things I’m learning better, not having a computer in front of me forces me to engage in the lecture or seminar - there’s no distractions, there’s no laptop to hide behind - I’m not just attending I’m present. This has never been something I’ve questioned much, in my undergrad sure most other students had laptops but I never thought anything of it and they never thought anything of me. I’ve recently started grad school, at a quite elite institution with lots of very wealthy international students (that’s far from my socio-economic background). I’ve been showing up to class with my trusty notebook and pen, stowing my notes in nicely divided folders... my usual thing. But for the first time ever I’ve been getting comments about it from my peers - ‘oh that’s so old school’ - ‘how do you work like that?’ - ‘we’re going to need you to type up your notes for our google drive!’ Etc. It’s suddenly made me very self-conscious about my approach to learning, and I have noticed that when I show up to the seminars I’m the only person in the room without a laptop in front of me, when I get out my paper and pen I almost feel naked in the classroom. I wonder what my professors think, because clearly the other students with their shiny MacBook Pro’s have noticed it... it’s not that I don’t have a laptop, it’s just my entire life I’ve never been encouraged to use one in a classroom environment - in school electronics were banned! So I wanted to get the perspective from ideally academics and other post-grad students about this, am I doing something wrong? What’s your perception of the student with just a notepad?? reminds me of this meme (which I feel on a spiritual level!) Assistant:

g9hues2

g9huum1

Everyone learns differently and I think it's important to know your learning style and do what works for you

I always take handwritten notes and keep them all in a divided binder! Sometimes I feel “less efficient” than the people with their computers open the whole time- until I sit behind them and watch them look at furry art all class (literally)

jf2a1a

askacademia_train

Human: The student that just brings a notebook to class... My whole academic career I’ve never brought more than my notebook, a pen, and an open engaged mind to class... I do it for myself, and I’ve never really questioned it - for me it allows me to make the most free form / interconnected notes, when I hand-write things I feel it helps me retain the things I’m learning better, not having a computer in front of me forces me to engage in the lecture or seminar - there’s no distractions, there’s no laptop to hide behind - I’m not just attending I’m present. This has never been something I’ve questioned much, in my undergrad sure most other students had laptops but I never thought anything of it and they never thought anything of me. I’ve recently started grad school, at a quite elite institution with lots of very wealthy international students (that’s far from my socio-economic background). I’ve been showing up to class with my trusty notebook and pen, stowing my notes in nicely divided folders... my usual thing. But for the first time ever I’ve been getting comments about it from my peers - ‘oh that’s so old school’ - ‘how do you work like that?’ - ‘we’re going to need you to type up your notes for our google drive!’ Etc. It’s suddenly made me very self-conscious about my approach to learning, and I have noticed that when I show up to the seminars I’m the only person in the room without a laptop in front of me, when I get out my paper and pen I almost feel naked in the classroom. I wonder what my professors think, because clearly the other students with their shiny MacBook Pro’s have noticed it... it’s not that I don’t have a laptop, it’s just my entire life I’ve never been encouraged to use one in a classroom environment - in school electronics were banned! So I wanted to get the perspective from ideally academics and other post-grad students about this, am I doing something wrong? What’s your perception of the student with just a notepad?? reminds me of this meme (which I feel on a spiritual level!) Assistant:

g9hv58f

g9hues2

I believe that most real academics will not care how you register information, as long as you achieve the goalposts of your academic curriculum. A professor will always prefer a student who is articulated and well organised regardless of how organises his learning. Each one has a different approach to learning, so if you feel that pen and paper do the trick for you that's absolutely fine. Many academics I know (including me) will jot down first the important piece of information because that will help register them in their mind. Don't cave in to the peer pressure of the other students, especially if that will screw up your learning process. Many academics do not understand that we develop our knowledge through processes of learning, which are different for each one of us; many people in academia, especially students, think that collecting the information counts as learning, but that is completely wrong. What I would suggest you to do is to look into how you could enhance your learning process, so you could manage the curriculum of a grad school (that is much heavier than an undergrad program). This may include use of special paper notebooks, mind-maps etc or the use of software that will help you improve your learning process (e.g citation managers, academic apps, electronic lab records etc) but that does not mean you'll have to quit pen and paper.

Everyone learns differently and I think it's important to know your learning style and do what works for you

hvblx7

askacademia_train

Human: Should I contact my previous advisor to see how they are doing? I graduated with my masters degree two years ago. I have two academic and research advisor that I guided me throughout the program and I managed to land a very good job and get on my feet after graduation. I want to send an email to two of my advisors to check in. Do you think this is a good idea? Do professors like to hear back from their previous students? ​ I don't know if it matters but im an engineer and they are in school of engineering Assistant:

fyscem0

fysas9f

Lecturer here! I love to hear back from my old students. Not only because I care about most of them, but I love to hear that their education has helped them achieve their goals.

Yes, do it!

hvblx7

askacademia_train

Human: Should I contact my previous advisor to see how they are doing? I graduated with my masters degree two years ago. I have two academic and research advisor that I guided me throughout the program and I managed to land a very good job and get on my feet after graduation. I want to send an email to two of my advisors to check in. Do you think this is a good idea? Do professors like to hear back from their previous students? ​ I don't know if it matters but im an engineer and they are in school of engineering Assistant:

fysas9f

fyse7u6

Yes, do it!

Yes yes yes! We LOVE hearing from our kiddos (no matter how old our “kids” actually were when they were our students). ESPECIALLY right now when everything is upside down.

hvblx7

askacademia_train

Human: Should I contact my previous advisor to see how they are doing? I graduated with my masters degree two years ago. I have two academic and research advisor that I guided me throughout the program and I managed to land a very good job and get on my feet after graduation. I want to send an email to two of my advisors to check in. Do you think this is a good idea? Do professors like to hear back from their previous students? ​ I don't know if it matters but im an engineer and they are in school of engineering Assistant:

fysfbeu

fysas9f

Yes definitely - especially if you left on a good note. Furthermore,do not be alarmed if they do not reply anytime soon. They are probably getting hundreds of emails daily and if they are not actively looking for an email from you specifically, it could be the case that they skip it.

Yes, do it!

hvblx7

askacademia_train

Human: Should I contact my previous advisor to see how they are doing? I graduated with my masters degree two years ago. I have two academic and research advisor that I guided me throughout the program and I managed to land a very good job and get on my feet after graduation. I want to send an email to two of my advisors to check in. Do you think this is a good idea? Do professors like to hear back from their previous students? ​ I don't know if it matters but im an engineer and they are in school of engineering Assistant:

fysfii5

fyso443

Yes! Give them an update! Professors love hearing back from former students!

Definitely contact. We love to hear that our students are doing well and appreciated our work Plus, you never know when one of your advisers might be up for a promotion or an award,, and having recent contact information from a former student who thought very highly of them could get you on a list to do something to advance their career or give them an honor. Similarly, faculty are sometimes asked to nominate former students for alumni awards and so forth, and you stand a better chance of getting nominated for one of those if you have been in contact. Always nice to hear when students have a good experience.

hvblx7

askacademia_train

Human: Should I contact my previous advisor to see how they are doing? I graduated with my masters degree two years ago. I have two academic and research advisor that I guided me throughout the program and I managed to land a very good job and get on my feet after graduation. I want to send an email to two of my advisors to check in. Do you think this is a good idea? Do professors like to hear back from their previous students? ​ I don't know if it matters but im an engineer and they are in school of engineering Assistant:

fysjela

fyso443

My advisor LOVES to receive news from formers students!

Definitely contact. We love to hear that our students are doing well and appreciated our work Plus, you never know when one of your advisers might be up for a promotion or an award,, and having recent contact information from a former student who thought very highly of them could get you on a list to do something to advance their career or give them an honor. Similarly, faculty are sometimes asked to nominate former students for alumni awards and so forth, and you stand a better chance of getting nominated for one of those if you have been in contact. Always nice to hear when students have a good experience.

ne4yc7

askacademia_train

Human: Anyone feel like they are left out of research work because you are not in the clique? I work in an academic research institute where everyone has some type of STEM PhD. I am typically the "get shit done person" (engineering), but left out of the initial decision making process when grants are written because Im not mathy / physicsy enough. Normally not a concern for me, but projects end up being a cluster because the grants are based in theory and implementation is somewhat of an after thought. Additionally, coworkers speak a lot of jargin and/or highly specific language which I am not versed in and eyes get rolled whenever I try to offer constructive criticism. Best analogy I can give is a restaurant owner giving a chef a bunch of tv dinners and telling him to make Michelin star quality food. Just venting I suppose...Anyone else have similar experiences? Assistant:

gyevslp

gyemdlr

Im a chemist working with biologists. So i kinda know how you feel. My advice is to learn their jargon. Afterall.. you are in research. In research because it is in the cutting edge, it would be a disservice to yourself if you keep yourself to a bottle "engineer". You are a scientist. Period. To be relevant, you need to understand their theories and provide them that link if they cant provide that link to you. Build the bridge. Explain to them the limitations of certain theories in application science. Then brainstorm. :) you can do it. And believe me.. when you show you are useful to them..youd be flooded with meetings of people wanting to hear your opinion on things.

Jargon is big in USA, I’ve heard, where talk is valued very highly and people overstate what they’ve done or what they’re doing.

ne4yc7

askacademia_train

Human: Anyone feel like they are left out of research work because you are not in the clique? I work in an academic research institute where everyone has some type of STEM PhD. I am typically the "get shit done person" (engineering), but left out of the initial decision making process when grants are written because Im not mathy / physicsy enough. Normally not a concern for me, but projects end up being a cluster because the grants are based in theory and implementation is somewhat of an after thought. Additionally, coworkers speak a lot of jargin and/or highly specific language which I am not versed in and eyes get rolled whenever I try to offer constructive criticism. Best analogy I can give is a restaurant owner giving a chef a bunch of tv dinners and telling him to make Michelin star quality food. Just venting I suppose...Anyone else have similar experiences? Assistant:

gyevslp

gyers1d

Im a chemist working with biologists. So i kinda know how you feel. My advice is to learn their jargon. Afterall.. you are in research. In research because it is in the cutting edge, it would be a disservice to yourself if you keep yourself to a bottle "engineer". You are a scientist. Period. To be relevant, you need to understand their theories and provide them that link if they cant provide that link to you. Build the bridge. Explain to them the limitations of certain theories in application science. Then brainstorm. :) you can do it. And believe me.. when you show you are useful to them..youd be flooded with meetings of people wanting to hear your opinion on things.

10000000%. there’s an old guard that’s all about gatekeeping, and they act like assholes because they can. The good news is you have a lot more control over your career than you think. Dont worry about these kinds of people and just keep doing you. Eventually you’ll find people like yourself with similar interests. I’ve worked with a lot more people internationally than I have within the states. Fuck em.

kfkybb

askacademia_train

Human: Quitting Prof job Hi all, i was wondering if I could get some opinions or advice to the following situation: i’m in my seventh year of assistant professorship, three of these tenure track US and four of these in a permanent position (UK). I am getting ready to apply for promotion. However there are a few issues. First my spouse and child absolutely do not like it here and want to go back to previous country. Second, i’ve been working my ass off especially post covid. I have ten undergrads, five PhD students, led two courses this semester with over 100 students in them. I do the grant applications (not going great but there are small steady funding amounts) and the publishing thing (very productive despite not having many resources or time).... I had to remodel my two courses to work remotely because of Covid whilst homeschooling. Well: just got my evals back and students loved the first module but absolutely hated the second! That one is a difficult, technical subject which is mandatory and half of them usually really loathe it even during non covid times. Others who are more interested love it—- smh. The spread of these evaluations goes from “best course i ever had” to “i’m gonna change my degree now”... I think I might be having an oncoming burnout or something but I just... want to quit..... right.... NOW! I’m normally calm and rational but i feel like I am trapped in a nightmare. I got scared of myself and have just taken leave over the holidays to let all of this settle - i normally never take any time off since i started in academia about 20 years ago- but i think i want to try getting into a different job. I’ve applied to a museum job on a whim the other day and they want to interview me. The more i think of it the more i like the idea of doing something practical that isn’t such a terrible 80 hour/week slog all the fucking time. I’m so tired and nothing is ever good enough. On the other hand it’s a secure job with benefits and they allow me to do my “research” at night times and weekends.... I’m so confused. Assistant:

gg90n7o

gg93qbb

What you describe is a classic stress/ poor MH response to the work conditions you are in right now. Revisit this after your leave, talk with your family and see how you feel.

I think the middle of an extremely stressful pandemic is a)not the time to get down on yourself for bad student evals b) not a great time to make snap major life decisions. I would take a long vacation over winter break and then do next semester and see how you feel next summer.

kfkybb

askacademia_train

Human: Quitting Prof job Hi all, i was wondering if I could get some opinions or advice to the following situation: i’m in my seventh year of assistant professorship, three of these tenure track US and four of these in a permanent position (UK). I am getting ready to apply for promotion. However there are a few issues. First my spouse and child absolutely do not like it here and want to go back to previous country. Second, i’ve been working my ass off especially post covid. I have ten undergrads, five PhD students, led two courses this semester with over 100 students in them. I do the grant applications (not going great but there are small steady funding amounts) and the publishing thing (very productive despite not having many resources or time).... I had to remodel my two courses to work remotely because of Covid whilst homeschooling. Well: just got my evals back and students loved the first module but absolutely hated the second! That one is a difficult, technical subject which is mandatory and half of them usually really loathe it even during non covid times. Others who are more interested love it—- smh. The spread of these evaluations goes from “best course i ever had” to “i’m gonna change my degree now”... I think I might be having an oncoming burnout or something but I just... want to quit..... right.... NOW! I’m normally calm and rational but i feel like I am trapped in a nightmare. I got scared of myself and have just taken leave over the holidays to let all of this settle - i normally never take any time off since i started in academia about 20 years ago- but i think i want to try getting into a different job. I’ve applied to a museum job on a whim the other day and they want to interview me. The more i think of it the more i like the idea of doing something practical that isn’t such a terrible 80 hour/week slog all the fucking time. I’m so tired and nothing is ever good enough. On the other hand it’s a secure job with benefits and they allow me to do my “research” at night times and weekends.... I’m so confused. Assistant:

gg91v96

gg93qbb

As soon as I read the statement about your spouse and children not liking US, I was convinced that you should leave. Academia will eat up your whole life if you let it! Also there is a r/leavingacademia that might be helpful to you and a recently published book called leaving academia. I’m reading it now and it speaks to my soul. I’m planning my exit and will do it soon!

I think the middle of an extremely stressful pandemic is a)not the time to get down on yourself for bad student evals b) not a great time to make snap major life decisions. I would take a long vacation over winter break and then do next semester and see how you feel next summer.

kfkybb

askacademia_train

Human: Quitting Prof job Hi all, i was wondering if I could get some opinions or advice to the following situation: i’m in my seventh year of assistant professorship, three of these tenure track US and four of these in a permanent position (UK). I am getting ready to apply for promotion. However there are a few issues. First my spouse and child absolutely do not like it here and want to go back to previous country. Second, i’ve been working my ass off especially post covid. I have ten undergrads, five PhD students, led two courses this semester with over 100 students in them. I do the grant applications (not going great but there are small steady funding amounts) and the publishing thing (very productive despite not having many resources or time).... I had to remodel my two courses to work remotely because of Covid whilst homeschooling. Well: just got my evals back and students loved the first module but absolutely hated the second! That one is a difficult, technical subject which is mandatory and half of them usually really loathe it even during non covid times. Others who are more interested love it—- smh. The spread of these evaluations goes from “best course i ever had” to “i’m gonna change my degree now”... I think I might be having an oncoming burnout or something but I just... want to quit..... right.... NOW! I’m normally calm and rational but i feel like I am trapped in a nightmare. I got scared of myself and have just taken leave over the holidays to let all of this settle - i normally never take any time off since i started in academia about 20 years ago- but i think i want to try getting into a different job. I’ve applied to a museum job on a whim the other day and they want to interview me. The more i think of it the more i like the idea of doing something practical that isn’t such a terrible 80 hour/week slog all the fucking time. I’m so tired and nothing is ever good enough. On the other hand it’s a secure job with benefits and they allow me to do my “research” at night times and weekends.... I’m so confused. Assistant:

gg9rb0v

gga2nx1

Feel your pain brother. Same here - but senior lecturer. I would ignore all evaluation during this period. Stop wasting time on grants and cut down the publishing to the minimum to meet ref. Also, renegotiate a lower teacher workload with your Dean. Frame it as a "don't abuse me or risk losing me" conversation.

A crisis either clarifies or confuses. You have to decide which one this is for you. You have already been working eight years then you know what it was like before the crisis. Honestly, none of us know what it’s going to be like years down the road.

ys57oa

askacademia_train

Human: My PI is asking me to falsify data. What is my recourse? I am a postdoc at an Italian research university. In a meeting yesterday, my PI and a senior professor instructed me to rush necessary foundational research and greatly overstate the reliability of certain data in order to produce results that would generate a great deal of press. This is data falsification. I will not be a part of it, but I have never dealt with a similar situation. What next? Assistant:

ivxqmw4

ivxmm8n

Before you report anything, I would advise that you very carefully think through what exactly was said and asked of you. If you were specifically and explicitly asked to falsify anything, then yes, immediately report it and forward any and all information to the appropriate people. But... most PIs are smarter than this, and to be fair, a lot of papers and grant applications sadly attempt to work in a grey zone that blurs the line between rigorous science and salesmanship. For the sake of academic survival, many researchers try to forge a very positive and optimistic interpretation of what the have or plan to achieve. No one will fund you if you fairly disclose that your methods and data are questionable... but this doesn't excuse overselling "bad" science. It's also important to consider whether the 2nd person in that mtg will side with the PI and claim that you grossly misunderstood the conversation. So I strongly suggest that you follow up with an email or documented conversation that can be read by a 3rd party and objectively conclude that they were asking you to do something clearly unethical. And beware: Universities from any country will always act on blatant law breaking...but when it comes to the grey zone of ethics, they will most often give the PI the benefit of the doubt. As leaders in their own field and research niche, administrators often consider the "expert" in deciding what is okay and what is not to be the PI. Unless there is documented evidence, paper trails, or direct proof, I would expect the university to chalk your situation up to a simple miscommunication. I encourage you to do the right thing, but also to tread carefully. Consider another serious conversation with the PI and ask for clarification. Make your concerns clear and then decide what to do based on their response. A premature jump to reporting them can do more harm to you than to them, and it could get you "blacklisted" in terms of your professional career if this person is truly unethical but able to escape justice. Good luck, OP!

The morally correct thing to do would be to report it to a student ombudsman, higher-ups the university, the IRB, etc. I’m not familiar with Italian universities to know if all of those exist but I’d guess they do. You’ll definitely risk retaliation and even if you don’t you may just want to leave the institution at that point.

ys57oa

askacademia_train

Human: My PI is asking me to falsify data. What is my recourse? I am a postdoc at an Italian research university. In a meeting yesterday, my PI and a senior professor instructed me to rush necessary foundational research and greatly overstate the reliability of certain data in order to produce results that would generate a great deal of press. This is data falsification. I will not be a part of it, but I have never dealt with a similar situation. What next? Assistant:

ivxmm8n

ivy0bao

The morally correct thing to do would be to report it to a student ombudsman, higher-ups the university, the IRB, etc. I’m not familiar with Italian universities to know if all of those exist but I’d guess they do. You’ll definitely risk retaliation and even if you don’t you may just want to leave the institution at that point.

There's a difference between interpretation of existing real data and outright fabrication of new data points that never existed. Based on what you wrote (I don't and can't know what the situation actually is like), this can be - or can at least sold as - a difference in opinion on how to interpret existing real data. In this case, it should be caught up in peer review and if it isn't, you can issue an Errata. That's my "Devil's advocate" take on this.

ys57oa

askacademia_train

Human: My PI is asking me to falsify data. What is my recourse? I am a postdoc at an Italian research university. In a meeting yesterday, my PI and a senior professor instructed me to rush necessary foundational research and greatly overstate the reliability of certain data in order to produce results that would generate a great deal of press. This is data falsification. I will not be a part of it, but I have never dealt with a similar situation. What next? Assistant:

ivy5j9p

ivy5k5a

Send an email to them and ask them if they can clarify & verify what was said so you can create the “paper trail” if there is not one already. If you have no evidence and it’s your word against theirs you will lose. If you proceed and anything happens they will throw you under the bus. There is a reason they’re asking you to do this and not doing it themselves.

I’ve been in a somewhat similar situation in the past where a PI told me in person to do unethical conduct. I definitely agree that if all you have is your word, don’t report it yet. The PI will just say you’re lying or misunderstood and you won’t get anywhere. Think hard about what you would want to get out of reporting, and what costs you are willing to pay. Losing your career is always a possibility when going up against a supervisor. My strategy was generally to write an email where I would essentially put my supervisor in a corner to agree that I should actually behave ethically. So like, if my PI in person said “we need this data completed in four weeks, so do unethical thing X”. My email might say, “Hi PI, I was making my plans based on our meeting. I know you said we want data completed in four weeks. Obviously I have to do (ethical thing), so on reflection, I don’t see a way to make the four week goal. Perhaps we could instead (do ethical thing - say maybe complete data in eight weeks)?” This does a few things: it puts in writing that doing the unethical thing is bad, so your PI knows you are unwilling to be unethical for them. It pushes your PI to either change what they are asking, or respond *in writing* asking you to do the unethical thing. (Of course they can just talk more in person? But then it’s weird to not respond to the email.) It sort of hints to your PI that you are getting things in writing, and so maybe they should be more careful about not asking you to do unethical things, because maybe you might try to report them. Every time I did this, my PI changed what he was asking and was willing to do the ethical route. It did make our relationship more strained / tense? But I was able to manage it and move on to the next stage of my career, with a reasonably good recommendation from my PI. If you can, it might also be good to confide in someone you trust who is familiar with your situation- another student, or a past supervisor. That will provide you with some backup if you need it later, and they also might be able to give better advice about how to handle your particular situation than us strangers on the internet.

ys57oa

askacademia_train

Human: My PI is asking me to falsify data. What is my recourse? I am a postdoc at an Italian research university. In a meeting yesterday, my PI and a senior professor instructed me to rush necessary foundational research and greatly overstate the reliability of certain data in order to produce results that would generate a great deal of press. This is data falsification. I will not be a part of it, but I have never dealt with a similar situation. What next? Assistant:

ivy5k5a

ivxmm8n

I’ve been in a somewhat similar situation in the past where a PI told me in person to do unethical conduct. I definitely agree that if all you have is your word, don’t report it yet. The PI will just say you’re lying or misunderstood and you won’t get anywhere. Think hard about what you would want to get out of reporting, and what costs you are willing to pay. Losing your career is always a possibility when going up against a supervisor. My strategy was generally to write an email where I would essentially put my supervisor in a corner to agree that I should actually behave ethically. So like, if my PI in person said “we need this data completed in four weeks, so do unethical thing X”. My email might say, “Hi PI, I was making my plans based on our meeting. I know you said we want data completed in four weeks. Obviously I have to do (ethical thing), so on reflection, I don’t see a way to make the four week goal. Perhaps we could instead (do ethical thing - say maybe complete data in eight weeks)?” This does a few things: it puts in writing that doing the unethical thing is bad, so your PI knows you are unwilling to be unethical for them. It pushes your PI to either change what they are asking, or respond *in writing* asking you to do the unethical thing. (Of course they can just talk more in person? But then it’s weird to not respond to the email.) It sort of hints to your PI that you are getting things in writing, and so maybe they should be more careful about not asking you to do unethical things, because maybe you might try to report them. Every time I did this, my PI changed what he was asking and was willing to do the ethical route. It did make our relationship more strained / tense? But I was able to manage it and move on to the next stage of my career, with a reasonably good recommendation from my PI. If you can, it might also be good to confide in someone you trust who is familiar with your situation- another student, or a past supervisor. That will provide you with some backup if you need it later, and they also might be able to give better advice about how to handle your particular situation than us strangers on the internet.

The morally correct thing to do would be to report it to a student ombudsman, higher-ups the university, the IRB, etc. I’m not familiar with Italian universities to know if all of those exist but I’d guess they do. You’ll definitely risk retaliation and even if you don’t you may just want to leave the institution at that point.

ys57oa

askacademia_train

Human: My PI is asking me to falsify data. What is my recourse? I am a postdoc at an Italian research university. In a meeting yesterday, my PI and a senior professor instructed me to rush necessary foundational research and greatly overstate the reliability of certain data in order to produce results that would generate a great deal of press. This is data falsification. I will not be a part of it, but I have never dealt with a similar situation. What next? Assistant:

ivxmm8n

ivy5j9p

The morally correct thing to do would be to report it to a student ombudsman, higher-ups the university, the IRB, etc. I’m not familiar with Italian universities to know if all of those exist but I’d guess they do. You’ll definitely risk retaliation and even if you don’t you may just want to leave the institution at that point.

Send an email to them and ask them if they can clarify & verify what was said so you can create the “paper trail” if there is not one already. If you have no evidence and it’s your word against theirs you will lose. If you proceed and anything happens they will throw you under the bus. There is a reason they’re asking you to do this and not doing it themselves.

ux6c0w

askacademia_train

Human: How do you guys cope with non-academic family members over-celebrating accomplishments? I receive what I would consider to be a participation award, and they go on and on about how I am somehow one of the most accomplished graduate students at my university. I mention that I am having a discussion with an advisor about the possibility of pursuing a patent, and they go around pretty much telling people that I have a patent. Etc. Obviously I really appreciate my family’s support, but when their excitement and celebrations feel disproportionate to the actual achievement, it makes me feel strange. I can’t quite pin down what the emotion is. It can be offsetting because even though I am actually excited about something, I then feel the need to repeatedly explain to them why it’s not actually as exciting as they think. And when I do try to explain, no one listens to or believes me/they say I’m just being modest, which can be pretty frustrating. How do you manage these sorts of situations? Assistant:

i9w036g

i9wbzak

When I read the title I thought this was about family celebrating/making a bigger deal about the accomplishments of nonacademics so they don't feel inadequate. Like down playing the accomplishments of their kid getting a PhD, while telling everyone/anyone who will listen about their high school drop out/quits everything other kid buying a camper van to sell cupcakes from (who didn't research and has no permits for this idea). This way sucks. It's great that your family is supportive. It's innocent and sweet. Maybe they don't understand 100% of what you do/study, let them cheer you on. If it makes them happy, why not.

Got my first decent sized grant and my Dad told me it was a waste of tax money so just enjoy their enthusiasm 😂

ux6c0w

askacademia_train

Human: How do you guys cope with non-academic family members over-celebrating accomplishments? I receive what I would consider to be a participation award, and they go on and on about how I am somehow one of the most accomplished graduate students at my university. I mention that I am having a discussion with an advisor about the possibility of pursuing a patent, and they go around pretty much telling people that I have a patent. Etc. Obviously I really appreciate my family’s support, but when their excitement and celebrations feel disproportionate to the actual achievement, it makes me feel strange. I can’t quite pin down what the emotion is. It can be offsetting because even though I am actually excited about something, I then feel the need to repeatedly explain to them why it’s not actually as exciting as they think. And when I do try to explain, no one listens to or believes me/they say I’m just being modest, which can be pretty frustrating. How do you manage these sorts of situations? Assistant:

i9wbzak

i9w1434

Got my first decent sized grant and my Dad told me it was a waste of tax money so just enjoy their enthusiasm 😂

Honestly, count your blessings--plenty of grad students (myself included) have the opposite problem, with family members who think we don't do anything all day and don't understand our accomplishments at all.

ux6c0w

askacademia_train

Human: How do you guys cope with non-academic family members over-celebrating accomplishments? I receive what I would consider to be a participation award, and they go on and on about how I am somehow one of the most accomplished graduate students at my university. I mention that I am having a discussion with an advisor about the possibility of pursuing a patent, and they go around pretty much telling people that I have a patent. Etc. Obviously I really appreciate my family’s support, but when their excitement and celebrations feel disproportionate to the actual achievement, it makes me feel strange. I can’t quite pin down what the emotion is. It can be offsetting because even though I am actually excited about something, I then feel the need to repeatedly explain to them why it’s not actually as exciting as they think. And when I do try to explain, no one listens to or believes me/they say I’m just being modest, which can be pretty frustrating. How do you manage these sorts of situations? Assistant:

i9w9v7q

i9wbzak

They’re proud of you, and they love you. That’s what people do when they’re proud of someone. It sounds like you’re pretty humble about it, but it’s okay for you to be proud of yourself too.

Got my first decent sized grant and my Dad told me it was a waste of tax money so just enjoy their enthusiasm 😂

ux6c0w

askacademia_train

Human: How do you guys cope with non-academic family members over-celebrating accomplishments? I receive what I would consider to be a participation award, and they go on and on about how I am somehow one of the most accomplished graduate students at my university. I mention that I am having a discussion with an advisor about the possibility of pursuing a patent, and they go around pretty much telling people that I have a patent. Etc. Obviously I really appreciate my family’s support, but when their excitement and celebrations feel disproportionate to the actual achievement, it makes me feel strange. I can’t quite pin down what the emotion is. It can be offsetting because even though I am actually excited about something, I then feel the need to repeatedly explain to them why it’s not actually as exciting as they think. And when I do try to explain, no one listens to or believes me/they say I’m just being modest, which can be pretty frustrating. How do you manage these sorts of situations? Assistant:

i9w0rah

i9wbzak

I would cut ties, they seem to have some hidden motives. Like love or appreciation for you, both of which I detest and would recommend you do the same.

Got my first decent sized grant and my Dad told me it was a waste of tax money so just enjoy their enthusiasm 😂

ux6c0w

askacademia_train

Human: How do you guys cope with non-academic family members over-celebrating accomplishments? I receive what I would consider to be a participation award, and they go on and on about how I am somehow one of the most accomplished graduate students at my university. I mention that I am having a discussion with an advisor about the possibility of pursuing a patent, and they go around pretty much telling people that I have a patent. Etc. Obviously I really appreciate my family’s support, but when their excitement and celebrations feel disproportionate to the actual achievement, it makes me feel strange. I can’t quite pin down what the emotion is. It can be offsetting because even though I am actually excited about something, I then feel the need to repeatedly explain to them why it’s not actually as exciting as they think. And when I do try to explain, no one listens to or believes me/they say I’m just being modest, which can be pretty frustrating. How do you manage these sorts of situations? Assistant:

i9w1434

i9wiimv

Honestly, count your blessings--plenty of grad students (myself included) have the opposite problem, with family members who think we don't do anything all day and don't understand our accomplishments at all.

I was embarrassed too at first. Then for a while I let them have their excitement. Now as I pass the midpoint of my career (just turned 44) I'm coming to agree with them. The things we do - making inventions and discoveries, filing patents, publishing in scientific journals, giving talks at international conferences, winning 6- or 7-figure research grants - are all achievements to be proud of. I'm very priveleged to have a job where this is what I do for a living. We do incredible things 9 to 5.

rm119y

askacademia_train

Human: When did the publishing model become so effed up? I don’t think there is a business model where an entity gets paid for acquiring the product and selling it! I understand if authors pay to publish in not-for-profit journals. But how come we have to pay to publish in for profit journals and endure all the biases of selection and even unqualified reviewers (Even in big name journals)? When did that become acceptable? And shouldn’t we do something about it? Assistant:

hpjqxd1

hpjjayn

Well maybe if we allowed scholarly activities that aren’t published articles to count for tenure then this problem would disappear.

I pay tax for science. Science gets published. I have to pay to read what I payed for. Please start from here! How should anti-vaxers read science if they don’t have access to it? Ex: The 2 page justifications for brain-death made by the Ad-Hoc Brain Dead committee is behind a 35€ paywall. It’s not like brain death is a big part of modern medicine. I think there is a lot of disregard for the ones that work a 9-5 to pay taxes. And there is also the Elseviers that bribed scientists to think that selling their rights to a company is a good ideea. And now, the cherry on top, the “you will not get taken seriously if you don’t publish to us” argument. Hypernormalisation…

rm119y

askacademia_train

Human: When did the publishing model become so effed up? I don’t think there is a business model where an entity gets paid for acquiring the product and selling it! I understand if authors pay to publish in not-for-profit journals. But how come we have to pay to publish in for profit journals and endure all the biases of selection and even unqualified reviewers (Even in big name journals)? When did that become acceptable? And shouldn’t we do something about it? Assistant:

hpjqxd1

hpje5fy

Well maybe if we allowed scholarly activities that aren’t published articles to count for tenure then this problem would disappear.

The problem, my friend, is that you think of academic publishing as a business. It isn't. Research and academia, by and large, are activities funded by the State and academics are similar to government employees. Publishing companies are also looking to suck some of that sweet, sweet government money from research grants. As a rule, anytime you have government money floating around and people want to grab it, tomfoolery happens. Public spending, pork barrelled projects, the list of Milton Friedman's and neoliberals' complaints about government inefficiency, defence spending, Military-Industrial-Congress-Complex, Yes, Minister/Prime Minister, etc ... Consider the publishing fee the cost of keeping the moderation and quality up. Editors from cracked.com once pointed out that any unmoderated forum turns into a white supremacist and conspiracy theorist cesspit. Yes, journals charge us through the nose, but they hire editors. Our conspiracy theorist uncles that "did his research" are free, but don't cut it. If you think of the solution to be along the neoliberal and libertarian "get government out", "small government", "free market", "deregulation", then well, look at the eroding trusts in science, research, scientists, academia, governments, institutions, and what not. We have been doing this for decades and look at where it got us. The only thing I can say is to be conscious of the role of academia and research vis-à-vis society and the role of State power and money vis-à-vis academia and research. My nemesis is of course Milton Friedman and his adherents, for he, too, sucked on that sweet government money for decades before jumping on the soapbox and launching the movement against it.

rm119y

askacademia_train

Human: When did the publishing model become so effed up? I don’t think there is a business model where an entity gets paid for acquiring the product and selling it! I understand if authors pay to publish in not-for-profit journals. But how come we have to pay to publish in for profit journals and endure all the biases of selection and even unqualified reviewers (Even in big name journals)? When did that become acceptable? And shouldn’t we do something about it? Assistant:

hpjjayn

hpjk0pu

I pay tax for science. Science gets published. I have to pay to read what I payed for. Please start from here! How should anti-vaxers read science if they don’t have access to it? Ex: The 2 page justifications for brain-death made by the Ad-Hoc Brain Dead committee is behind a 35€ paywall. It’s not like brain death is a big part of modern medicine. I think there is a lot of disregard for the ones that work a 9-5 to pay taxes. And there is also the Elseviers that bribed scientists to think that selling their rights to a company is a good ideea. And now, the cherry on top, the “you will not get taken seriously if you don’t publish to us” argument. Hypernormalisation…

The solution should come from the top. Ban publicly funded research from being published in privately owned journals and at the same time fund university owned journals. There are very slow and shy moves in this direction, but nothing big.

rm119y

askacademia_train

Human: When did the publishing model become so effed up? I don’t think there is a business model where an entity gets paid for acquiring the product and selling it! I understand if authors pay to publish in not-for-profit journals. But how come we have to pay to publish in for profit journals and endure all the biases of selection and even unqualified reviewers (Even in big name journals)? When did that become acceptable? And shouldn’t we do something about it? Assistant:

hpjk0pu

hpje5fy

The solution should come from the top. Ban publicly funded research from being published in privately owned journals and at the same time fund university owned journals. There are very slow and shy moves in this direction, but nothing big.

The problem, my friend, is that you think of academic publishing as a business. It isn't. Research and academia, by and large, are activities funded by the State and academics are similar to government employees. Publishing companies are also looking to suck some of that sweet, sweet government money from research grants. As a rule, anytime you have government money floating around and people want to grab it, tomfoolery happens. Public spending, pork barrelled projects, the list of Milton Friedman's and neoliberals' complaints about government inefficiency, defence spending, Military-Industrial-Congress-Complex, Yes, Minister/Prime Minister, etc ... Consider the publishing fee the cost of keeping the moderation and quality up. Editors from cracked.com once pointed out that any unmoderated forum turns into a white supremacist and conspiracy theorist cesspit. Yes, journals charge us through the nose, but they hire editors. Our conspiracy theorist uncles that "did his research" are free, but don't cut it. If you think of the solution to be along the neoliberal and libertarian "get government out", "small government", "free market", "deregulation", then well, look at the eroding trusts in science, research, scientists, academia, governments, institutions, and what not. We have been doing this for decades and look at where it got us. The only thing I can say is to be conscious of the role of academia and research vis-à-vis society and the role of State power and money vis-à-vis academia and research. My nemesis is of course Milton Friedman and his adherents, for he, too, sucked on that sweet government money for decades before jumping on the soapbox and launching the movement against it.

rm119y

askacademia_train

Human: When did the publishing model become so effed up? I don’t think there is a business model where an entity gets paid for acquiring the product and selling it! I understand if authors pay to publish in not-for-profit journals. But how come we have to pay to publish in for profit journals and endure all the biases of selection and even unqualified reviewers (Even in big name journals)? When did that become acceptable? And shouldn’t we do something about it? Assistant:

hpjg9hi

hpje5fy

>I understand if authors pay to publish in not-for-profit journals. Buthow come we have to pay to publish in for profit journals and endure all the biases of selection and even unqualified reviewers (Even in bignme journals)? We don't, *but* there's a constant cost-benefit analysis taking place here and a constant struggle over how much power each stakeholder has: Does one publish in a journal that reaps profits but which is more likely to cede greater attention (read: *not* access) to his or her research? Does one publish in an open-access journal, which may or may not charge a publishing fee, and which may or may not have recognition in the field but which will allow a greater number of people to access the research? Does one publish independently and retain greater control over the final product but run the risk of having this research not be viewed as a 'real' publication? Etc. I don't know the answer or solution to what you're describing here, as many of the problems have almost nothing to do with the publishing model itself: If a faculty member could lose his or her job by not publishing in for-profit journals, then this reinforces the need for and existence of those journals. If a faculty member can publish in whichever type of journal he or she desires, then this could erode the quality of published results. If a faculty member can publish independently, then what prevents a layperson from otherwise 'becoming' a faculty member? Sorry, I have no answers -- just more gasoline for the trash fire.

The problem, my friend, is that you think of academic publishing as a business. It isn't. Research and academia, by and large, are activities funded by the State and academics are similar to government employees. Publishing companies are also looking to suck some of that sweet, sweet government money from research grants. As a rule, anytime you have government money floating around and people want to grab it, tomfoolery happens. Public spending, pork barrelled projects, the list of Milton Friedman's and neoliberals' complaints about government inefficiency, defence spending, Military-Industrial-Congress-Complex, Yes, Minister/Prime Minister, etc ... Consider the publishing fee the cost of keeping the moderation and quality up. Editors from cracked.com once pointed out that any unmoderated forum turns into a white supremacist and conspiracy theorist cesspit. Yes, journals charge us through the nose, but they hire editors. Our conspiracy theorist uncles that "did his research" are free, but don't cut it. If you think of the solution to be along the neoliberal and libertarian "get government out", "small government", "free market", "deregulation", then well, look at the eroding trusts in science, research, scientists, academia, governments, institutions, and what not. We have been doing this for decades and look at where it got us. The only thing I can say is to be conscious of the role of academia and research vis-à-vis society and the role of State power and money vis-à-vis academia and research. My nemesis is of course Milton Friedman and his adherents, for he, too, sucked on that sweet government money for decades before jumping on the soapbox and launching the movement against it.

jc7vv5

askacademia_train

Human: PhD students, how much of your time is spent on administrative tasks? It's mentally exhausting. I keep track of my time, and I can see that over the past year and a half, 26% of my time was spent between meetings, preparing for meetings, filling out university and committee forms, and reading and writing emails. Is this normal? This is not including the time I spend preparing for classes and teaching either, so there are some weeks where I feel like I haven't actually worked on anything. That's not to say that meetings are not productive - they're often necessary. I've just realized how long it takes to prepare for them, and of course that's something I need to work on. I'm just curious if people have more or less administrative stuff to do and whether it also feels like an added mental drain or whether it feels like something that is more integrated with your research as a whole. Assistant:

g8zr6y0

g8zsdt7

Filling out forms should not take up that much time in a yearly perspective. Email is an important communication, asking for advice, responding to queries . If you’re spending alot of time composing emails then i would worry. Admin tasks are part of life, completing online trainings , updating profiles, organizing info. My research group had weekly meetings plus presentations every couple of weeks so at some point i stopped prepping for the subgroup meetings with the proper format unless i had plots and data. Many times it was just a discussion, however going back it was helpful to see what experiments were done which week and easy to search. As an organizational nut, i spent alot of time on planning out my week making schedules and calendars each week for which lab if be working in, admin tasks, home adult tasks, TA duties , other job duties Ill end with my long windy response to your question with not really, and it only increases with industry in my experience. Now, Its a 3 step process to download and run software to use for work lol

Maybe this is just me, but I would not consider preparing for meetings and email correspondence with advisors to be administrative. Preparing for meetings allows you to think about all your updates and distill them, communicate them clearly and solicit feedback. Advisors, committee members and even collaborators are busy people, if you do not invest sufficient time in communicating well with them, you fail to use them properly. This is very valuable skill, learned over time. The rest of the stuff you describe (barring teaching) generally does not occupy much of my time, maybe \~5% at most? It's true that when we teach, it can feel unproductive, but I encourage you to consider a different perspective: when I do research I'm often stuck and real progress comes sporadically, so teaching can actually make me feel productive: I've actually helped someone learn!

jc7vv5

askacademia_train

Human: PhD students, how much of your time is spent on administrative tasks? It's mentally exhausting. I keep track of my time, and I can see that over the past year and a half, 26% of my time was spent between meetings, preparing for meetings, filling out university and committee forms, and reading and writing emails. Is this normal? This is not including the time I spend preparing for classes and teaching either, so there are some weeks where I feel like I haven't actually worked on anything. That's not to say that meetings are not productive - they're often necessary. I've just realized how long it takes to prepare for them, and of course that's something I need to work on. I'm just curious if people have more or less administrative stuff to do and whether it also feels like an added mental drain or whether it feels like something that is more integrated with your research as a whole. Assistant:

g8zr6y0

g8zyfz8

Filling out forms should not take up that much time in a yearly perspective. Email is an important communication, asking for advice, responding to queries . If you’re spending alot of time composing emails then i would worry. Admin tasks are part of life, completing online trainings , updating profiles, organizing info. My research group had weekly meetings plus presentations every couple of weeks so at some point i stopped prepping for the subgroup meetings with the proper format unless i had plots and data. Many times it was just a discussion, however going back it was helpful to see what experiments were done which week and easy to search. As an organizational nut, i spent alot of time on planning out my week making schedules and calendars each week for which lab if be working in, admin tasks, home adult tasks, TA duties , other job duties Ill end with my long windy response to your question with not really, and it only increases with industry in my experience. Now, Its a 3 step process to download and run software to use for work lol

It seems like you think that if you aren’t being in the lab, working at a bench, you aren’t dosing science. Presenting data to your lab group (and preparing for it), meeting with your advisor, emailing with people about projects, filling out forms (you say you only do 4-5 hours a year which isn’t worth worrying about, but generally there are tasks like obtaining and maintaining approval for experiments, doing budgets, keeping current with safety protocols etc)— all of that is also science. It’s just part of the real job of a scientist not the fantasy of a job as a scientist. Grad school is in part for you to do a dissertation but also for you to gain the skills you need to know to go to your next position- all of these things will take more time as you move up. I would reframe what you’re thinking of as ‘administrative’, these are all important skills too.

jc7vv5

askacademia_train

Human: PhD students, how much of your time is spent on administrative tasks? It's mentally exhausting. I keep track of my time, and I can see that over the past year and a half, 26% of my time was spent between meetings, preparing for meetings, filling out university and committee forms, and reading and writing emails. Is this normal? This is not including the time I spend preparing for classes and teaching either, so there are some weeks where I feel like I haven't actually worked on anything. That's not to say that meetings are not productive - they're often necessary. I've just realized how long it takes to prepare for them, and of course that's something I need to work on. I'm just curious if people have more or less administrative stuff to do and whether it also feels like an added mental drain or whether it feels like something that is more integrated with your research as a whole. Assistant:

g8zyfz8

g8zxfe3

It seems like you think that if you aren’t being in the lab, working at a bench, you aren’t dosing science. Presenting data to your lab group (and preparing for it), meeting with your advisor, emailing with people about projects, filling out forms (you say you only do 4-5 hours a year which isn’t worth worrying about, but generally there are tasks like obtaining and maintaining approval for experiments, doing budgets, keeping current with safety protocols etc)— all of that is also science. It’s just part of the real job of a scientist not the fantasy of a job as a scientist. Grad school is in part for you to do a dissertation but also for you to gain the skills you need to know to go to your next position- all of these things will take more time as you move up. I would reframe what you’re thinking of as ‘administrative’, these are all important skills too.

I have 3 RA jobs and one teaching assistant job. Sometimes, 60%of my time in a week is just meetings, with 25% being time taken up by emails. I would say I work fulltime and do my PhD work on the side. Meetings are exhausting and draining but my jobs pay well enough. If you don't have any RAs or TAs, I'm not sure what forms you're filling out. I only have to complete one annual form related to my PhD work. Edit: just noticed your STEM flare. We probably havent different experiences, I'm in humanities

jc7vv5

askacademia_train

Human: PhD students, how much of your time is spent on administrative tasks? It's mentally exhausting. I keep track of my time, and I can see that over the past year and a half, 26% of my time was spent between meetings, preparing for meetings, filling out university and committee forms, and reading and writing emails. Is this normal? This is not including the time I spend preparing for classes and teaching either, so there are some weeks where I feel like I haven't actually worked on anything. That's not to say that meetings are not productive - they're often necessary. I've just realized how long it takes to prepare for them, and of course that's something I need to work on. I'm just curious if people have more or less administrative stuff to do and whether it also feels like an added mental drain or whether it feels like something that is more integrated with your research as a whole. Assistant:

g8ztrrn

g8zyfz8

Learn to say “no”.

It seems like you think that if you aren’t being in the lab, working at a bench, you aren’t dosing science. Presenting data to your lab group (and preparing for it), meeting with your advisor, emailing with people about projects, filling out forms (you say you only do 4-5 hours a year which isn’t worth worrying about, but generally there are tasks like obtaining and maintaining approval for experiments, doing budgets, keeping current with safety protocols etc)— all of that is also science. It’s just part of the real job of a scientist not the fantasy of a job as a scientist. Grad school is in part for you to do a dissertation but also for you to gain the skills you need to know to go to your next position- all of these things will take more time as you move up. I would reframe what you’re thinking of as ‘administrative’, these are all important skills too.

jc7vv5

askacademia_train

Human: PhD students, how much of your time is spent on administrative tasks? It's mentally exhausting. I keep track of my time, and I can see that over the past year and a half, 26% of my time was spent between meetings, preparing for meetings, filling out university and committee forms, and reading and writing emails. Is this normal? This is not including the time I spend preparing for classes and teaching either, so there are some weeks where I feel like I haven't actually worked on anything. That's not to say that meetings are not productive - they're often necessary. I've just realized how long it takes to prepare for them, and of course that's something I need to work on. I'm just curious if people have more or less administrative stuff to do and whether it also feels like an added mental drain or whether it feels like something that is more integrated with your research as a whole. Assistant:

g8zzig4

g9051wv

Welcome to academia. This is what all of your faculty are doing, in a larger scale.

Not one of those is even close to being an "administrative task"

ev5i7e

askacademia_train

Human: What drama is happening in your department right now? After hearing some interesting tales of pettiness, I'm looking to hear yours. What drama is happening among your department or school now? How do you plan to cope with it? Assistant:

fftrlnd

fftp5ig

There are rumors that the head of my program is leaving. The starter of those rumors? The head of my program.

Department chair who wants to remove all MA, MFA people from full-time NTT (not adjuncts to clarify) positions who teach lower division courses and replace them with newly minted PhDs for the same low wages, therefore diluting the actual value and work of a PhD. Oh, and the PhDs who take such positions will never have the opportunity to advance to a TT position. Ethics at it’s finest. 😒

ev5i7e

askacademia_train

Human: What drama is happening in your department right now? After hearing some interesting tales of pettiness, I'm looking to hear yours. What drama is happening among your department or school now? How do you plan to cope with it? Assistant:

fftr9yz

fftrlnd

Our Department was officially shut down! Reduced to a MA only Program and faculty dispersed throughout other departments. Embarrassing. Largely a product of an ultra conservative "run the University like a business" President, but also certainly due to a Department that was mired in political divisions and poor job placement after graduation.

There are rumors that the head of my program is leaving. The starter of those rumors? The head of my program.

ev5i7e

askacademia_train

Human: What drama is happening in your department right now? After hearing some interesting tales of pettiness, I'm looking to hear yours. What drama is happening among your department or school now? How do you plan to cope with it? Assistant:

fftrlnd

fftrj57

There are rumors that the head of my program is leaving. The starter of those rumors? The head of my program.

PI has a chronic illness that incapacitates them for 4-6 weeks every 6-12 months. Totally at random, no warning at all. Same PI insists on supervising all their grad students in the lab, and forbids them from even going in when PI is off sick, unless they are in constant text based contact while in there. Slows everyone's research to a grinding halt, then it takes another couple of weeks to get caught up when PI comes back. PI is not open to suggestions that there may be a better way to manage this, ie let students have a bit more autonomy, maybe stop committing to every single project that crops up, have some trusted people in the lab who can take over temporarily...

ev5i7e

askacademia_train

Human: What drama is happening in your department right now? After hearing some interesting tales of pettiness, I'm looking to hear yours. What drama is happening among your department or school now? How do you plan to cope with it? Assistant:

fftiite

fftrlnd

Bigger drama, Consolidation of multi campus university. We've had a long period of massive expansion of the number of students thanks to baby boomers, plus an expansion in public sector financing. Now, enrollments are low and state is pushing for consolidation.

There are rumors that the head of my program is leaving. The starter of those rumors? The head of my program.

ev5i7e

askacademia_train

Human: What drama is happening in your department right now? After hearing some interesting tales of pettiness, I'm looking to hear yours. What drama is happening among your department or school now? How do you plan to cope with it? Assistant:

fftqcff

fftrlnd

They're doing Lend Me a Tenor but I think that's technically a comedy.

There are rumors that the head of my program is leaving. The starter of those rumors? The head of my program.

j9bjps

askacademia_train

Human: No matter what I do, I keep feeling the pull back to higher ed. I'm 28 and will probably apply for a PhD next year but feel like I'm too old and the market is too volatile. Thoughts? I graduated from university several years ago now. I had intended to apply for a PhD straight out but didn't due to a combination of health issues, feeling insecure about my chosen PhD project, and imposter syndrome. Well, at the end of last year it became clear to me that my mind was never going to stop gravitating back to higher ed. I just fucking loved it. I loved taking classes, I loved going to guest lectures and panels and doc screenings, and I really loved being a research assistant. And, in a weird way, I felt a sense of kinship with my discipline (in the social sciences) and my professors. It's hard to not feel gushy about it all, but I felt it then (even when it wasn't easy) and I feel it now. My intention was to apply this year but all things 2020 really took a toll on me mentally, to the point where it really started to impact my physical health. So, sadly, I am not ready to apply for programs this cycle (and a lot of programs closed their admissions anyway). At this point, the insecurities have started flooding in. Partially because I feel like I'll be starting my PhD very old and that it will make me incredibly unattractive in an already unstable and volatile higher ed market. There is also the good ol' imposter syndrome drilling away at me HARD. I'm honestly just looking for any personal advice/thoughts. No one else in my life has any real grasp on the academic or higher ed space. So I'd just love to talk to someone about this. Assistant:

g8iwugi

g8iwvcl

I hate the term "imposter syndrome". Sometimes you really do suck and just should not be getting a PhD or at least a PhD in a particular field. Let people sort it out for themselves which situation they're in.

I wouldn't say your age is a factor that would impact how you are viewed, but could impact you just due to life stage- do you have/want children? Will you be able to move freely for field work or future employment? Or are you more tied down? Also consider you won't be saving money and kinda sucks to start retirement savings in your late 30s. The bigger thing is to realize how few people land an academic job. Make sure you are going in informed on how unlikely that is, how much adjuncting can suck, and what other careers you could do with your degree. If all that sounds ok, go for it.

j9bjps

askacademia_train

Human: No matter what I do, I keep feeling the pull back to higher ed. I'm 28 and will probably apply for a PhD next year but feel like I'm too old and the market is too volatile. Thoughts? I graduated from university several years ago now. I had intended to apply for a PhD straight out but didn't due to a combination of health issues, feeling insecure about my chosen PhD project, and imposter syndrome. Well, at the end of last year it became clear to me that my mind was never going to stop gravitating back to higher ed. I just fucking loved it. I loved taking classes, I loved going to guest lectures and panels and doc screenings, and I really loved being a research assistant. And, in a weird way, I felt a sense of kinship with my discipline (in the social sciences) and my professors. It's hard to not feel gushy about it all, but I felt it then (even when it wasn't easy) and I feel it now. My intention was to apply this year but all things 2020 really took a toll on me mentally, to the point where it really started to impact my physical health. So, sadly, I am not ready to apply for programs this cycle (and a lot of programs closed their admissions anyway). At this point, the insecurities have started flooding in. Partially because I feel like I'll be starting my PhD very old and that it will make me incredibly unattractive in an already unstable and volatile higher ed market. There is also the good ol' imposter syndrome drilling away at me HARD. I'm honestly just looking for any personal advice/thoughts. No one else in my life has any real grasp on the academic or higher ed space. So I'd just love to talk to someone about this. Assistant:

g8jcu2q

g8jrk0m

I went back in my 30s with a husband and kid. Age wasn’t a big problem for me. I think it was an advantage because I was focused and knew what I wanted. The family made it harder since about 1% of grad students at my R1 had one, and it meant I couldn’t stay up all night working on research. There is an opportunity cost to not earning a real salary and retirement during those (six for me) prime earning years, especially if you don’t end up with a job.

My opinion probably will get downvoted, but it needs to be shared. Think long and hard before entering a purely academic-oriented discipline. It's so easy to get lulled into the idea of "pursuing your passion against all odds," but that on its own won't pay the bills. Ask yourself this: What do you currently do for employment? Are there ways you can leverage your interest in research, data, and analysis within your current line of work? I'm not in academia (I'm admin in higher ed), but I can honestly say from hearing what others go through that it's not worth pigeon holing yourself to a life of adjuncting.

j9bjps

askacademia_train

Human: No matter what I do, I keep feeling the pull back to higher ed. I'm 28 and will probably apply for a PhD next year but feel like I'm too old and the market is too volatile. Thoughts? I graduated from university several years ago now. I had intended to apply for a PhD straight out but didn't due to a combination of health issues, feeling insecure about my chosen PhD project, and imposter syndrome. Well, at the end of last year it became clear to me that my mind was never going to stop gravitating back to higher ed. I just fucking loved it. I loved taking classes, I loved going to guest lectures and panels and doc screenings, and I really loved being a research assistant. And, in a weird way, I felt a sense of kinship with my discipline (in the social sciences) and my professors. It's hard to not feel gushy about it all, but I felt it then (even when it wasn't easy) and I feel it now. My intention was to apply this year but all things 2020 really took a toll on me mentally, to the point where it really started to impact my physical health. So, sadly, I am not ready to apply for programs this cycle (and a lot of programs closed their admissions anyway). At this point, the insecurities have started flooding in. Partially because I feel like I'll be starting my PhD very old and that it will make me incredibly unattractive in an already unstable and volatile higher ed market. There is also the good ol' imposter syndrome drilling away at me HARD. I'm honestly just looking for any personal advice/thoughts. No one else in my life has any real grasp on the academic or higher ed space. So I'd just love to talk to someone about this. Assistant:

g8jgihv

g8jrk0m

I didn't even start my *bachelor's* until your age and I'm doing a STEM PhD. You're letting your insecurities get the better of you, my friend.

My opinion probably will get downvoted, but it needs to be shared. Think long and hard before entering a purely academic-oriented discipline. It's so easy to get lulled into the idea of "pursuing your passion against all odds," but that on its own won't pay the bills. Ask yourself this: What do you currently do for employment? Are there ways you can leverage your interest in research, data, and analysis within your current line of work? I'm not in academia (I'm admin in higher ed), but I can honestly say from hearing what others go through that it's not worth pigeon holing yourself to a life of adjuncting.

j9bjps

askacademia_train

Human: No matter what I do, I keep feeling the pull back to higher ed. I'm 28 and will probably apply for a PhD next year but feel like I'm too old and the market is too volatile. Thoughts? I graduated from university several years ago now. I had intended to apply for a PhD straight out but didn't due to a combination of health issues, feeling insecure about my chosen PhD project, and imposter syndrome. Well, at the end of last year it became clear to me that my mind was never going to stop gravitating back to higher ed. I just fucking loved it. I loved taking classes, I loved going to guest lectures and panels and doc screenings, and I really loved being a research assistant. And, in a weird way, I felt a sense of kinship with my discipline (in the social sciences) and my professors. It's hard to not feel gushy about it all, but I felt it then (even when it wasn't easy) and I feel it now. My intention was to apply this year but all things 2020 really took a toll on me mentally, to the point where it really started to impact my physical health. So, sadly, I am not ready to apply for programs this cycle (and a lot of programs closed their admissions anyway). At this point, the insecurities have started flooding in. Partially because I feel like I'll be starting my PhD very old and that it will make me incredibly unattractive in an already unstable and volatile higher ed market. There is also the good ol' imposter syndrome drilling away at me HARD. I'm honestly just looking for any personal advice/thoughts. No one else in my life has any real grasp on the academic or higher ed space. So I'd just love to talk to someone about this. Assistant:

g8jrk0m

g8j2fus

My opinion probably will get downvoted, but it needs to be shared. Think long and hard before entering a purely academic-oriented discipline. It's so easy to get lulled into the idea of "pursuing your passion against all odds," but that on its own won't pay the bills. Ask yourself this: What do you currently do for employment? Are there ways you can leverage your interest in research, data, and analysis within your current line of work? I'm not in academia (I'm admin in higher ed), but I can honestly say from hearing what others go through that it's not worth pigeon holing yourself to a life of adjuncting.

Definitely not too old. My department typically hires between 30 and 45 year olds for TT positions. Also, age brings maturity. In retrospect, I was a clueless baby when I started my TT position in my 20s.

j9bjps

askacademia_train

Human: No matter what I do, I keep feeling the pull back to higher ed. I'm 28 and will probably apply for a PhD next year but feel like I'm too old and the market is too volatile. Thoughts? I graduated from university several years ago now. I had intended to apply for a PhD straight out but didn't due to a combination of health issues, feeling insecure about my chosen PhD project, and imposter syndrome. Well, at the end of last year it became clear to me that my mind was never going to stop gravitating back to higher ed. I just fucking loved it. I loved taking classes, I loved going to guest lectures and panels and doc screenings, and I really loved being a research assistant. And, in a weird way, I felt a sense of kinship with my discipline (in the social sciences) and my professors. It's hard to not feel gushy about it all, but I felt it then (even when it wasn't easy) and I feel it now. My intention was to apply this year but all things 2020 really took a toll on me mentally, to the point where it really started to impact my physical health. So, sadly, I am not ready to apply for programs this cycle (and a lot of programs closed their admissions anyway). At this point, the insecurities have started flooding in. Partially because I feel like I'll be starting my PhD very old and that it will make me incredibly unattractive in an already unstable and volatile higher ed market. There is also the good ol' imposter syndrome drilling away at me HARD. I'm honestly just looking for any personal advice/thoughts. No one else in my life has any real grasp on the academic or higher ed space. So I'd just love to talk to someone about this. Assistant:

g8jrk0m

g8jkqod

My opinion probably will get downvoted, but it needs to be shared. Think long and hard before entering a purely academic-oriented discipline. It's so easy to get lulled into the idea of "pursuing your passion against all odds," but that on its own won't pay the bills. Ask yourself this: What do you currently do for employment? Are there ways you can leverage your interest in research, data, and analysis within your current line of work? I'm not in academia (I'm admin in higher ed), but I can honestly say from hearing what others go through that it's not worth pigeon holing yourself to a life of adjuncting.

I’m 35 and pregnant with my second kid-I started mine this summer and have taken breaks due to health issues and childcare issues. I am aware this will take me a long time but because Im passionate about the work I do I think that will probably work out better for me. No need to rush. I’ve been told by numerous people that no one ever asks about how long it took you to complete the program-in terms of employers or higher ed institutions. I think it’s great you are following your passion and 28 is definitely not too old IMO Also in terms of the imposter syndrome I have also felt this and I found it really helpful to just take it one small chunk at a time and gradually gain mastery that way. You will slowly start to feel better about what you are capable of and your ability to learn. It’s ok to not know everything-it’s ok to notice gaps in your expertise and this is a great time to push yourself without shame or judgement. You got this!

ikhk2i

askacademia_train

Human: Middle-aged, burnout, hoping to leave academia Hello. I'm a researcher in a STEM field, formerly rather successful in terms of published papers, etc. Around three years ago I had a revelation that my research is nonsense: I'm publishing stuff that's peer reviewed by a clique, and read and applied by no one else. I will be looking to move out of academia, but: (1) firstly I need to work my technical skills to be up-to-date with what industry wants; (2) I need to shed all the negative energy and bitterness that I amassed throughout these years. So far (2) has been a real problem for me, partly due to being in my forties and never have worked outside of academia. I would really appreciate sharing positive stories and resources. Assistant:

g3l1ph9

g3ljoo7

There are “consulting engineers” companies who use a lot of people educated in various STEM fields. Advanced degrees can get you hired at a pretty decent rate. The downside is you have to be ready for conversations about your bill-ability and charge-ability rates, productivity, and a bunch of business pressure jargon.

> my research is nonsense > never have worked outside of academia I'm not in STEM and I'm not middle-aged, but I have worked outside of academia and, based on that, I want to encourage you to temper your expectations of what life outside of academia is like. If you're burned out on your job, changing your job is definitely an avenue you should consider, but it's not your only avenue and I don't think that automatically privileging it is a good idea if it turns out that you're doing so out of overly rosy expectations. There's a lot of bullshit in industry too. Working in the private sector (or public sector), being "demand-driven", being paid to provide a service to someone else doesn't necessarily mean that your work will be meaningful in some existential sense, nor that you will feel like it's meaningful. When I was in industry, a lot of my senior middle-aged colleagues said the same thing as you: I feel like a paper-pusher, nobody cares about what I do, I wish I were researching *the really important things* in academia/molding young minds. A lot of people were bitter, felt expoloited, felt like they were squandering their working years, and felt like the stuff they were producing (at an internationally renowned organization known to everyone in my field) work that has no impact on people's daily lives or which is a very expensive spinning-of-wheels. Everyone wasted 3 out of 5 days on emails and bullshit administrative tasks, everyone had shitty coworkers and unsupportive bosses, a lot of people were frustrated every day and hated their lives. This is not to discourage you from moving to industry. This is to encourage you to remember that the grass is greener where you water it. Anyway, to get a little more woo-woo, I've been at institutions that everyone wants to be at starting in my mid-teens, and I am continually surprised by the one thing that unites my experience at all of these institutions: everyone around me bitched constantly. Brilliant people, living geniuses, people with an incredible work ethic and achievements to match, people with a level of privilege that I didn't know existed - they had something to complain about (like, a list as long as my arm of somethings) every single day. Some of these people have left industry for academia, or academia for industry, maybe even several times, and they are still constantly unhappy. I don't think they will ever be happy, because they've gotten everything they wanted several times in life and it's still not enough. Maybe I'm projecting too much of my experience on you, but burnt out + no experience of the outside world is a combination that I've seen way too many times to not notice the pattern. In my experience, a lot of the people who are very successful in academia have had such a rarefied life experience that they quite naturally find themselves above such mortal things as daily frustrations and a sense of worthlessness. But in the end, we are all lesser beings and finding solace in the fact that we must all eat, shit, sleep and respond to emails is a big part of any zen you want to achieve. Thanks for coming to my commencement speech.

ikhk2i

askacademia_train

Human: Middle-aged, burnout, hoping to leave academia Hello. I'm a researcher in a STEM field, formerly rather successful in terms of published papers, etc. Around three years ago I had a revelation that my research is nonsense: I'm publishing stuff that's peer reviewed by a clique, and read and applied by no one else. I will be looking to move out of academia, but: (1) firstly I need to work my technical skills to be up-to-date with what industry wants; (2) I need to shed all the negative energy and bitterness that I amassed throughout these years. So far (2) has been a real problem for me, partly due to being in my forties and never have worked outside of academia. I would really appreciate sharing positive stories and resources. Assistant:

g3l9vd5

g3ljoo7

I feel you. Also in my 40s and have dedicated my life to academia. Sometimes I worry that no one reads what I write or that it doesn’t mean anything. However, it fades, and now I recognize it as a form of low grade depression. It’s not real, just a feeling. I’m sure industry might pay more but I wouldn’t look for meaning there. Your current research program is likely to be something you could improve or make more meaningful. I’m personally making sure my current project really represents what I find important. Hard to have control outside of academia.

> my research is nonsense > never have worked outside of academia I'm not in STEM and I'm not middle-aged, but I have worked outside of academia and, based on that, I want to encourage you to temper your expectations of what life outside of academia is like. If you're burned out on your job, changing your job is definitely an avenue you should consider, but it's not your only avenue and I don't think that automatically privileging it is a good idea if it turns out that you're doing so out of overly rosy expectations. There's a lot of bullshit in industry too. Working in the private sector (or public sector), being "demand-driven", being paid to provide a service to someone else doesn't necessarily mean that your work will be meaningful in some existential sense, nor that you will feel like it's meaningful. When I was in industry, a lot of my senior middle-aged colleagues said the same thing as you: I feel like a paper-pusher, nobody cares about what I do, I wish I were researching *the really important things* in academia/molding young minds. A lot of people were bitter, felt expoloited, felt like they were squandering their working years, and felt like the stuff they were producing (at an internationally renowned organization known to everyone in my field) work that has no impact on people's daily lives or which is a very expensive spinning-of-wheels. Everyone wasted 3 out of 5 days on emails and bullshit administrative tasks, everyone had shitty coworkers and unsupportive bosses, a lot of people were frustrated every day and hated their lives. This is not to discourage you from moving to industry. This is to encourage you to remember that the grass is greener where you water it. Anyway, to get a little more woo-woo, I've been at institutions that everyone wants to be at starting in my mid-teens, and I am continually surprised by the one thing that unites my experience at all of these institutions: everyone around me bitched constantly. Brilliant people, living geniuses, people with an incredible work ethic and achievements to match, people with a level of privilege that I didn't know existed - they had something to complain about (like, a list as long as my arm of somethings) every single day. Some of these people have left industry for academia, or academia for industry, maybe even several times, and they are still constantly unhappy. I don't think they will ever be happy, because they've gotten everything they wanted several times in life and it's still not enough. Maybe I'm projecting too much of my experience on you, but burnt out + no experience of the outside world is a combination that I've seen way too many times to not notice the pattern. In my experience, a lot of the people who are very successful in academia have had such a rarefied life experience that they quite naturally find themselves above such mortal things as daily frustrations and a sense of worthlessness. But in the end, we are all lesser beings and finding solace in the fact that we must all eat, shit, sleep and respond to emails is a big part of any zen you want to achieve. Thanks for coming to my commencement speech.

ikhk2i

askacademia_train

Human: Middle-aged, burnout, hoping to leave academia Hello. I'm a researcher in a STEM field, formerly rather successful in terms of published papers, etc. Around three years ago I had a revelation that my research is nonsense: I'm publishing stuff that's peer reviewed by a clique, and read and applied by no one else. I will be looking to move out of academia, but: (1) firstly I need to work my technical skills to be up-to-date with what industry wants; (2) I need to shed all the negative energy and bitterness that I amassed throughout these years. So far (2) has been a real problem for me, partly due to being in my forties and never have worked outside of academia. I would really appreciate sharing positive stories and resources. Assistant:

g3ljoo7

g3l6tw9

> my research is nonsense > never have worked outside of academia I'm not in STEM and I'm not middle-aged, but I have worked outside of academia and, based on that, I want to encourage you to temper your expectations of what life outside of academia is like. If you're burned out on your job, changing your job is definitely an avenue you should consider, but it's not your only avenue and I don't think that automatically privileging it is a good idea if it turns out that you're doing so out of overly rosy expectations. There's a lot of bullshit in industry too. Working in the private sector (or public sector), being "demand-driven", being paid to provide a service to someone else doesn't necessarily mean that your work will be meaningful in some existential sense, nor that you will feel like it's meaningful. When I was in industry, a lot of my senior middle-aged colleagues said the same thing as you: I feel like a paper-pusher, nobody cares about what I do, I wish I were researching *the really important things* in academia/molding young minds. A lot of people were bitter, felt expoloited, felt like they were squandering their working years, and felt like the stuff they were producing (at an internationally renowned organization known to everyone in my field) work that has no impact on people's daily lives or which is a very expensive spinning-of-wheels. Everyone wasted 3 out of 5 days on emails and bullshit administrative tasks, everyone had shitty coworkers and unsupportive bosses, a lot of people were frustrated every day and hated their lives. This is not to discourage you from moving to industry. This is to encourage you to remember that the grass is greener where you water it. Anyway, to get a little more woo-woo, I've been at institutions that everyone wants to be at starting in my mid-teens, and I am continually surprised by the one thing that unites my experience at all of these institutions: everyone around me bitched constantly. Brilliant people, living geniuses, people with an incredible work ethic and achievements to match, people with a level of privilege that I didn't know existed - they had something to complain about (like, a list as long as my arm of somethings) every single day. Some of these people have left industry for academia, or academia for industry, maybe even several times, and they are still constantly unhappy. I don't think they will ever be happy, because they've gotten everything they wanted several times in life and it's still not enough. Maybe I'm projecting too much of my experience on you, but burnt out + no experience of the outside world is a combination that I've seen way too many times to not notice the pattern. In my experience, a lot of the people who are very successful in academia have had such a rarefied life experience that they quite naturally find themselves above such mortal things as daily frustrations and a sense of worthlessness. But in the end, we are all lesser beings and finding solace in the fact that we must all eat, shit, sleep and respond to emails is a big part of any zen you want to achieve. Thanks for coming to my commencement speech.

Therapy might help. I don't think (1) is a big problem for you. If you managed to be successful in academia then you can figure out what is needed in industry. I'm thinking some type of consulting or venture capital endeavor might be up your alley with some business know-how. (2) depends on who and what you are bitter about. IMO, all research is niche and it's very easy to feel that it's not important. If you genuinely feel that, then move out or branch out in your research. If your gripe is people or culture related then figure out what it is you want and move towards it. If it's directed at yourself, then cut yourself some slack. You did it because at some point you liked it and thought it was important. If we're taking a very high level perspective, very little work is truly important and you never know if it was important until many years have passed.

ikhk2i

askacademia_train

Human: Middle-aged, burnout, hoping to leave academia Hello. I'm a researcher in a STEM field, formerly rather successful in terms of published papers, etc. Around three years ago I had a revelation that my research is nonsense: I'm publishing stuff that's peer reviewed by a clique, and read and applied by no one else. I will be looking to move out of academia, but: (1) firstly I need to work my technical skills to be up-to-date with what industry wants; (2) I need to shed all the negative energy and bitterness that I amassed throughout these years. So far (2) has been a real problem for me, partly due to being in my forties and never have worked outside of academia. I would really appreciate sharing positive stories and resources. Assistant:

g3ljoo7

g3kzt8v

> my research is nonsense > never have worked outside of academia I'm not in STEM and I'm not middle-aged, but I have worked outside of academia and, based on that, I want to encourage you to temper your expectations of what life outside of academia is like. If you're burned out on your job, changing your job is definitely an avenue you should consider, but it's not your only avenue and I don't think that automatically privileging it is a good idea if it turns out that you're doing so out of overly rosy expectations. There's a lot of bullshit in industry too. Working in the private sector (or public sector), being "demand-driven", being paid to provide a service to someone else doesn't necessarily mean that your work will be meaningful in some existential sense, nor that you will feel like it's meaningful. When I was in industry, a lot of my senior middle-aged colleagues said the same thing as you: I feel like a paper-pusher, nobody cares about what I do, I wish I were researching *the really important things* in academia/molding young minds. A lot of people were bitter, felt expoloited, felt like they were squandering their working years, and felt like the stuff they were producing (at an internationally renowned organization known to everyone in my field) work that has no impact on people's daily lives or which is a very expensive spinning-of-wheels. Everyone wasted 3 out of 5 days on emails and bullshit administrative tasks, everyone had shitty coworkers and unsupportive bosses, a lot of people were frustrated every day and hated their lives. This is not to discourage you from moving to industry. This is to encourage you to remember that the grass is greener where you water it. Anyway, to get a little more woo-woo, I've been at institutions that everyone wants to be at starting in my mid-teens, and I am continually surprised by the one thing that unites my experience at all of these institutions: everyone around me bitched constantly. Brilliant people, living geniuses, people with an incredible work ethic and achievements to match, people with a level of privilege that I didn't know existed - they had something to complain about (like, a list as long as my arm of somethings) every single day. Some of these people have left industry for academia, or academia for industry, maybe even several times, and they are still constantly unhappy. I don't think they will ever be happy, because they've gotten everything they wanted several times in life and it's still not enough. Maybe I'm projecting too much of my experience on you, but burnt out + no experience of the outside world is a combination that I've seen way too many times to not notice the pattern. In my experience, a lot of the people who are very successful in academia have had such a rarefied life experience that they quite naturally find themselves above such mortal things as daily frustrations and a sense of worthlessness. But in the end, we are all lesser beings and finding solace in the fact that we must all eat, shit, sleep and respond to emails is a big part of any zen you want to achieve. Thanks for coming to my commencement speech.

What field is it?

ikhk2i

askacademia_train

Human: Middle-aged, burnout, hoping to leave academia Hello. I'm a researcher in a STEM field, formerly rather successful in terms of published papers, etc. Around three years ago I had a revelation that my research is nonsense: I'm publishing stuff that's peer reviewed by a clique, and read and applied by no one else. I will be looking to move out of academia, but: (1) firstly I need to work my technical skills to be up-to-date with what industry wants; (2) I need to shed all the negative energy and bitterness that I amassed throughout these years. So far (2) has been a real problem for me, partly due to being in my forties and never have worked outside of academia. I would really appreciate sharing positive stories and resources. Assistant:

g3ljoo7

g3l9oyd

> my research is nonsense > never have worked outside of academia I'm not in STEM and I'm not middle-aged, but I have worked outside of academia and, based on that, I want to encourage you to temper your expectations of what life outside of academia is like. If you're burned out on your job, changing your job is definitely an avenue you should consider, but it's not your only avenue and I don't think that automatically privileging it is a good idea if it turns out that you're doing so out of overly rosy expectations. There's a lot of bullshit in industry too. Working in the private sector (or public sector), being "demand-driven", being paid to provide a service to someone else doesn't necessarily mean that your work will be meaningful in some existential sense, nor that you will feel like it's meaningful. When I was in industry, a lot of my senior middle-aged colleagues said the same thing as you: I feel like a paper-pusher, nobody cares about what I do, I wish I were researching *the really important things* in academia/molding young minds. A lot of people were bitter, felt expoloited, felt like they were squandering their working years, and felt like the stuff they were producing (at an internationally renowned organization known to everyone in my field) work that has no impact on people's daily lives or which is a very expensive spinning-of-wheels. Everyone wasted 3 out of 5 days on emails and bullshit administrative tasks, everyone had shitty coworkers and unsupportive bosses, a lot of people were frustrated every day and hated their lives. This is not to discourage you from moving to industry. This is to encourage you to remember that the grass is greener where you water it. Anyway, to get a little more woo-woo, I've been at institutions that everyone wants to be at starting in my mid-teens, and I am continually surprised by the one thing that unites my experience at all of these institutions: everyone around me bitched constantly. Brilliant people, living geniuses, people with an incredible work ethic and achievements to match, people with a level of privilege that I didn't know existed - they had something to complain about (like, a list as long as my arm of somethings) every single day. Some of these people have left industry for academia, or academia for industry, maybe even several times, and they are still constantly unhappy. I don't think they will ever be happy, because they've gotten everything they wanted several times in life and it's still not enough. Maybe I'm projecting too much of my experience on you, but burnt out + no experience of the outside world is a combination that I've seen way too many times to not notice the pattern. In my experience, a lot of the people who are very successful in academia have had such a rarefied life experience that they quite naturally find themselves above such mortal things as daily frustrations and a sense of worthlessness. But in the end, we are all lesser beings and finding solace in the fact that we must all eat, shit, sleep and respond to emails is a big part of any zen you want to achieve. Thanks for coming to my commencement speech.

"I'm publishing stuff that's peer reviewed by a clique, and read and applied by no one else." this really hit home, I'm a soon-to-graduate phd that's considering doing a post-doc on an area that's a bit different from my own and very exciting for me. I think that it's important to find the right publishing venues for you, there's a lot of variability among STEM sub-fields. There's nothing cool in publishing for a community that you do not appreciate. Going to the industry is of course an option, perhaps it makes more sense if you've tried academia for a long time. But even there, finding the right culture for you is what I believe matters

wggv3i

askacademia_train

Human: perhaps?). * Visiting scientist is not from my home institution or my home country and I don't know anything about the system over there. * My PI is extremely nonconfrontational, and I'm afraid they might choose to ignore the problem instead of addressing it since Visiting Scientist will only be with us for another two months or so. * We are in the early stages of this study, nowhere near publishing. This figure was not presented in a manuscript or at a conference or any kind of formal presentation, so I'm not sure how "academic honesty" kicks in yet Thankfully, this data is not a big part of the study, so it's no real loss if we don't include it and scrap that part of the project. That being said, making up data is completely unacceptable. My fellow grad students have already been warned to not take a co-authorship of any paper that Visiting scientist decides to publish later. If you were in my shoes, what would you do? Have you ever encountered something like this before? What kind of punishment does this conduct incur? I'm going to tell my PI, of course. TL/DR: Visiting scientist is flagrantly making up data, but I'm afraid my PI will just choose to ignore the problem instead of getting involved. Assistant:

ij175al

ij1ka8l

A couple things: first, I have not experienced this, but many friends in academia have, and there are plenty of well known cases similar to yours, often found easily by searching for academic ethics course material, so that you can see how others handled it, and how the university (maybe even your university) and faculty have responded. In the us there are very few universities that can afford to “do the right thing”, most often if a professor has to choose between investigating something like this, or trying to make it go away, the calculus is very clear: if they investigate they draw unwanted attention on themselves, and the best case outcome is a waste of time and resources on a false allegation, while the worst outcome is loss of data, firing of key personnel, and huge soft consequences (e.g. their department treats them as Parriah, they never get another grant, etc.). That’s a lose-lose, much easier to quietly handle it by letting the offender go (this avoids any lawsuits and negative press, which most university/faculty are very focused on), AND does not endanger the research group (e.g. people won’t panic leave) or the research (one allegation can lead to many investigations of prior work, and what are the odds that some other random person, sometime in the last 15 years of the lab, doctored a photo or messaged the data a bit?). Sorry for the wall of text, here’s my suggestions: 1. Immediately start making records, keep all copies of data and put a date on it so you know when the data was from, ideally have some way of tracking it back to the original data files. This includes making copies of the original data files, since they could mysteriously disappear or be copied over. Ask for copies or make copies (as you are allowed to, do not break privacy or criminal laws) any presentations and speaking discussions on the data in question. Most importantly, if you do decide to raise this issue (say by sending an email) make sure you keep copies in a separate email that is not associated with your university email. Do not store all these records in any place that is easily accessible or on the university campus/property. Keep in mind, if the university “owns” the data, there may be rules on how you can take or store their intellectual property. 2. Thoroughly research your university resources and rules for reporting ethical and integrity violations, as some universities have surprisingly punitive rules, or complex reporting procedures that must be followed. Try to see how protected you are, in the case that the university is not so kind to a whistle blower, check if anyone else has done similar at your university and how it was handled. Can you report this 1 year from now? If there is no urgency, you can slowly research for months, a little each day, so that this doesn’t impact your own research focus. But, most importantly, if you are certain you want to act, make some form of public record type disclosure- email the professor and save a record. Email the omnibusman if you feel they will work in your best interest, and keep a copy, etc. 3. Evaluate, as best you can, the political implications of your actions. Is the project/person funded by a strict federal funding course (NIH), and do they have specific reporting guidelines? 4. Ideally, find a strong ally. You will need people to coorvorate your claims, and it would really help to make sure you have a strong support (department head, network outside the university, mentor, etc.).

You must talk to your PI. You can do this from a standpoint of “I’m confused” rather than “they falsified data” if you want to be gentler but you must deliver this message. Under no circumstances should you be a coauthor in this paper.

wggv3i

askacademia_train

Human: perhaps?). * Visiting scientist is not from my home institution or my home country and I don't know anything about the system over there. * My PI is extremely nonconfrontational, and I'm afraid they might choose to ignore the problem instead of addressing it since Visiting Scientist will only be with us for another two months or so. * We are in the early stages of this study, nowhere near publishing. This figure was not presented in a manuscript or at a conference or any kind of formal presentation, so I'm not sure how "academic honesty" kicks in yet Thankfully, this data is not a big part of the study, so it's no real loss if we don't include it and scrap that part of the project. That being said, making up data is completely unacceptable. My fellow grad students have already been warned to not take a co-authorship of any paper that Visiting scientist decides to publish later. If you were in my shoes, what would you do? Have you ever encountered something like this before? What kind of punishment does this conduct incur? I'm going to tell my PI, of course. TL/DR: Visiting scientist is flagrantly making up data, but I'm afraid my PI will just choose to ignore the problem instead of getting involved. Assistant:

ij175al

ij2bu9q

A couple things: first, I have not experienced this, but many friends in academia have, and there are plenty of well known cases similar to yours, often found easily by searching for academic ethics course material, so that you can see how others handled it, and how the university (maybe even your university) and faculty have responded. In the us there are very few universities that can afford to “do the right thing”, most often if a professor has to choose between investigating something like this, or trying to make it go away, the calculus is very clear: if they investigate they draw unwanted attention on themselves, and the best case outcome is a waste of time and resources on a false allegation, while the worst outcome is loss of data, firing of key personnel, and huge soft consequences (e.g. their department treats them as Parriah, they never get another grant, etc.). That’s a lose-lose, much easier to quietly handle it by letting the offender go (this avoids any lawsuits and negative press, which most university/faculty are very focused on), AND does not endanger the research group (e.g. people won’t panic leave) or the research (one allegation can lead to many investigations of prior work, and what are the odds that some other random person, sometime in the last 15 years of the lab, doctored a photo or messaged the data a bit?). Sorry for the wall of text, here’s my suggestions: 1. Immediately start making records, keep all copies of data and put a date on it so you know when the data was from, ideally have some way of tracking it back to the original data files. This includes making copies of the original data files, since they could mysteriously disappear or be copied over. Ask for copies or make copies (as you are allowed to, do not break privacy or criminal laws) any presentations and speaking discussions on the data in question. Most importantly, if you do decide to raise this issue (say by sending an email) make sure you keep copies in a separate email that is not associated with your university email. Do not store all these records in any place that is easily accessible or on the university campus/property. Keep in mind, if the university “owns” the data, there may be rules on how you can take or store their intellectual property. 2. Thoroughly research your university resources and rules for reporting ethical and integrity violations, as some universities have surprisingly punitive rules, or complex reporting procedures that must be followed. Try to see how protected you are, in the case that the university is not so kind to a whistle blower, check if anyone else has done similar at your university and how it was handled. Can you report this 1 year from now? If there is no urgency, you can slowly research for months, a little each day, so that this doesn’t impact your own research focus. But, most importantly, if you are certain you want to act, make some form of public record type disclosure- email the professor and save a record. Email the omnibusman if you feel they will work in your best interest, and keep a copy, etc. 3. Evaluate, as best you can, the political implications of your actions. Is the project/person funded by a strict federal funding course (NIH), and do they have specific reporting guidelines? 4. Ideally, find a strong ally. You will need people to coorvorate your claims, and it would really help to make sure you have a strong support (department head, network outside the university, mentor, etc.).

This is a PI level issue. Contact your PI. If they do not do anything about it, it is on your PI as in they would be complicit with fraud if that work was published. You are helping your PI prevent a bigger problem. When you present this, do it as dispassionately as possible. Do not say anything about your personal feelings about the visiting scientist, that you don't trust them, that they are rude, etc. Simply say you found some equipment issue (show the pictures) and then when double checking some data, you found discrepancies. Do not say you think the scientist faked the data, just present it as a problem that you want to alert the PI to for them to follow up. This is not academic honesty, rather research misconduct. A big difference is that you are not dealing with a student. You can't flunk a visiting a scientist or put them on academic probation. This is an employee. So you are going to have to let the PI deal with this person through HR. Finally, if your PI does ignore you and still publishes the questionable data, then you can file an issue with your research integrity office on campus. I have been on one of these investigations (a post-doc leaving the university claimed a research professor had fabricated data), and we had to go in and inspect all of the lab records to verify the data was collected (turned out that lab kept impeccable records).

wggv3i

askacademia_train

Human: not be collecting any data. It would still run like normal, but no sample would be collected. I promptly reconnected this tube and asked my (other PhD student) coworkers about it. They all told me that they had also seen the loose tube and that one of our lab's visiting scientists had set it up and left the tube off, telling them not to mess with the instrument. Now, this particular instrument has been running for the past month. That tube has not been connected the entire time, meaning this instrument has not collected any samples for the past month when there should have been 1-2 per day. This could be an honest mistake by the visiting scientist, but we (the grad students) are not feeling very generous towards them because they have a history of being very rude to us and asking us to do things they just don't want to do. Today, the visiting scientist sent me a figure comparing our data to the data of a nearby environmental sensor, showing that we have good agreement between our measurements. These data have been entirely falsified and I have the evidence. Now that the instrument is properly connected, the data look quite different, and I have eyewitness and some photographic evidence that the tube was never connected, so no sample could have possibly been collected. The data were recorded in a notebook and spreadsheet and look like a random distribution, which is to be expected as it is really a variety of blanks. After asking the visiting scientist for the data to go with the figure, I can see their numbers are, for the most part, totally different from what is in the spreadsheet. This visiting scientist has also hassled one of the other grad students about "doing \[their\] data processing wrong" and then when asked to show how to do it correctly, picked and chose random cells in the spreadsheet to get the values they wanted instead of filling down the rows and using the correct (though blank) measurements. This is obviously a major breach of academic honesty, but there are a few important details that make me uncertain of what to do: * Visiting scientist has their PhD and has published quite a few papers (others with falsified data perhaps?). * Visiting scientist is not from my home institution or my home country and I don't know anything about the system over there. * My PI is extremely nonconfrontational, and I'm afraid they might choose to ignore the problem instead of addressing it since Visiting Scientist will only be with us for another two months or so. * We are in the early stages of this study, nowhere near publishing. This figure was not presented in a manuscript or at a conference or any kind of formal presentation, so I'm not sure how "academic honesty" kicks in yet Thankfully, this data is not a big part of the study, so it's no real loss if we don't include it and scrap that part of the project. That being said, making up data is completely unacceptable. My fellow grad students have already been warned to not take a co-authorship of any paper that Visiting scientist decides to publish later. If you were in my shoes, what would you do? Have you ever encountered something like this before? What kind of punishment does this conduct incur? I'm going to tell my PI, of course. TL/DR: Visiting scientist is flagrantly making up data, but I'm afraid my PI will just choose to ignore the problem instead of getting involved. Assistant:

ij2bu9q

ij27gta

This is a PI level issue. Contact your PI. If they do not do anything about it, it is on your PI as in they would be complicit with fraud if that work was published. You are helping your PI prevent a bigger problem. When you present this, do it as dispassionately as possible. Do not say anything about your personal feelings about the visiting scientist, that you don't trust them, that they are rude, etc. Simply say you found some equipment issue (show the pictures) and then when double checking some data, you found discrepancies. Do not say you think the scientist faked the data, just present it as a problem that you want to alert the PI to for them to follow up. This is not academic honesty, rather research misconduct. A big difference is that you are not dealing with a student. You can't flunk a visiting a scientist or put them on academic probation. This is an employee. So you are going to have to let the PI deal with this person through HR. Finally, if your PI does ignore you and still publishes the questionable data, then you can file an issue with your research integrity office on campus. I have been on one of these investigations (a post-doc leaving the university claimed a research professor had fabricated data), and we had to go in and inspect all of the lab records to verify the data was collected (turned out that lab kept impeccable records).

Tell your PI ASAP. Give him/her the benefit of the doubt that he/she will take your concerns/observations seriously. If your PI chooses to ignore you, then go above... Ombudsman, department chair, or possibly even a Dean or someone in your education office. It's important you don't ignore it, even if your PI wants to ignore!

lpry1q

askacademia_train

Human: What are your best academic writing tips? I'm a first year UK PhD student in meteorology. Currently, I'm trying to write my first formal progress report which (if you don't know) is just a summary of my project, my progress up to yet, my methods and my future plans. I'm having a bit of writer's block - maybe it's the impostor syndrome but I feel less able to write a good piece of work. I'm doubting everything I write and struggling to come up with a good way to start and finish my writing. **So what are your best academic writing tips?** One thing I picked up from a Nature workshop is to make your reader understand why something is important, rather than saying "this is important because..." For example: * "Identifying flaws in weather models is important because it enables meteorologists to make direct improvements." vs * "Identifying flaws in weather models equips meteorologists with the knowledge to make direct improvements to the forecasts, which could increase the lead time on evacuation decisions." Assistant:

gocwzc7

gocqmkl

The main thing I've learned is that trying to sound smart usually backfires. Smart people communicate as simply and efficiently as possible. Sometimes that requires 'big words', but usually it doesn't. When somebody starts using fancy words in an effort to seem smart it usually had the opposite effect, and the reader will have the feeling that the complicated writing is hiding a lack of important information. Overcomplicated scientific writing is a relic of an elitist, bygone era. As a small example, when using a word like 'utilize', stop and ask whether 'use' would have worked. In most cases, 'use' is the better word. When people say they're stuck trying to communicate something in writing, I ask what it is they're trying to say and they can usually say it to me simply, eloquently and clearly off the top of their head. Just do that, but in writing. It's that simple.

Identify your key results, insert the figures that show those results, write sections around the results, see where that leaves you in terms of needing to explain the background and future work.

lpry1q

askacademia_train

Human: What are your best academic writing tips? I'm a first year UK PhD student in meteorology. Currently, I'm trying to write my first formal progress report which (if you don't know) is just a summary of my project, my progress up to yet, my methods and my future plans. I'm having a bit of writer's block - maybe it's the impostor syndrome but I feel less able to write a good piece of work. I'm doubting everything I write and struggling to come up with a good way to start and finish my writing. **So what are your best academic writing tips?** One thing I picked up from a Nature workshop is to make your reader understand why something is important, rather than saying "this is important because..." For example: * "Identifying flaws in weather models is important because it enables meteorologists to make direct improvements." vs * "Identifying flaws in weather models equips meteorologists with the knowledge to make direct improvements to the forecasts, which could increase the lead time on evacuation decisions." Assistant:

gocstyj

gocwzc7

A handy article with some suggestions: https://www.cell.com/matter/fulltext/S2590-2385(19)30394-730394-7)

The main thing I've learned is that trying to sound smart usually backfires. Smart people communicate as simply and efficiently as possible. Sometimes that requires 'big words', but usually it doesn't. When somebody starts using fancy words in an effort to seem smart it usually had the opposite effect, and the reader will have the feeling that the complicated writing is hiding a lack of important information. Overcomplicated scientific writing is a relic of an elitist, bygone era. As a small example, when using a word like 'utilize', stop and ask whether 'use' would have worked. In most cases, 'use' is the better word. When people say they're stuck trying to communicate something in writing, I ask what it is they're trying to say and they can usually say it to me simply, eloquently and clearly off the top of their head. Just do that, but in writing. It's that simple.

lpry1q

askacademia_train

Human: What are your best academic writing tips? I'm a first year UK PhD student in meteorology. Currently, I'm trying to write my first formal progress report which (if you don't know) is just a summary of my project, my progress up to yet, my methods and my future plans. I'm having a bit of writer's block - maybe it's the impostor syndrome but I feel less able to write a good piece of work. I'm doubting everything I write and struggling to come up with a good way to start and finish my writing. **So what are your best academic writing tips?** One thing I picked up from a Nature workshop is to make your reader understand why something is important, rather than saying "this is important because..." For example: * "Identifying flaws in weather models is important because it enables meteorologists to make direct improvements." vs * "Identifying flaws in weather models equips meteorologists with the knowledge to make direct improvements to the forecasts, which could increase the lead time on evacuation decisions." Assistant:

gocqmkl

goctuul

Identify your key results, insert the figures that show those results, write sections around the results, see where that leaves you in terms of needing to explain the background and future work.

This tip changed my life: Aim for active voice as much as possible. In the case of your example: “When scientists are able to identify flaws in weather models they can improve their forecasts, which can increase the lead time for making evacuation decisions.” Edited to add: Also, don’t be afraid of short sentences: “When scientists identify flaws in weather models, their forecasts can improve. With better forecasts, officials can make critical evacuation decisions earlier in the course of an adverse weather event.”

lpry1q

askacademia_train

Human: What are your best academic writing tips? I'm a first year UK PhD student in meteorology. Currently, I'm trying to write my first formal progress report which (if you don't know) is just a summary of my project, my progress up to yet, my methods and my future plans. I'm having a bit of writer's block - maybe it's the impostor syndrome but I feel less able to write a good piece of work. I'm doubting everything I write and struggling to come up with a good way to start and finish my writing. **So what are your best academic writing tips?** One thing I picked up from a Nature workshop is to make your reader understand why something is important, rather than saying "this is important because..." For example: * "Identifying flaws in weather models is important because it enables meteorologists to make direct improvements." vs * "Identifying flaws in weather models equips meteorologists with the knowledge to make direct improvements to the forecasts, which could increase the lead time on evacuation decisions." Assistant:

goctuul

gocstyj

This tip changed my life: Aim for active voice as much as possible. In the case of your example: “When scientists are able to identify flaws in weather models they can improve their forecasts, which can increase the lead time for making evacuation decisions.” Edited to add: Also, don’t be afraid of short sentences: “When scientists identify flaws in weather models, their forecasts can improve. With better forecasts, officials can make critical evacuation decisions earlier in the course of an adverse weather event.”

A handy article with some suggestions: https://www.cell.com/matter/fulltext/S2590-2385(19)30394-730394-7)

lpry1q

askacademia_train

Human: What are your best academic writing tips? I'm a first year UK PhD student in meteorology. Currently, I'm trying to write my first formal progress report which (if you don't know) is just a summary of my project, my progress up to yet, my methods and my future plans. I'm having a bit of writer's block - maybe it's the impostor syndrome but I feel less able to write a good piece of work. I'm doubting everything I write and struggling to come up with a good way to start and finish my writing. **So what are your best academic writing tips?** One thing I picked up from a Nature workshop is to make your reader understand why something is important, rather than saying "this is important because..." For example: * "Identifying flaws in weather models is important because it enables meteorologists to make direct improvements." vs * "Identifying flaws in weather models equips meteorologists with the knowledge to make direct improvements to the forecasts, which could increase the lead time on evacuation decisions." Assistant:

gocx5e7

goczl6g

I really like to use quillbot when something doesn't sound quite right. It's not always working but it does give me an idea on where I can improve

> Identifying flaws in weather models is important Generally I avoid saying something important unless it's something that I REALLY wanna highlight. To quote my adviser, everything in your paper is important otherwise it shouldn't be in there. Anyway, my writing approach is: 1. Outline the paper 2. Insert figures and tables or whatever results that I wanna talk about 3. List what I wanna talk about for each figure and table. Be as detailed as possible. For example, use 'Parameter A increases parabolically with respect to Parameter B because blah blah blah' and don't be like 'Talk about trend of A vs B'. 4. Do the intro, methodology, etc 5. Turn the points that I listed in Step 3 into complete sentences and paragraphs Imo Step 3 is the most important because it gives me the opportunity to really think about what I wanna present without having to worry about other things such as the language, sentence structure, etc.

h0cdnj

askacademia_train

Human: What's on your most recommended reading/activity list for early career academics? Are there any books (or other references) you find yourself reaching for over and over again or recommending to your mentees? Alternatively, is there an activity that you personally find very useful (journal clubs, independent reviews, ect.) for newcomers to your field? I definitely fall into early career myself, but there's a few books I've collected that I can't help but recommend to anyone I think may benefit from them. * "Writing Science: How to Write Papers That Get Cited and Proposals That Get Funded" by Joshua Schimel * "The 2-Hour Job Search: Using Technology to Get the Right Job Faster" by Steve Dalton * "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks" by Rebecca Skloot * "The Emperor of All Maladies" by Siddhartha Mukherjee (I'm in cancer research) I'm hoping to expand this list, especially as I work with my postdoctoral and graduate student office to establish a lending library of sorts for our institution. Assistant:

ftlx1zl

ftlpr5h

Found a lot of helpful tips in "The Professor Is In" by Karen Kelsky related to looking for academic positions. Also thanks so much for initiating this topic! Always looking for more academia/writing/reading/communicating science books.

I'm in organic geochemistry, and most often recommend: * *Echoes of Life* by Susan Gaines, Geoffrey Eglinton, and Jurgen Rullkotter * *The Story of More* by Hope Jahren (as much as I love her writing, I try to *avoid* recommending *Lab Girl* to new students, because I feel like it promotes an unhealthy work/life balance - or actually, no work/life balance)

h0cdnj

askacademia_train

Human: What's on your most recommended reading/activity list for early career academics? Are there any books (or other references) you find yourself reaching for over and over again or recommending to your mentees? Alternatively, is there an activity that you personally find very useful (journal clubs, independent reviews, ect.) for newcomers to your field? I definitely fall into early career myself, but there's a few books I've collected that I can't help but recommend to anyone I think may benefit from them. * "Writing Science: How to Write Papers That Get Cited and Proposals That Get Funded" by Joshua Schimel * "The 2-Hour Job Search: Using Technology to Get the Right Job Faster" by Steve Dalton * "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks" by Rebecca Skloot * "The Emperor of All Maladies" by Siddhartha Mukherjee (I'm in cancer research) I'm hoping to expand this list, especially as I work with my postdoctoral and graduate student office to establish a lending library of sorts for our institution. Assistant:

ftlym5b

ftm1mfm

Robert Boice's "Advice for New Faculty Members" is a goodie. Lots of advice on how to mindfully engage with writing and teaching, while trying not to burn out.

Houston, We Have A Narrative: Why Science Needs Story (by Randy Olson). It's about how to tell an engaging story about your data/project instead of giving the audience a boring timeline of "we did this and these are the results." It's featured in at least one student seminar and one class for our grad students, but is beneficial for all ages/levels.

stau47

askacademia_train

Human: How do you deal with burnout as a researcher? I am a postdoc and confronting a serious burnout situation. I cannot focus and become very depressed so frequently. I feel I am not so great researcher, colleagues do not respect me as a researcher, and I do not see hopeful future. The actual situation might not be actually that bad, but I am thinking that way very often probably by the burnout. I think I am worrying too much about bad things that are not happen yet. When I do a Zoom meeting, my energy goes down real quick so that after the meeting, I cannot do anything for the rest of the day. I tried multiple things to fix this situation, like working out regularly, waking up earlier in the morning, going to bed early, meeting some friends in person, purchasing things that I always wanted, etc. But these did not work. Do you have any practical recommendations? Would be good to hear from people who went through this. Assistant:

hx31a9x

hx2scyy

>I am a postdoc and confronting a serious burnout situation. You and I are kindred spirits. I started my postdoc last September and was seriously struggling with burnout on top of mental health issues and a litany of things happening in my personal life. I had a very frank conversation with my post doc adviser, who was thankfully very understanding. I told him that for a few months my productivity was going to be low, but I laid out a specific plan to deliver completed projects at the end of one year. So, I took 3 weeks straight completely off and since then I have spent some weeks working only 30 hours or less. The important thing is to adjust your own expectations and take the time not working to very seriously recharge **guilt free**. This will take some practice because as a postdoc you are naturally very high achieving. Then the next step is to see a mental health professional. Medication might be helpful, as it was for me. But it won't be helpful longterm without making serious life changes - it will give the motivation to make those changes and hopefully the mental clarity to address your mental distress as it arises. Then, seek out measures that improve your productivity during the hours where you are working. For example, I frequently co-work with friends and I use a website called in.flow.club . It is magical. As I started being more productive in the fewer hours I was working I actually started wanting to work more because I was explicitly reminded that I do this job because I love it and I got concrete evidence that I was competent. Please reach out if you want to chat. I empathize greatly.

When burnt out, trying to continue to push through can make it worse and make it take longer to get out of. Can you take some time completely off, even if it's only a long weekend? The longer the better, usually, but any time where you are completely disconnected and away from what is burning you out is better than none. Also, therapy, if you haven't already.

stau47

askacademia_train

Human: How do you deal with burnout as a researcher? I am a postdoc and confronting a serious burnout situation. I cannot focus and become very depressed so frequently. I feel I am not so great researcher, colleagues do not respect me as a researcher, and I do not see hopeful future. The actual situation might not be actually that bad, but I am thinking that way very often probably by the burnout. I think I am worrying too much about bad things that are not happen yet. When I do a Zoom meeting, my energy goes down real quick so that after the meeting, I cannot do anything for the rest of the day. I tried multiple things to fix this situation, like working out regularly, waking up earlier in the morning, going to bed early, meeting some friends in person, purchasing things that I always wanted, etc. But these did not work. Do you have any practical recommendations? Would be good to hear from people who went through this. Assistant:

hx2tqca

hx2scyy

1) Get help: therapy sessions. 2) Take a break. A long break. Like a month. Go hiking, do some manual labor, go surfing, rent a shed in the mountain and learn snowboarding. Anything that prevents you from thinking about science. Talk to your boss about it. If they’re a human being they’ll understand.

When burnt out, trying to continue to push through can make it worse and make it take longer to get out of. Can you take some time completely off, even if it's only a long weekend? The longer the better, usually, but any time where you are completely disconnected and away from what is burning you out is better than none. Also, therapy, if you haven't already.

stau47

askacademia_train

Human: How do you deal with burnout as a researcher? I am a postdoc and confronting a serious burnout situation. I cannot focus and become very depressed so frequently. I feel I am not so great researcher, colleagues do not respect me as a researcher, and I do not see hopeful future. The actual situation might not be actually that bad, but I am thinking that way very often probably by the burnout. I think I am worrying too much about bad things that are not happen yet. When I do a Zoom meeting, my energy goes down real quick so that after the meeting, I cannot do anything for the rest of the day. I tried multiple things to fix this situation, like working out regularly, waking up earlier in the morning, going to bed early, meeting some friends in person, purchasing things that I always wanted, etc. But these did not work. Do you have any practical recommendations? Would be good to hear from people who went through this. Assistant:

hx2scyy

hx39t8n

When burnt out, trying to continue to push through can make it worse and make it take longer to get out of. Can you take some time completely off, even if it's only a long weekend? The longer the better, usually, but any time where you are completely disconnected and away from what is burning you out is better than none. Also, therapy, if you haven't already.

Burnout is basically depression (see here). It is a serious issue and spontaneous recovery is not likely, so I urge you to get help (therapy). The earlier you get help, the better it can be treated and the better/faster you can recover from it. It sucks, but if you have burnout/depression, you cannot power through it because normal coping mechanisms will not be enough. In light of recent events, I would recommend to contact a therapist outside of your work place (if possible). There are employers (HR included) who will hold any sign of weakness against you. I hope you do not have such an employer, but it does not hurt to be careful and test the waters a bit before revealing too much. A practical tip on therapists is that you should switch if it does not fit. This does not mean that you should be discouraged if therapy is hard (because it often is a lot of work), but that you should work with a therapist who you are comfortable with. For this, you have to feel that you are taken seriously and the therapists understands you. It might also be useful to look into the different therapy types. Cognitive behavioral therapy and psychodynamic theory have both been found effective for depression treatment (source). Hope you get through this!

stau47

askacademia_train

Human: How do you deal with burnout as a researcher? I am a postdoc and confronting a serious burnout situation. I cannot focus and become very depressed so frequently. I feel I am not so great researcher, colleagues do not respect me as a researcher, and I do not see hopeful future. The actual situation might not be actually that bad, but I am thinking that way very often probably by the burnout. I think I am worrying too much about bad things that are not happen yet. When I do a Zoom meeting, my energy goes down real quick so that after the meeting, I cannot do anything for the rest of the day. I tried multiple things to fix this situation, like working out regularly, waking up earlier in the morning, going to bed early, meeting some friends in person, purchasing things that I always wanted, etc. But these did not work. Do you have any practical recommendations? Would be good to hear from people who went through this. Assistant:

hx35slz

hx39t8n

Taking "a break" or "down time" isn't sufficient. You need to do something really fun, like take a vacation or go to a music festival (if you love that kind of music). Don't even feel a little guilty, I promise it really works.

Burnout is basically depression (see here). It is a serious issue and spontaneous recovery is not likely, so I urge you to get help (therapy). The earlier you get help, the better it can be treated and the better/faster you can recover from it. It sucks, but if you have burnout/depression, you cannot power through it because normal coping mechanisms will not be enough. In light of recent events, I would recommend to contact a therapist outside of your work place (if possible). There are employers (HR included) who will hold any sign of weakness against you. I hope you do not have such an employer, but it does not hurt to be careful and test the waters a bit before revealing too much. A practical tip on therapists is that you should switch if it does not fit. This does not mean that you should be discouraged if therapy is hard (because it often is a lot of work), but that you should work with a therapist who you are comfortable with. For this, you have to feel that you are taken seriously and the therapists understands you. It might also be useful to look into the different therapy types. Cognitive behavioral therapy and psychodynamic theory have both been found effective for depression treatment (source). Hope you get through this!

stau47

askacademia_train

Human: How do you deal with burnout as a researcher? I am a postdoc and confronting a serious burnout situation. I cannot focus and become very depressed so frequently. I feel I am not so great researcher, colleagues do not respect me as a researcher, and I do not see hopeful future. The actual situation might not be actually that bad, but I am thinking that way very often probably by the burnout. I think I am worrying too much about bad things that are not happen yet. When I do a Zoom meeting, my energy goes down real quick so that after the meeting, I cannot do anything for the rest of the day. I tried multiple things to fix this situation, like working out regularly, waking up earlier in the morning, going to bed early, meeting some friends in person, purchasing things that I always wanted, etc. But these did not work. Do you have any practical recommendations? Would be good to hear from people who went through this. Assistant:

hx39t8n

hx37sn7

Burnout is basically depression (see here). It is a serious issue and spontaneous recovery is not likely, so I urge you to get help (therapy). The earlier you get help, the better it can be treated and the better/faster you can recover from it. It sucks, but if you have burnout/depression, you cannot power through it because normal coping mechanisms will not be enough. In light of recent events, I would recommend to contact a therapist outside of your work place (if possible). There are employers (HR included) who will hold any sign of weakness against you. I hope you do not have such an employer, but it does not hurt to be careful and test the waters a bit before revealing too much. A practical tip on therapists is that you should switch if it does not fit. This does not mean that you should be discouraged if therapy is hard (because it often is a lot of work), but that you should work with a therapist who you are comfortable with. For this, you have to feel that you are taken seriously and the therapists understands you. It might also be useful to look into the different therapy types. Cognitive behavioral therapy and psychodynamic theory have both been found effective for depression treatment (source). Hope you get through this!

Get evaluated for anxiety and/or depression by your primary care physician. I did, got put on a medicine that now allows me to function. I am tired but I feel much better!

n00q6i

askacademia_train

Human: Humanities PhDs that have left academia, what do you do now? The market has been terrible since I was in undergrad. I am getting towards the end of my PhD and I know that I need plan B's and C's (really these will more than likely be A and B with academia being a Hail Mary). But I am struggling with thinking about alternatives. I have some friends in the private sector that say consulting could be a good fit. Others say to go into teaching, but I'm certain that this requires even more school. Assistant:

gw57qvj

gw4rl67

The fact that people have to resort to Reddit to find out answers to these questions tells you everything you need to know about just how much academic depts care about what happens to their PhD graduates after they’ve pushed them out of the door.

Policy analyst for a Govt department. Was sad to leave academia but now I get to do interesting work with intelligent people, clock off at 5pm, I'm paid a decent wage and get to live in the city I want to live in :)

n00q6i

askacademia_train

Human: Humanities PhDs that have left academia, what do you do now? The market has been terrible since I was in undergrad. I am getting towards the end of my PhD and I know that I need plan B's and C's (really these will more than likely be A and B with academia being a Hail Mary). But I am struggling with thinking about alternatives. I have some friends in the private sector that say consulting could be a good fit. Others say to go into teaching, but I'm certain that this requires even more school. Assistant:

gw513z8

gw57qvj

I manage the tutors at an online tutoring company. I wish I had had the foresight to pursue management consulting at McKinsey and the like, if only to pay off the debts of grad school before heading elsewhere.

The fact that people have to resort to Reddit to find out answers to these questions tells you everything you need to know about just how much academic depts care about what happens to their PhD graduates after they’ve pushed them out of the door.

n00q6i

askacademia_train

Human: Humanities PhDs that have left academia, what do you do now? The market has been terrible since I was in undergrad. I am getting towards the end of my PhD and I know that I need plan B's and C's (really these will more than likely be A and B with academia being a Hail Mary). But I am struggling with thinking about alternatives. I have some friends in the private sector that say consulting could be a good fit. Others say to go into teaching, but I'm certain that this requires even more school. Assistant:

gw47fr5

gw57qvj

I will soon graduate with a PhD in Spanish and I plan on exploring the field of localization. You obviously need to pay for these courses, but it's something to consider if you know a foreign language (especially Spanish), have experience translating, and would like to gain more marketable technical skills. Not sure if it's your cup of tea, but I'm considering giving it a try.

The fact that people have to resort to Reddit to find out answers to these questions tells you everything you need to know about just how much academic depts care about what happens to their PhD graduates after they’ve pushed them out of the door.

n00q6i

askacademia_train

Human: Humanities PhDs that have left academia, what do you do now? The market has been terrible since I was in undergrad. I am getting towards the end of my PhD and I know that I need plan B's and C's (really these will more than likely be A and B with academia being a Hail Mary). But I am struggling with thinking about alternatives. I have some friends in the private sector that say consulting could be a good fit. Others say to go into teaching, but I'm certain that this requires even more school. Assistant:

gw47fr5

gw4rl67

I will soon graduate with a PhD in Spanish and I plan on exploring the field of localization. You obviously need to pay for these courses, but it's something to consider if you know a foreign language (especially Spanish), have experience translating, and would like to gain more marketable technical skills. Not sure if it's your cup of tea, but I'm considering giving it a try.

Policy analyst for a Govt department. Was sad to leave academia but now I get to do interesting work with intelligent people, clock off at 5pm, I'm paid a decent wage and get to live in the city I want to live in :)

n00q6i

askacademia_train

Human: Humanities PhDs that have left academia, what do you do now? The market has been terrible since I was in undergrad. I am getting towards the end of my PhD and I know that I need plan B's and C's (really these will more than likely be A and B with academia being a Hail Mary). But I am struggling with thinking about alternatives. I have some friends in the private sector that say consulting could be a good fit. Others say to go into teaching, but I'm certain that this requires even more school. Assistant:

gw6yzwk

gw6dilu

English PhD. Did a brief stint in marketing and consulting. Wanted to hang myself. Then got a visiting assistant prof position that gave me tuition reimbursement, and I started get my Ed certification. Then, thank god, published my first book and lucked into a tenure track line, and, when I say lucked I mean it. It’s an absolute crap shoot. Now almost 20 years down the road. Full prof, etc. Still believe I would have enjoyed teaching high school.

Other people already said it, but look into private schools. They are eager to hire Ph.D.s more than anywhere. Elite private boarding schools are harder to get in because they already have lots of applicants with a Ph.D. degree when there's a job opening, but most private schools will open their doors for you if you have a Ph.D. and some teaching experience (i.e., TAs). It's definitely hard work as *restricteddata* said. Parents can be demanding because they're paying tens of thousands of dollars for tuition, and if you work at a boarding school, you'll likely have to take another role like taking care of them at a dorm or organize an extracurricular activity. If you end up at a smaller private school, they might ask you to teach Spanish or some type of a general humanities course (world civilization, etc) on top of a history course. But it pays well; you don't have pressure for tenure; you get to teach what you love (hey, it's like teaching at a liberal arts college without a tenure review!); and if you have a child, they'll attend the school for free. So most people I know who went into this field genuinely like their jobs though there are hard days for sure. But what jobs don't? So if you're open to teaching secondary school students but getting another degree is a concern, definitely look into a private school. (I also went to a private boarding school in New England, and there were very few teachers with an Ed.M. or M.Ed. Most "only" had Ph.D. or regular Master's (M.A. or M.S.) in their respective field.

8q1t9u

askacademia_train

Human: knew that I wouldn't be given any particular advantage over other applicants. Nonetheless, I was very hopeful. But, I didn't want to think of it as guaranteed and I did continue to apply elsewhere for TT positions. I didn't have much luck. I was shortlisted at another R1 Geography program and (as anyone who has been on the market for awhile knows), applying for jobs is enormously time consuming and emotionally draining. After January, I stopped applying to other jobs and decided to let the chips fall where they would. I made it to the campus visit stage in the TT search at my university. I felt like my interview went well. Throughout the process I was very aware of everything else that was happening (a common challenge for the internal candidate). I knew when search committee meetings were happening, I knew when other candidates were visiting, I knew something of the internal dynamics of the search. For complicated reasons, the search was drawn out, a final candidate interviewed a month after the initial interviews happened. Members of the search committee were out of the country off and on. It was about 2.5 months from the time of my interview to the time when they actually made a decision about the job. Meanwhile, I organized a conference on themes that related directly to the position. I continued to work on publishing, provided quality educational experiences for my students, and generally do my thing well. But I was under an intense amount of pressure. My insomnia was terrible. I was dealing with some crippling anxiety. I was socially isolated because everyone I knew in this new place was either a colleague or a grad student in my department. It seemed like a bad idea to unload my stress on anyone in my department while the search was underway, so I kept my distance and spent a lot of time alone. It was honestly one of the hardest times in my life. Being alone in a new place, not being able to reach out to the few friends I had made there, and feeling like everything I did professionally was being judged. I felt that I had to do everything right so that they would give me this TT job. I was a mess emotionally, but managed to keep it to myself and appear as if I was doing fine professionally. They didn't give me the job. Worse, they didn't give it to anyone. It was a failed search. No one would ever give me a straight answer about why. My colleagues were mostly gaslighting me and acting as if I should not be impacted by how this all played out. Senior colleagues said things like, "I had lots of jobs I didn't get" and tried to act as if they knew my experience. But they didn't. They all got TT jobs within a year of finishing their PhDs (most straight out of grad school) none of them had to go through what early career people do today. A couple colleagues even offered to help me improve my application materials so that when they re-run the search next year I would be better prepared. I tried to be polite and not burn bridges, but all of this was insulting and hurtful. I'd already made it to the campus visit stage. I felt that they had their opportunity for me to be a part of their department long term and they didn't take it. So why would I bother putting myself through another year of that hell? As I saw it, my only pathway forward was to leave. But the NTT position I was in wasn't terrible so I couldn't just take anything. I knew it was a long shot but I applied to a few jobs that were posted in April. I got 2 on site interviews. One of them was an amazing good fit at an R1 near where I did my PhD. It's a great city that I love and I have friends in the area. The interview was like a great blind date. I loved it there and I could tell that their department was really excited about me. The day after I got back from my interview, I had an informal offer from the chair and after a bit of negotiation, I signed the offer letter and am now on my way to a TT position in a place I am very excited about. I really can't get over my good fortune here, especially after such a hellish year. So, after 4 years on the job market and a terrible experience an internal candidate, I finally got the job. It felt great to email my current colleagues brief polite emails about my imminent departure. If you made it to the end of this, thank you for reading. I am mostly posting this for my own catharsis, but also for grad students with academic aspirations and others still on the market. Good luck to all, the market is brutal and demoralizing. The End Assistant:

e0fv3ov

e0g824b

CONGRATS! Persistence and hard work pays off! Enjoy some R&R with the comfort of knowing they want you!

GEOGRAPHERS UNITE! Congratulations! The job hunt is scary and disheartening and humbling, but you made it! I have only one question: Physical geography or Human geography? ;)

8q1t9u

askacademia_train

Human: , I didn't want to think of it as guaranteed and I did continue to apply elsewhere for TT positions. I didn't have much luck. I was shortlisted at another R1 Geography program and (as anyone who has been on the market for awhile knows), applying for jobs is enormously time consuming and emotionally draining. After January, I stopped applying to other jobs and decided to let the chips fall where they would. I made it to the campus visit stage in the TT search at my university. I felt like my interview went well. Throughout the process I was very aware of everything else that was happening (a common challenge for the internal candidate). I knew when search committee meetings were happening, I knew when other candidates were visiting, I knew something of the internal dynamics of the search. For complicated reasons, the search was drawn out, a final candidate interviewed a month after the initial interviews happened. Members of the search committee were out of the country off and on. It was about 2.5 months from the time of my interview to the time when they actually made a decision about the job. Meanwhile, I organized a conference on themes that related directly to the position. I continued to work on publishing, provided quality educational experiences for my students, and generally do my thing well. But I was under an intense amount of pressure. My insomnia was terrible. I was dealing with some crippling anxiety. I was socially isolated because everyone I knew in this new place was either a colleague or a grad student in my department. It seemed like a bad idea to unload my stress on anyone in my department while the search was underway, so I kept my distance and spent a lot of time alone. It was honestly one of the hardest times in my life. Being alone in a new place, not being able to reach out to the few friends I had made there, and feeling like everything I did professionally was being judged. I felt that I had to do everything right so that they would give me this TT job. I was a mess emotionally, but managed to keep it to myself and appear as if I was doing fine professionally. They didn't give me the job. Worse, they didn't give it to anyone. It was a failed search. No one would ever give me a straight answer about why. My colleagues were mostly gaslighting me and acting as if I should not be impacted by how this all played out. Senior colleagues said things like, "I had lots of jobs I didn't get" and tried to act as if they knew my experience. But they didn't. They all got TT jobs within a year of finishing their PhDs (most straight out of grad school) none of them had to go through what early career people do today. A couple colleagues even offered to help me improve my application materials so that when they re-run the search next year I would be better prepared. I tried to be polite and not burn bridges, but all of this was insulting and hurtful. I'd already made it to the campus visit stage. I felt that they had their opportunity for me to be a part of their department long term and they didn't take it. So why would I bother putting myself through another year of that hell? As I saw it, my only pathway forward was to leave. But the NTT position I was in wasn't terrible so I couldn't just take anything. I knew it was a long shot but I applied to a few jobs that were posted in April. I got 2 on site interviews. One of them was an amazing good fit at an R1 near where I did my PhD. It's a great city that I love and I have friends in the area. The interview was like a great blind date. I loved it there and I could tell that their department was really excited about me. The day after I got back from my interview, I had an informal offer from the chair and after a bit of negotiation, I signed the offer letter and am now on my way to a TT position in a place I am very excited about. I really can't get over my good fortune here, especially after such a hellish year. So, after 4 years on the job market and a terrible experience an internal candidate, I finally got the job. It felt great to email my current colleagues brief polite emails about my imminent departure. If you made it to the end of this, thank you for reading. I am mostly posting this for my own catharsis, but also for grad students with academic aspirations and others still on the market. Good luck to all, the market is brutal and demoralizing. The End Assistant:

e0g824b

e0fx6a0

GEOGRAPHERS UNITE! Congratulations! The job hunt is scary and disheartening and humbling, but you made it! I have only one question: Physical geography or Human geography? ;)

Congrats! Do you have any idea for why your current department had a failed search? I sometimes wonder if accepting an NTT in hopes of getting TT isn't a bad idea because it's unlikely, but because working in the department gives the opportunity for politics/personal vendettas to arise when they wouldnt otherwise.

8q1t9u

askacademia_train

Human: knew that I wouldn't be given any particular advantage over other applicants. Nonetheless, I was very hopeful. But, I didn't want to think of it as guaranteed and I did continue to apply elsewhere for TT positions. I didn't have much luck. I was shortlisted at another R1 Geography program and (as anyone who has been on the market for awhile knows), applying for jobs is enormously time consuming and emotionally draining. After January, I stopped applying to other jobs and decided to let the chips fall where they would. I made it to the campus visit stage in the TT search at my university. I felt like my interview went well. Throughout the process I was very aware of everything else that was happening (a common challenge for the internal candidate). I knew when search committee meetings were happening, I knew when other candidates were visiting, I knew something of the internal dynamics of the search. For complicated reasons, the search was drawn out, a final candidate interviewed a month after the initial interviews happened. Members of the search committee were out of the country off and on. It was about 2.5 months from the time of my interview to the time when they actually made a decision about the job. Meanwhile, I organized a conference on themes that related directly to the position. I continued to work on publishing, provided quality educational experiences for my students, and generally do my thing well. But I was under an intense amount of pressure. My insomnia was terrible. I was dealing with some crippling anxiety. I was socially isolated because everyone I knew in this new place was either a colleague or a grad student in my department. It seemed like a bad idea to unload my stress on anyone in my department while the search was underway, so I kept my distance and spent a lot of time alone. It was honestly one of the hardest times in my life. Being alone in a new place, not being able to reach out to the few friends I had made there, and feeling like everything I did professionally was being judged. I felt that I had to do everything right so that they would give me this TT job. I was a mess emotionally, but managed to keep it to myself and appear as if I was doing fine professionally. They didn't give me the job. Worse, they didn't give it to anyone. It was a failed search. No one would ever give me a straight answer about why. My colleagues were mostly gaslighting me and acting as if I should not be impacted by how this all played out. Senior colleagues said things like, "I had lots of jobs I didn't get" and tried to act as if they knew my experience. But they didn't. They all got TT jobs within a year of finishing their PhDs (most straight out of grad school) none of them had to go through what early career people do today. A couple colleagues even offered to help me improve my application materials so that when they re-run the search next year I would be better prepared. I tried to be polite and not burn bridges, but all of this was insulting and hurtful. I'd already made it to the campus visit stage. I felt that they had their opportunity for me to be a part of their department long term and they didn't take it. So why would I bother putting myself through another year of that hell? As I saw it, my only pathway forward was to leave. But the NTT position I was in wasn't terrible so I couldn't just take anything. I knew it was a long shot but I applied to a few jobs that were posted in April. I got 2 on site interviews. One of them was an amazing good fit at an R1 near where I did my PhD. It's a great city that I love and I have friends in the area. The interview was like a great blind date. I loved it there and I could tell that their department was really excited about me. The day after I got back from my interview, I had an informal offer from the chair and after a bit of negotiation, I signed the offer letter and am now on my way to a TT position in a place I am very excited about. I really can't get over my good fortune here, especially after such a hellish year. So, after 4 years on the job market and a terrible experience an internal candidate, I finally got the job. It felt great to email my current colleagues brief polite emails about my imminent departure. If you made it to the end of this, thank you for reading. I am mostly posting this for my own catharsis, but also for grad students with academic aspirations and others still on the market. Good luck to all, the market is brutal and demoralizing. The End Assistant:

e0fy4hs

e0g824b

Congrats! The job search is hell.

GEOGRAPHERS UNITE! Congratulations! The job hunt is scary and disheartening and humbling, but you made it! I have only one question: Physical geography or Human geography? ;)

8q1t9u

askacademia_train

Human: search. For complicated reasons, the search was drawn out, a final candidate interviewed a month after the initial interviews happened. Members of the search committee were out of the country off and on. It was about 2.5 months from the time of my interview to the time when they actually made a decision about the job. Meanwhile, I organized a conference on themes that related directly to the position. I continued to work on publishing, provided quality educational experiences for my students, and generally do my thing well. But I was under an intense amount of pressure. My insomnia was terrible. I was dealing with some crippling anxiety. I was socially isolated because everyone I knew in this new place was either a colleague or a grad student in my department. It seemed like a bad idea to unload my stress on anyone in my department while the search was underway, so I kept my distance and spent a lot of time alone. It was honestly one of the hardest times in my life. Being alone in a new place, not being able to reach out to the few friends I had made there, and feeling like everything I did professionally was being judged. I felt that I had to do everything right so that they would give me this TT job. I was a mess emotionally, but managed to keep it to myself and appear as if I was doing fine professionally. They didn't give me the job. Worse, they didn't give it to anyone. It was a failed search. No one would ever give me a straight answer about why. My colleagues were mostly gaslighting me and acting as if I should not be impacted by how this all played out. Senior colleagues said things like, "I had lots of jobs I didn't get" and tried to act as if they knew my experience. But they didn't. They all got TT jobs within a year of finishing their PhDs (most straight out of grad school) none of them had to go through what early career people do today. A couple colleagues even offered to help me improve my application materials so that when they re-run the search next year I would be better prepared. I tried to be polite and not burn bridges, but all of this was insulting and hurtful. I'd already made it to the campus visit stage. I felt that they had their opportunity for me to be a part of their department long term and they didn't take it. So why would I bother putting myself through another year of that hell? As I saw it, my only pathway forward was to leave. But the NTT position I was in wasn't terrible so I couldn't just take anything. I knew it was a long shot but I applied to a few jobs that were posted in April. I got 2 on site interviews. One of them was an amazing good fit at an R1 near where I did my PhD. It's a great city that I love and I have friends in the area. The interview was like a great blind date. I loved it there and I could tell that their department was really excited about me. The day after I got back from my interview, I had an informal offer from the chair and after a bit of negotiation, I signed the offer letter and am now on my way to a TT position in a place I am very excited about. I really can't get over my good fortune here, especially after such a hellish year. So, after 4 years on the job market and a terrible experience an internal candidate, I finally got the job. It felt great to email my current colleagues brief polite emails about my imminent departure. If you made it to the end of this, thank you for reading. I am mostly posting this for my own catharsis, but also for grad students with academic aspirations and others still on the market. Good luck to all, the market is brutal and demoralizing. The End Assistant:

e0g824b

e0g3wyw

GEOGRAPHERS UNITE! Congratulations! The job hunt is scary and disheartening and humbling, but you made it! I have only one question: Physical geography or Human geography? ;)

Thank you so much for sharing your story here. I'd like to contribute a structural POV to the conversation: I was once in an interview with a program (as a potential PhD admit) and I asked how they saw their faculty hiring practices over the next several years as a component of their larger research agenda. The committee responded in depth, describing how departments plan out, years in advance, what "sort" of department they want to be, what sort of research they want to produce, and what sort of position they ultimately desire in their field. Hiring and admission practices are bricks in this type of long-term agenda-building. It could be that your research simply wasn't a match with the sort of department they want to be ten years down the line. This has, I'm sure, very little to do with the quality of work (which, from the quality of your writing, I can assume to be high), and everything to do with the direction they want to take the program in. Again, thank you for your story, and congrats on the new job!

8q1t9u

askacademia_train

Human: search. For complicated reasons, the search was drawn out, a final candidate interviewed a month after the initial interviews happened. Members of the search committee were out of the country off and on. It was about 2.5 months from the time of my interview to the time when they actually made a decision about the job. Meanwhile, I organized a conference on themes that related directly to the position. I continued to work on publishing, provided quality educational experiences for my students, and generally do my thing well. But I was under an intense amount of pressure. My insomnia was terrible. I was dealing with some crippling anxiety. I was socially isolated because everyone I knew in this new place was either a colleague or a grad student in my department. It seemed like a bad idea to unload my stress on anyone in my department while the search was underway, so I kept my distance and spent a lot of time alone. It was honestly one of the hardest times in my life. Being alone in a new place, not being able to reach out to the few friends I had made there, and feeling like everything I did professionally was being judged. I felt that I had to do everything right so that they would give me this TT job. I was a mess emotionally, but managed to keep it to myself and appear as if I was doing fine professionally. They didn't give me the job. Worse, they didn't give it to anyone. It was a failed search. No one would ever give me a straight answer about why. My colleagues were mostly gaslighting me and acting as if I should not be impacted by how this all played out. Senior colleagues said things like, "I had lots of jobs I didn't get" and tried to act as if they knew my experience. But they didn't. They all got TT jobs within a year of finishing their PhDs (most straight out of grad school) none of them had to go through what early career people do today. A couple colleagues even offered to help me improve my application materials so that when they re-run the search next year I would be better prepared. I tried to be polite and not burn bridges, but all of this was insulting and hurtful. I'd already made it to the campus visit stage. I felt that they had their opportunity for me to be a part of their department long term and they didn't take it. So why would I bother putting myself through another year of that hell? As I saw it, my only pathway forward was to leave. But the NTT position I was in wasn't terrible so I couldn't just take anything. I knew it was a long shot but I applied to a few jobs that were posted in April. I got 2 on site interviews. One of them was an amazing good fit at an R1 near where I did my PhD. It's a great city that I love and I have friends in the area. The interview was like a great blind date. I loved it there and I could tell that their department was really excited about me. The day after I got back from my interview, I had an informal offer from the chair and after a bit of negotiation, I signed the offer letter and am now on my way to a TT position in a place I am very excited about. I really can't get over my good fortune here, especially after such a hellish year. So, after 4 years on the job market and a terrible experience an internal candidate, I finally got the job. It felt great to email my current colleagues brief polite emails about my imminent departure. If you made it to the end of this, thank you for reading. I am mostly posting this for my own catharsis, but also for grad students with academic aspirations and others still on the market. Good luck to all, the market is brutal and demoralizing. The End Assistant:

e0g3wyw

e0ghuvm

Thank you so much for sharing your story here. I'd like to contribute a structural POV to the conversation: I was once in an interview with a program (as a potential PhD admit) and I asked how they saw their faculty hiring practices over the next several years as a component of their larger research agenda. The committee responded in depth, describing how departments plan out, years in advance, what "sort" of department they want to be, what sort of research they want to produce, and what sort of position they ultimately desire in their field. Hiring and admission practices are bricks in this type of long-term agenda-building. It could be that your research simply wasn't a match with the sort of department they want to be ten years down the line. This has, I'm sure, very little to do with the quality of work (which, from the quality of your writing, I can assume to be high), and everything to do with the direction they want to take the program in. Again, thank you for your story, and congrats on the new job!

Congrats OP! This sounds like the best possible outcome given your circumstances, and better than staying at your first school. It also underscores the risks of being an internal candidate...it's a tough position to be in, and often hard on departmental colleagues as well. Glad you were able to negotiate it while building your c.v. on the way to a better TT job.

ikq8xm

askacademia_train

Human: Is "bullshit" a legitimate research area and is it supposed to be tongue-in-cheek or am I just immature? I met a linguistics faculty recently whose primary research interests included "bullshit". I laughed when I read that because I thought it was a joke, or at least supposed to be a humorous description of what he studied. Then I looked it up and found legitimate papers published in big journals about bullshit, discussing it like it's a scientific term. Is the linguistic research area "bullshit" supposed to be humorous like papers on "Trajectory of a Falling Batman" (https://journals.le.ac.uk/ojs1/index.php/pst/article/view/2036/1939)? Or is this a research area people discuss with a totally straight face and no hint of humor, and I'm just immature for thinking it's a joke? Assistant:

g3n73o7

g3nfrvk

UC Berkeley has a whole class on bullshit! It's both serious and there's some levity.

Yes, it's a legitimate area of study. Bullshitting is trying to pass off vacuous or epistemically fuzzy content as truth. It involves an intentional state of an actor and a presupposed state of receptivity by an other. The recipient of the claim likely has to engage in some type of reasoning process to accept or reject the bullshit. For these reasons bullshitting is a complex process that may yield insights into how specific operations or processes (such as reasoning or evaluation of a claim) may operate. Edit: here's an example of a bullshit study in a decent journal http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.html

ikq8xm

askacademia_train

Human: Is "bullshit" a legitimate research area and is it supposed to be tongue-in-cheek or am I just immature? I met a linguistics faculty recently whose primary research interests included "bullshit". I laughed when I read that because I thought it was a joke, or at least supposed to be a humorous description of what he studied. Then I looked it up and found legitimate papers published in big journals about bullshit, discussing it like it's a scientific term. Is the linguistic research area "bullshit" supposed to be humorous like papers on "Trajectory of a Falling Batman" (https://journals.le.ac.uk/ojs1/index.php/pst/article/view/2036/1939)? Or is this a research area people discuss with a totally straight face and no hint of humor, and I'm just immature for thinking it's a joke? Assistant:

g3nfrvk

g3mu08r

Yes, it's a legitimate area of study. Bullshitting is trying to pass off vacuous or epistemically fuzzy content as truth. It involves an intentional state of an actor and a presupposed state of receptivity by an other. The recipient of the claim likely has to engage in some type of reasoning process to accept or reject the bullshit. For these reasons bullshitting is a complex process that may yield insights into how specific operations or processes (such as reasoning or evaluation of a claim) may operate. Edit: here's an example of a bullshit study in a decent journal http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.html

Linguistics is the science of language, so yes, bullshit is a scientific term to someone studying language. He probably says it in that way to elicit your reaction.

ikq8xm

askacademia_train

Human: Is "bullshit" a legitimate research area and is it supposed to be tongue-in-cheek or am I just immature? I met a linguistics faculty recently whose primary research interests included "bullshit". I laughed when I read that because I thought it was a joke, or at least supposed to be a humorous description of what he studied. Then I looked it up and found legitimate papers published in big journals about bullshit, discussing it like it's a scientific term. Is the linguistic research area "bullshit" supposed to be humorous like papers on "Trajectory of a Falling Batman" (https://journals.le.ac.uk/ojs1/index.php/pst/article/view/2036/1939)? Or is this a research area people discuss with a totally straight face and no hint of humor, and I'm just immature for thinking it's a joke? Assistant:

g3nfrvk

g3n8cd5

Yes, it's a legitimate area of study. Bullshitting is trying to pass off vacuous or epistemically fuzzy content as truth. It involves an intentional state of an actor and a presupposed state of receptivity by an other. The recipient of the claim likely has to engage in some type of reasoning process to accept or reject the bullshit. For these reasons bullshitting is a complex process that may yield insights into how specific operations or processes (such as reasoning or evaluation of a claim) may operate. Edit: here's an example of a bullshit study in a decent journal http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.html

Sounds like there's a better academic term for it (e.g. misinformation), but the word "bullshit" is more edgy and makes for better clickbait.

ikq8xm

askacademia_train

Human: Is "bullshit" a legitimate research area and is it supposed to be tongue-in-cheek or am I just immature? I met a linguistics faculty recently whose primary research interests included "bullshit". I laughed when I read that because I thought it was a joke, or at least supposed to be a humorous description of what he studied. Then I looked it up and found legitimate papers published in big journals about bullshit, discussing it like it's a scientific term. Is the linguistic research area "bullshit" supposed to be humorous like papers on "Trajectory of a Falling Batman" (https://journals.le.ac.uk/ojs1/index.php/pst/article/view/2036/1939)? Or is this a research area people discuss with a totally straight face and no hint of humor, and I'm just immature for thinking it's a joke? Assistant:

g3njlbo

g3n8cd5

This is a philosophical take on it from Harry Frankfurt. There's also a tribute collection of philosophical essays on the topic. https://www.amazon.com/Bullshit-Harry-G-Frankfurt/dp/0691122946

Sounds like there's a better academic term for it (e.g. misinformation), but the word "bullshit" is more edgy and makes for better clickbait.

vye2jq

askacademia_train

Human: PIs -- how are you dealing with the Great Resignation? Support staff, postdocs, and grad students are hard to recruit and retain these days, due to the relatively poor wages in academia and the red hot private sector job market. I've seen many job postings go unfilled for months (and even years), and PIs eventually returning to teaching or leaving academia altogether due to their inability to staff. How are the PIs on this sub doing? I have turned towards more computational, less labor intensive research for the time being, but I am unsure of the future of grant-based research, if universities demand federal funding, but the feds won't increase award amounts. Assistant:

ig2ij0y

ig2c7if

I'm a tenured PI at a university that people often associate with scientific breakthroughs. This doesn't have as much to do with the Great Resignation, but I'm a little burnt out from the big lab + big grants game. So I've been just doing research myself, rather than: working my ass off to get grants, recruit students and staff, then train them to do work that I can do myself. The downside is less advising and mentorship which I genuinely enjoy, but the upside is way way fewer complications, less stress dealing with personnel situations, and I no longer feel like I'm paying money to give myself more advising work. If I were not tenured, I might have a different attitude, but now I'm totally happy being a "small lab" until things become more favorable to run a big lab again.

By leaving my postdoc for industry..

nk0ist

askacademia_train

Human: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories. Assistant:

gzafyta

gzai8p0

College is for you if the career path you have in mind requires a college degree. A bad experience at one college does not mean you will have a bad experience at another, so don't let a bad experience stop you from following your professional dream. I say this from experience. School and department cultures vary widely, and the surrounding community can also be a big factor. Personally, I'm only happy in big cities (as a student and as a professor), but others prefer a different environment. The major could also be the problem. I have seen some people change majors and find themselves much happier. That said, there are some people who hate school, don't see themselves in any career that requires a bachelor's degree or higher, and have interests and skills that would lend well to a trade (like mechanic, plumber, electrician...). There is no one-size-fits-all answer, but I would strongly encourage the large majority of people to pursue some sort of higher education, be it college, community college, trade school...it's just really hard (though not impossible) to succeed professionally without some sort of degree or credential...And don't let hating school stop you from pursuing a professional dream that requires it.

The title is true. Also the other questions in your post are also true. these are not 'either/or' questions.

nk0ist

askacademia_train

Human: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories. Assistant:

gzai8p0

gza6kpq

The title is true. Also the other questions in your post are also true. these are not 'either/or' questions.

>Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Broadly speaking; most colleges and universities are more similar to each other than they are different, and there is a subset of the population that will not be successful in college. >Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Granted, it's entirely possible that people grow up or change, such that college actually *is* realistic at a later time, but at the same time the economic and financial reality of most people is such that college has to happen at a certain time in people's lives. Many can't just put their lives on hold to go back to college later on in life. Same problem broadly applies to grad school.

nk0ist

askacademia_train

Human: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories. Assistant:

gzb9qqm

gzaqz4k

Is not just ‘college’. It is everything. ‘Climbing mountains’ is not for everyone ‘Marriage’ is not for everyone ‘Being a house owner’ is not for everyone ‘Playing tennis’ is not for everyone ... Why would college be different?

Sometimes. For instance, an adult with a sub-par level of intelligence probably will not do too well studying mathematics (or anything else) at the college level. Your question depends on the individual, with important aspects being capabilities, ambitions, objectives, personality, etc. So there’s no simple answer to your question. That college or that program may have not been the ideal fit for you, or it may be college itself that was the problem.

nk0ist

askacademia_train

Human: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories. Assistant:

gzb9qqm

gzaqrvu

Is not just ‘college’. It is everything. ‘Climbing mountains’ is not for everyone ‘Marriage’ is not for everyone ‘Being a house owner’ is not for everyone ‘Playing tennis’ is not for everyone ... Why would college be different?

Yes & yes. For some people, college doesn't make sense. It doesn't fit their interests, goals, or talents. For some people, college at a certain place or time is a bad fit and they'll thrive somewhere/time else. Lots of life paths.

nk0ist

askacademia_train

Human: “College isn’t for everyone”. Is it really that simple? Couldn’t one college be for someone but not another? Or maybe college wasn’t for someone in the past but is now? Or maybe it isn’t for someone now but they need to grow up? Transferring colleges, hope the next one I do better. At least because it holds no bad memories. Assistant:

gzaosxb

gzb9qqm

I don't think it's a question of whether college is for everyone. I think it's a question is "what are workforce needs" and "what standard of general knowledge and skills should be formally attainable and normalized in our social fabric"? Then the question becomes does our k-12 system meet those needs. If not, then post k-12 education must be for everyone.

Is not just ‘college’. It is everything. ‘Climbing mountains’ is not for everyone ‘Marriage’ is not for everyone ‘Being a house owner’ is not for everyone ‘Playing tennis’ is not for everyone ... Why would college be different?

m4f00w

askacademia_train

Human: How important was being around campus as a PhD student? Obviously the last year has been weird for graduate students. Despite the darkness I’ve had the good fortune to receive funding that has liberated me from the need to TA for the remainder of my degree. But it’s opened up some new questions. I’m in the social sciences, so I don’t have any physical lab equipment I need access to. I’m done classes as well, so I’m seriously considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks! Assistant:

gqu8zsc

gqu4xd3

I have a PhD in psychology (social/personality) and I found that people tended to take notice of who was on campus and who was not. I was able to get involved on a few projects largely because I was around. Then, as people learned I was reliable, I was able to get involved in a lot more collaborations. Some people couldn’t care less if students are around or not, but for those that do care about it, showing up can do a lot for their perception of you. As much as networking at conferences was invaluable, I think the networking within my department gave me a good jumping off point for when I networked elsewhere. Academic communities are small and people talk to each other more than you might think. Sometimes impressing a professor in an adjacent field can mean that people at conferences have already heard good things about you. I also found that being around was helpful whenever I needed another perspective or some help on my work. Sometimes I would explain my reasoning to other grad students just to have them poke holes in it. Overall, I think those perspectives made my thesis stronger and helped prepare me for my defense.

I'm an incoming social sciences phd student and would like to know this too.

m4f00w

askacademia_train

Human: How important was being around campus as a PhD student? Obviously the last year has been weird for graduate students. Despite the darkness I’ve had the good fortune to receive funding that has liberated me from the need to TA for the remainder of my degree. But it’s opened up some new questions. I’m in the social sciences, so I don’t have any physical lab equipment I need access to. I’m done classes as well, so I’m seriously considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks! Assistant:

gqu8990

gqu4xd3

Once the world goes back to normal, there will be a class of networking you won't be able to do if you're constantly away from campus. Interfacing with visiting faculty, with other members of your cohort and in your program, developing secondary contacts through them, etc. Depending on how important that is for you, it can make a difference. A lot of my networking happens through fellow grads or faculty introducing me to people. Additionally, as a historian, I'm not sure I could be anywhere where I don't have reliable access to a trove of books. Meaning I can't work without a library. My University's library doesn't just allow me access to their own books, but is also the institution I'd work with to procure books and items such as microfilm records that my own doesn't possess through systems such as Interlibrary loans. Without access to that, I'm not convinced I'd be nearly as competent as a writer. So for me, being close to the library is absolutely critical to my work. Now the thing about history is that a lot of stuff isn't digitized. Old microfilm records for instance. If you can manage with digital sources entirely for your work, then this isn't such a consideration for you.

I'm an incoming social sciences phd student and would like to know this too.

m4f00w

askacademia_train

Human: How important was being around campus as a PhD student? Obviously the last year has been weird for graduate students. Despite the darkness I’ve had the good fortune to receive funding that has liberated me from the need to TA for the remainder of my degree. But it’s opened up some new questions. I’m in the social sciences, so I don’t have any physical lab equipment I need access to. I’m done classes as well, so I’m seriously considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks! Assistant:

gqu9bub

gqu4xd3

I'm in the humanities. I spent five year in town/on campus, teaching for four of those. Then I took a full time job 1,500 miles away and wrote my dissertation in the evenings/weekends. I missed my friends but many of them took similar paths anyway. The only real problem with not being in town was library access, and since I took a faculty position when I left I still had a local library. There was no value at all to "networking" on my home campus because nobody was working in my particular area; I could easily call up or email my committee members (and it would be far easier today to zoom) if I needed something. My intellectual community really ended up being at the university where I worked, not the one where I was still enrolled as a grad student. Once classes were done (three years in my program) the only reason to stay in town was to gain TA experience. My cohort was large and the average time to degree was close to ten years...very few people stayed in town more than five unless they had a partner who was working there or tied to a lab or something. When I left in year five (I finished in eight) we were among the first from my cohort to leave, but almost nobody was left in town when I went back to defend three years later.

I'm an incoming social sciences phd student and would like to know this too.

m4f00w

askacademia_train

Human: How important was being around campus as a PhD student? Obviously the last year has been weird for graduate students. Despite the darkness I’ve had the good fortune to receive funding that has liberated me from the need to TA for the remainder of my degree. But it’s opened up some new questions. I’m in the social sciences, so I don’t have any physical lab equipment I need access to. I’m done classes as well, so I’m seriously considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks! Assistant:

gquhxok

gqucb2z

Also in the social sciences. While a lot of my research technically never required me to be on campus during grad school, showing your face and being a good citizen in the department — going to seminars, attending reading groups, etc. — matter a *lot* more than many PhD students realize. Faculty definitely notice if you disappear. Besides that, some of the friendships I made with people in my program are among the best I’ve ever found, and that wouldn’t have been possible without the random coffee breaks and the hours spent leaning in each other’s office doorways to complain about how awful everything is. :)

İt totally depends on your school, your department, you supervisor, etc, etc. Being on campus during my masters -- which happened to be in Canada (I'm not sure if that is the reason) was very important. A bunch of grad students and occasionally profs would go to the pub after classes every Thursday. Some of the greatest times in my life and wonderful 'networking'. I did my PhD at a Catholic university in the states and the atmosphere was totally different. You go to school to do your stuff and then go home. İ had known one of the profs since we were in undergrad together (i took time off while he went straight through, we are both in our 40s)-- İ was directly told not to call him by his first name when on campus. The unstated rule is that school was not a social environment. As for getting future jobs, i think conferences are the most important thing.

m4f00w

askacademia_train

Human: How important was being around campus as a PhD student? Obviously the last year has been weird for graduate students. Despite the darkness I’ve had the good fortune to receive funding that has liberated me from the need to TA for the remainder of my degree. But it’s opened up some new questions. I’m in the social sciences, so I don’t have any physical lab equipment I need access to. I’m done classes as well, so I’m seriously considering whether to just go somewhere sunny to crank out the writing and analysis for the next few years. It seems pretty common for people to leave for relationship based reasons and finish remotely. Then again, there’s a community of scholars I would like to engage with at my university, but I also find that faculty are not that interested in building relationships with grad students if they’re not on your committee or you’re not doing research for them. I’m wondering, especially among people with social science backgrounds, how critical was sustained campus engagement for you? Is networking better done on campus than at conferences? Is sticking around with your cohort important for your professional development? Many thanks! Assistant:

gquhxok

gqucck9

Also in the social sciences. While a lot of my research technically never required me to be on campus during grad school, showing your face and being a good citizen in the department — going to seminars, attending reading groups, etc. — matter a *lot* more than many PhD students realize. Faculty definitely notice if you disappear. Besides that, some of the friendships I made with people in my program are among the best I’ve ever found, and that wouldn’t have been possible without the random coffee breaks and the hours spent leaning in each other’s office doorways to complain about how awful everything is. :)

I have an arts PhD and spent a fair chunk away from campus, as did quite a few others, including my supervisor. I think some things could have been better by being on campus but on that specific campus there was not a lot of potential in terms of networking. I think networking really is useful, there might be future contacts and your dissertation is not the endgame, a job is and that comes through networking. In my case, there were two other PhD students who made life for other students hard, as they were very arrogant. I think I was not the only one who got fed up and decided to work from home. Again, a specific circumstance. My Masters was more useful in networking perspective as I forged more friendships there. Have you considered going one week a month or every two months to campus so you can keep in touch? That way when you come to campus, everything gets more intense and you really use the week to network and all things you could not do off-campus.

hw5p60

askacademia_train

Human: My advisor was sexually inappropriate - how can I get around a letter of recommendation from him for PhD applications? Background: I finished my undergraduate a few years ago. Research was my passion, but this burned me out and I've been too afraid to go back. I'm also not in the US. Long story short, my advisor was a creep to me, I don't want to elaborate in case he's on this subreddit. I know he uses Reddit a lot. I didn't really work with anyone else in the department, and I have no interest in reporting it - it's well known, my department doesn't care. I also don't want to bring this up in a new application, I don't want to seem like I'm slandering someone - and frankly, it's probably irrational, but I'd feel unprofessional talking about it. I'm finally in a place where I want to apply for my PhD, but I don't know how to explain the fact I won't have a letter of reference from the person I did my undergraduate thesis with. I honestly don't even know who else I can ask for a letter from - it's been so long since I left that I don't think any professors would remember me. Does anyone have any idea how I can frame this without it coming off as unprofessional, or like *I* did something to sour the relationship? ​ Thanks Reddit. Assistant:

fyy3xs0

fyyf6dd

First of all, I’m very sorry about what you had to go through, OP. It’s sad it’s still happening in 2020. If you ask other profs who taught a class in which you did well, a very minimal thing they can do is what you were taught in the class and how you did, and what your performance means compared to the general student population. They can also explain the textbook and what they covered in the class. There are so many programs in the world and they vary so much, such information is very helpful for the people who go through students from all over the world. And many schools don’t have academic advisor program anyway so it doesn’t really hurt your case if you don’t get a letter from the creep. I hope this helps. And I hope you won’t have to deal with such awful people in your future career.

Professor here. I'm so sorry for what you experienced. ***No one will care that you don't have a letter from your advisor.*** It's not something we check for or make note of. We only care that the letters are strong, which means they're written by people who know you and your work well. /u/po2gdHaeKaYk is exactly right. The real issue here is getting a minimum of three solid letters. Based on what you wrote, it sounds like other than your advisor, you don't know who else to ask. So, even if you asked him (don't), you'd still be two letters short. Definitely follow other posters' advice on how to approach faculty and provide them with enough materials to put something together. While I think you should remain optimistic--we really do want to help students--you should also be prepared to hear no. It won't be just because they don't remember you well enough. It's also because writing a letter puts our reputation on the line; we are vouching for you to our colleagues. If we vouch for students who end up plagiarizing, harassing other students, imploding, etc, our colleagues will no longer trust our judgment. **Candidate interviews are definitely field-specific**, so if your discipline doesn't have them, this may not even be something you ever have to address in person. I'd be surprised if anyone pointedly asked you, but if so, I like /u/sunia42's suggestion. The last thing I'll say is that you should think about why you want a PhD. (I don't mean to imply that you haven't, just encouraging you to keep doing so.) If you're considering working in industry, a PhD is rarely needed and the time spent in school can make you less competitive. If you plan to pursue academia, please understand that the job markets (in the U.S.) across the humanities, social sciences, and STEM are terrible and have been for a long time. Tenure track positions are becoming more rare, and recent grads must compete with PhDs who are still on the market 4-5 years after defending. Finally, if you don't know about the exploitation of adjuncts, you should look into it. Good luck with everything!

u4be7z

askacademia_train

Human: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions? Assistant:

i4vb71w

i4ul99c

It sounds like you would need to travel to attend? So I would just tell PI I cannot travel at that time, but I appreciate the invitation and wish I could come as he’s a big part of how I got to this point in my career and wish him the best. Something that’s a no, but still makes a narcissist feel good so next time I ask for a favor he has positive feelings

I suggest going as well, but don't stay long. One way to get through it is to just let other people talk about themselves until it's time to leave.

u4be7z

askacademia_train

Human: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions? Assistant:

i4vb71w

i4v90gv

It sounds like you would need to travel to attend? So I would just tell PI I cannot travel at that time, but I appreciate the invitation and wish I could come as he’s a big part of how I got to this point in my career and wish him the best. Something that’s a no, but still makes a narcissist feel good so next time I ask for a favor he has positive feelings

>Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. Then don't go. ​ >My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. I am assuming you are in your mid-20s - do you plan to spend decades bending the knee to people ? Is that worth your sense of self-worth?

u4be7z

askacademia_train

Human: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions? Assistant:

i4uvwtk

i4vb71w

I would come up with an excuse and not go. A family issue or other commitment. You don't owe anyone a long explanation. Just say you are happy for the invitation but are not available to attend and wish everyone the best. That stays professional but gets you out of attending the event.

It sounds like you would need to travel to attend? So I would just tell PI I cannot travel at that time, but I appreciate the invitation and wish I could come as he’s a big part of how I got to this point in my career and wish him the best. Something that’s a no, but still makes a narcissist feel good so next time I ask for a favor he has positive feelings

u4be7z

askacademia_train

Human: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions? Assistant:

i4uj5ao

i4vb71w

Suck it up and go.

It sounds like you would need to travel to attend? So I would just tell PI I cannot travel at that time, but I appreciate the invitation and wish I could come as he’s a big part of how I got to this point in my career and wish him the best. Something that’s a no, but still makes a narcissist feel good so next time I ask for a favor he has positive feelings

u4be7z

askacademia_train

Human: How can I stay professional and calm while meeting with my toxic Ph.D. supervisor after I've graduated? I am a Postdoc now, and I graduated back in 2019. My Ph.D. lab environment was toxic ( sabotaging experiments, favoritism, disputes about authorship, reagent hoarding, etc..), and my PI was extremely narcissistic and manipulative. I somehow fought my way through the years, got my degree, and shifted to the US for a postdoc. I even avoided getting a Postdoc in a lab that my PI recommended because he knew the professor personally, and I did not want to be under his umbrella anymore. I still kept an amicable relationship with him, but I am in touch with very few of my previous colleagues and avoid the rest, as I had a rather unpleasant experience with them. Recently, he personally invited me to join a get-together of his lab, which will consist of past lab members, but I really want to avoid it. My wife (who was in academia too) says not attending might come across as unprofessional and can have repercussions later (if we decide to move back) since he (the PI) is well connected and influential in the academic circles in my home country. Any suggestions? Assistant:

i4vgl14

i4ul99c

Well, you're in the US now. Are you actually going to pay for an expensive plane ticket and go on a 7h+ flight to meet some former colleagues? I wouldn't even do that for colleagues I adored

I suggest going as well, but don't stay long. One way to get through it is to just let other people talk about themselves until it's time to leave.